|
|
Listening
to Obama
by Joseph C. Phillips
 After months of being
transfixed by empty slogans, supporters of presumptive Democratic
presidential nominee Barack Obama are finally listening and many do not
like what they are hearing. Critics have charged him with flip flopping
on a number of issues most significantly his stance on the war in Iraq.
During this campaign, Obama has been adamant that as president he would
"set the mission" to end the war and bring the troops home in 16
months. In what no less an authority than the liberal paper of record,
the New York Times identified as a flip (or a flop depending on one's
inclination)Obama now says he will consult with his generals in order
to refine his promise to quickly remove troops.
I am disinclined to view this as a change of position. Though he has
sought to reassure the left by responding with a hearty "Don't be
confused, I will bring this war to a close when I am president of the
United States." It would appear that he has finally come around to my
way of thinking. He has taken a more moderate approach based on an
evolving situation on the ground.
That the current administration and John McCain, the Republican Party
nominee, also want to bring this war to a close as quickly as possible
should go without saying. Alas, the left has been so successful at
obfuscation that it must be said: Republicans want to end the war - the
sooner the better! Republicans want to bring the troops home - the
sooner the better! The difference between the Republican position and
until recently Obama's position has always been that bringing the war
to a responsible close meant victory. To that end, events on the ground
would dictate our leaving Iraq as opposed to an arbitrary timetable.
Obama now says that as commander-in-chief, he will keep his options
open. One assumes that means if he is informed that events on the
ground do not warrant a redeployment of our troops, we will remain in
Iraq beyond his 16 month deadline. That is not a flip flop, but a
reasonable position and as it happens, the same position as both
President Bush and John McCain.
Barack is actually a victim of his own success. He did such a
remarkable job of demonizing the war effort that any suggestion that he
might actually fight the war makes the left apoplectic.
During the Democratic primaries, Obama gained considerable political
mileage by pointing out that among the major candidates he was the only
one to oppose America's invasion of Iraq from the beginning. It is a
testament to his political skill that he has been able to continually
bask in the glow of having the moral courage to oppose the war while a
member of the Illinois state senate. Of course at the time, no one much
cared what the state of Illinois thought of toppling Saddam Hussein.
More recently, one wonders where all this moral courage was when called
upon to step up to the plate and vote against the wire tap bill that
easily passed the U.S. Senate.
For two years, Congress debated the measure designed to overhaul rules
for government eavesdropping in terrorism and espionage cases. Many
prominent Democrats had viewed the bill, which rewrites the 1978
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, as an unacceptable encroachment
upon the civil liberties of American citizens. Barack Obama had opposed
an earlier version of the bill but supported this latest version in
opposition to fellow Democrats Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Harry Reid
(D-NV).
What remains unclear is how he can continue to refer to the current
administration policy as "brain dead" when he has supported a measure
this president fought for, and when he now clearly seems to be adopting
the administration's position on withdrawal from Iraq.
Joseph C. Phillips is the author of “He Talk Like a White Boy” available wherever books are sold.
Source:JosephCPhillips.com
Rate this Article:
Tell
Us What You Think.
|
|
|
Subscribe
to Our RSS Feed