Obama’s Two Faces and Forked Tongue
By medusa on June 30, 2008 at 10:00 AM in 4th Amendment, Bamboozling, Barack Obama, Disenfranchisement, FISA, Fat Cat Money, PACs, Presidential Candidates, Public Finance, Transparency, WORMs, civil liberties, death penalty, general election, pandering
by Medusa and Bud White
Two-faced? Hypocritical? Or showing his true colors? Last week Barack Obama made 180 degree turns on three previous positions he had taken in order to seduce liberal Democrats. In an article entitled “For Obama, winning is everything“, Michael Tomasky writes of these changes, claiming that:
It’s acceptable - and necessary - for Barack Obama to compromise his liberal principles in order to get elected
Taking Fat-Cat Money
In November 2007, the Midwest Democracy Network, a non-partisan alliance of 20 civic and public interests groups, released the unedited responses to a questionnaire on federal political and government reform issues. The questionnaire was sent to both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates. Question 1-B asks:
If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?
Barack Obama answered the question in detail: Yes. I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests. I introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State Senate, and am the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold’s (D- WI) bill to reform the presidential public financing system.
In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election.My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election.
My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election.The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and Senator John McCain (r- AZ) has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.
However, on June 19, in an about-face so abrupt as to cause whiplash in his beholden followers, Obama said he would forego public finances in his presidential race against John McCain.Previously decrying special interests money, which made him the darling to liberal Democrats, Obama has rejected the 84 million dollars in public funds available to him. This allows him to accept money from special interest groups, making clear that against all his claims, he is a Washington insider. Anthony Corrado writes:
Obama “is likely to outspend McCain and the Republican national committee combined by perhaps two to one. Between now and election day, we very well may see Senator Obama spend $400m or more
Obama is clearly two-faced, as we are seeing more and more. But he’s not simply repeating old and familiar patterns, according to Richard Briffault, a campaign finance expert at Columbia University:
Obama is the first candidate since the public financing system was established by congress in 1974 to opt out of the system.
Denying Civil Liberties
The second liberal principal Obama sacrificed in the space of one week is his decision to support a bill that gives the telecoms retroactive immunity. Only last year Obama promised to filibuster the bill but instead, in a stomach-lurching turn to the right, he gave his support to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and climbed in bed with George Bush and company. No doubt Obama is attempting to show some strength regarding national security to those of us who know he has none, but he’s sacrificing the very liberals who fell for his dippy promises of hope and change:
Asked specifically why he’s supporting the current FISA bill when he’d promised months ago to support a filibuster of an earlier version of the bill, Obama suggested flat out that “national security” overrides the question of telecom immunity.
The Death Penalty
As Michael Tomasky writes, most liberals are opposed to the death penalty, so when Obama joined in with the most conservative minority of the supreme court justices to support the death penalty in the case of the rape of a child, he turned more right than many from the right wing, causing many of his supporters to doubt their support. David Sirota suggests that “When Obama takes these mushy positions, it could speak to a character issue. Voters that don’t pay a lot of attention look at one thing: ‘Does the guy believe in something?’ They may be saying the guy is afraid of his own shadow.” The Huffington Post has noticed Obama’s lurch to the right:
Sen. Barack Obama is risking his brand as a political reformer, according to reports today in the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post. In recent weeks, he has moderated or changed positions on a number of politically-charged issues, leading to criticism from demoralized Democratic activists and charges of “flip-flopping” from conservatives.
Hillary supporters have long known that Obama wears whatever mask will gain him political advantage in the moment. The big blogs are now beginning to catch on to Obama’s tricks. Anglachel notices this trend:
Overall, the trend I am seeing is that, with Hillary out of contention, the Blogger Boyz have abruptly noticed The Precious is not what they have claimed him to be or, rather, they are finally having to acknowledge that we HRC supporters were right about the mendacious little bastard all along.
Indeed, there is an emerging narrative — not just in the blogosphere — that Obama is two-faced. Unlike the charge that Kerry was a flip-flopper, this narrative is born out of Obama’s own actions; no windsurfing imagery is necessary, even the big blogs are beginning to see that Obama has no core values and that he suddenly shifts positions and rhetoric to suit his needs. Politico reports:
“[A] lot of people tried to convince themselves that he was a progressive hero, and I think they were disappointed,” Hamsher said. “You can feel a real shift in the zeitgeist online.”
Obama recently told women that they need to “get over” that Hillary lost. But what Obama doesn’t understand or have the maturity to see is that in this extended job interview, in which women are the majority of voters, his tactics, reversals, arrogance, and bullying do not easily fade from memory. Even at this date, Obama is largely unknown to the public, but what we do know is that he will say one thing and do another. Where we come from that’s called lying, and it’s something we’d expect from a con.
I just wish Obama would get over the expectation that we are going to come around. He can get over that idea. We ain’t coming around. No Way, No How, Nobama.
Not getting over it! Get used to it!
oooooohhhh,
this one is going to bring out the bots.
Obama is a political sociopath. The only “change” in evidence is his malleability in relation to important issues, and his consistent willingness to sacrifice conviction for political expedience. He was never a “progressive”; his “liberalism” is a right-wing talking point that he capitalized on to win support from the left. What’s amazing is the cognitive dissonance demonstrated by progressives, who are running in circles trying to spin Obama’s right-of-center positions as a long-term progressive strategy.
Indeed.
Mr. TRIANGULATOR himself, now bamboozling the very same “progressive” supporters who completely trashed the Clintons for being triangulators.
They’ve been hoodwinked, our dramatic little Obama supporters.
He played them like a drum, and they’re even praising him for doing so.
Amazing, eh?
I love that term for Nobama….political sociopath. That is so accurate! He may also be a run of the mill sociopath, too.
Definately meets all the diagnostic criteria for narcissist.
Excellent description of Obama.
It is amazing to me the so called “progressives” (faux-progressives?) are swallowing this canard…
I find it amusing professionals and academics can look straight in the eye to the working class and say : “but can’t you see you have to vote for Obama because he will do all these great things for you and me” . I am sure what the working class needs is quite different than what they need….
But they have NO clue…. Self centered egotistical society blind progressives, that’s what they are. …
USAToday:
You see, it’s OUR fault. We misconstrued the bitter, angry witch.
What’s the date of this quote? If it’s recent, why is she waiting until now to “clarify” what she said? In my opinion, Michelle and Barack make great bookends–I don’t trust either one.
LOL! So, all those accusations and criticisms you and your husband made about Clintons are now just “strategy and you admit Hillary was a target?” Like husband like wife.
Senator Clinton is her title Michelle.
And you will never ever be “the same” as Senator Clinton.
The Senator does not make a living conning people and abusing the Public trust for personal gain like you did in the purchase of your current Chicago residence.
Michelle you are immoral…just like BO is.
Michelle: why didn’t you speak up before about being a target “just like Hillary”? Maybe because your hubby’s campaign was the one doing the targeting. Who is she fooling??? Ah, yes, The Obamanoids.. of course.
Great post medusa. I love the picture, it would make a fitting insignia for his seal. No wonder he is going on a world tour, if he stays here and keeps going at this rate, he won’t have any supporters left. There’s not enough Kool-Aid to swallow down all this “CHANGE”.
Is Thomasky a complete idiot? Compromising his principles may be the first thing a politician does, but it should be the last thing that a leader should even consider. One of the best reasons to oppose Obama is that we can never know “what principle will Obama compromise today“.
Tomasky:
To me, winning is a principle. It’s the highest principle there is. Nuff said about him.
What’s up with the Guardian putting a “g” on Mount Rushmore?
So, Obama and Thomasky now believe in “Anything to win. Winning is everything.”
There was a time when Bill and Hillary were completely trashed for same.
Nothing new under the sun, eh?
So, Obama and Thomasky now believe in “Anything to win. Winning is everything.”
There was a time when Bill and Hillary were completely trashed for same.
Nothing new under the sun, eh?
a cardinal feature of a psychopath is to wrongly accuse you of the very same things they are doing.
Tomasky’s article is actually rather forgiving of Barack Obama’s recent flip-flops. Tomasky provides some rational reasons for B.O.’s position “revisions” over the past few weeks.
Here’s Tomasky’s closing paragraph:
…To me, winning is a principle. It’s the highest principle there is. If you win the election, you can do at least some of the good things that will improve people’s lives in the country and around the world. If you lose it, you can’t do any of them…
I don’t agree with this conclusion, but it softens the argument criticizing Obama’s “two-face” image. However, it convinces me that those who voted for Obama as the supreme change agent were sold a bill of goods, which they swallowed without an ounce of critical thought. Sounds kinda like George W. Bush in 2000 doesn’t it?
Many of Obama’s fanatical supporters should be in for some serious disappointments, but their delusions will save them. They’ll continue to worship the guy and make every excuse they can. Fortunately, some of them will finally realize what others have known for a long time: Obama is just another politician and he has not been thoroughly vetted.
That’s risky business as we head into the general election with two totally undesirable candidates: Obama and McCain.
Yeah, Tomasky drinks deeply of the kool aid. And it’s very telling that he claims BO should say anything JUST to get elected. Bush much?
Oh look, realdemocrat’s assignment today was to come over and troll no quarter. What a good little Obamabot!
Obama is quickly becoming a caricature.
I want to know why people think a speech is the same thing as actually doing something. It is the most absurd thinking since Bush/Rove said they can make their own reality. Obama believes reality is his speech. Can you imagine the idiocy of people who agree with this sentiment. And if you dare question the sanity of that belief, you are criticized as racist. It is a wacky as I have ever seen. I read today Nobama was giving a speech on patriotism. It is beyond bizarro. It is as if thinking Bush is “the worst president that ever was” means I am a man hater. Now how does that even compute. Nobama is a fool with a petulant mean streak with delusions of grandeur. His hue is so irrelevant! I am so not racist, that I can feel free to criticise him, as I do Bush. They are so similar as to be scary. If one hates Bush and Obama, how can one be called a racist? Maybe I am a man hater? It is beginning to make some sense, except I loved Bill Clinton. Well, scratch that bigotry. I suppose I am just a bigot when it comes to fools and liars and criminals.
Obama marketed himself as the “anti-war” candidate, promising a withdrawel of troops from Iraq within 16 mos. In 1/08, former advisor Samantha Powers, acknowledged that this plan is, in fact, a “best-case scenario”, pointing out that is is unrealistic to plan now for January, 09. Obama supports the continued use of contrators, like Blackwater, in US war zones.
In 9/07 Obama replied “yes” to public campaign financing. He has now reneged.
In a 2002 Public Affairs interview, Obama stated that he did not support school vouchers. In a 2003 interview he stated that he did support vouchers, but did not support charter schools. In a 7/07 speech to the NEA, he stated that he did not support either. Most recently, Obama stated that he is willing to consider charter schools.
During the debates, when asked about health care, Obama said, “I never said we should go and try to get single payer”. In a 2003 speech to the AFL-CIO, he stated, “I happen to be a proponant of single-payer health care coverage”.
Obama has backtracked on issues such as NAFTA, immigration, FISA and the Cuba embargo. He avoided committing himself to specific positions by voting “present” 129 times whil in the Illinois State Senate.
In addition to his unique flexibility in relation to critical issues, he lacks the skills and qualifications needed for POTUS.
Comment by alibe4hillary | 2008-06-30 10:22:50
I want to know why people think a speech is the same thing as actually doing something.
————————-
Agreed. Obama’s speech became moot to me when I learned that he voted to support funding for the war each and every time it came up… That *speech* is a wash, given his actions.
Can you say opportunist?
Twenty somethings don’t know much about doing. All they’ve ever done is talk and text message.
Putting aside all of Obama’s flip flops for a moment, it’s the about face from all the alleged “progressives” that I find really scary. Suddenly they like the death penalty for sex offenders and agree with Scalia and Alito who dissented on banning it? Just like Obama did? Suddenly they don’t like public funding? Suddenly FISA is not so bad and should be compromised on?
I mean look at the insanity in this quote, “It’s acceptable - and necessary - for Barack Obama to compromise his liberal principles in order to get elected”. See, Obama is really an honest committed liberal disguised as a crooked, self serving fascist? He’s just pretending to be a complete flake so he can get elected?
This takes fantasy to a whole new level. Ignore what you’re hearing, disregard your perceptions, don’t take anything he says at face value, because he’s really just a good guy in disguise. This is like what you do in a cult to justify your leader’s behavior. No thank you.
The supreme cognitive dissonance!
If these “progressives” are as smart as they claim to be, why did they back Obama instead of Clinton, and why are they still backing him? Even a cursory background check on Obama would show he is lacking in core principles. Come on, guys, admit it, you backed a plug instead of a racehorse.
Well said yttk! Can’t wait to the next BO signpost up ahead.
Murphy has it right on pumapac.
H Help
O Obama
U Undermine our
N Nation’s
D Democracy
Pumas must prevail- as we have the moral high ground on our side. How can anyone in their right mind vote for Obama and support the DNC when he was selected through the most UNDEMOCRATIC means possible. His nomination will be a complete fraud. Jimmy Carter goes to all these countries trying to oversea fair and honest elections yet we cannot seem to have one here in America. This year was the worst it has ever been in my lifetime. The ends does not justify the means. I am afraid we are losing our democracy thanks to corporations who are taking over our airwaves and major print media networks. No they want to shut down our blogs. Thanks to call PUMA writing so eloquently- I hope and pray their messages gets to the people- we independent thinking Democrats must not be led by the nose like a cult but remain free thinkers who demand the FACTS be given by their media and not propaganda or spin which is all we got this year from most journalists. I will do anything to see that Obama is not elected but am not sure whether the best way to prevent that would be to vote for McCain or the independent candidate which once again appears to be Nader.
That’s the problem the DNC and Obama can’t overcome–that we are able to think and act for ourselves. We don’t want Obama in the White House, and no amount of mind-altering kool-aid will change that.
Breaking via HotAir:
On average, women working in Obama’s Senate office were paid at least $6,000 below the average man working for the Illinois senator. That’s according to data calculated from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, which covered the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2007. Of the five people in Obama’s Senate office who were paid $100,000 or more on an annual basis, only one — Obama’s administrative manager — was a woman.
Be careful MEDUSA… you wrote “Or showing his true colors” Now the Obama camp will peg you as a racist.
Any chance they get to throw out that term to any non-Obamabots.
Quite right, LOL. But actually Obama’s color is green, green about the ears and he serves the manna.
Oy Vey, you’re right! And it’s printed on a white background! I must be a racist!
No doubt they’ll find some way to play the race card. It’s been what….ten minutes?
Remember they also have to work in Roe V. Wade for the full effect.
The bottom line for me is….
I will not vote for Obama who is a race baiting, anti american liar.
Remember fairytale is a racial word.
I think Bill Clinton should demand that Obama apologize for painting the Clintons as racist.
I hope Bill Clinton just ignores Obama.
I have concluded that defeating Nobama is the first goal. If we can’t have Hillary, then I will vote for McCain without a moment’s hesitation. If Nobama wins, we will have no one to stand up for liberal or progressive ideals. the Democrats will all be co opted as they are now. Buit if McCain is President, the left will at least attempt to stand up. We will be totally screwed if Nobama would be elected. If McCain is elected, we would only be partially screwed. So that leaves me with only one choice, vote for McCain. He is not as bad as Bush and he is a hell of alot better than Nobama. And we can have Hillary in 4 years. And Hillary would be the true power of the party if Nobama is defeated! The more I think about it, the “more better” I like voting for McCain. Just imagine the day after the November election and Nobama is standing all alone behind his foolish non-presidential seal, telling all of us why it was Hillary’s fault and not his or the DNC’s fault that he lost. I can hardly wait for Hillary to reign supreme on November 5. Love the thought of it.
I’m with you, except given the Democrats’ past history, I don’t expect them to show any courage. But I do believe that McCain will be willing to work with Hillary to get compromise legislation passed.
Did anybody notice that Obama is wearing a classic Bill Clinton expression in that image. Dubya started doing that as well in 2001. I said at the time Rove was probably using old footage of Clinton as training tapes. Unfortunately mimicking Bubba’s facial expressions has not made either of them fluent or well informed. They confuse form with substance.
The new story is that BO is going to travel internationally this summer. It’s his Cliff Note’s attempt to make up for a complete lack of knowledge about foreign policy.
What an unqualified, inadequate and dangerous candidate. How did this happen in America?
Corruption, bribery and disenfranchisement. That’s how…..
His traveling to other countries is a good thing, IMO.
Do you think foreign heads of state are going to swallow that arrogance? Personally, I don’t think so.
He’s going to make plenty of gaffes, possibly cause international fiasco’s, and further demonstrate his total ineptitude.
Is he going to go overseas to Mexico like Bush did?
Obama is about to give a “major” speech on Patriotism. I sure hope he has a teleprompter because he can’t ad lib something he knows nothing about.
LMAO! Good one!
on what do you base your conclusion that obama knows nothing about patriotism?
You said it not me!
Don’t be surprised that if in the very near future Obama evolves into a 3 Faced politician. Coming to a political reality theater near you.
BOBO is going to need the Imax in three dee to pull off that slight of hand. And then of course, the audience will have to wear blinders
Pagan BO is already on the 3 dollar bill, when is enough enough?!
This bears repeating:
Obama is a spineless, unqualified, incompetent, ethically-challenged fraud with friends, associates, and advisors of dubious character . … now THAT’s the TRUTH!!!
Now you know how BOBO got the tag jelloman: BOBO the magnificent.
realdemocrat……get the hell out of here. you are a rodent. you belong to to rookie obama deploys elite nasty tactics squad. you are an idiot and you cant convince anybody in here. go back to the hussein camp and take a good dump.
“You are a rodent”? You mean he’s from one of those tenements in Obama’s state senate district?
If McCain gets elected with a democratic House and Senate you can bet your life everyone will just sit on their hands for at least four more years.
In this case gridlock works!
Nobama!
Hillary now or in 2012.
PUMA
Well, we all remember when “words counted,” until they didn’t. Or when Obama would talk to the world’s dictators without preconditions, until he modified the idea. Or how he’d toss NAFTA until his supporters whispered to the Canadians that he was [wink, wink] joshing. Or how he’d fight like hell on the Telecom Immunity business, until he decided he’d do it later. Or . . . the list goes on and on. And then, there’s all those inconvenient types tossed beneath the bus, those people he was shocked or saddened over. But under the bus they went. And the art of defection, did I mention that? And the blame game and the race card and the blatant sexism.
And Obamatrons expect us to “get over it?” This is all pre-convention stuff. Just can’t wait until September and the real fight begins.
See you at the polls!
PUMApac.org
Amen!
Well, realdemocrat, you certainly are….you managed to list every fault, every flip-flop of John McCain, now be a REAL democrat and do the same for Obama.
Amen! I’ll be waiting for that list.
But you have to remember, he hasn’t really DONE anything so his list might just be equal to McCain’s and not longer.
Where you at RealDemcrat? I’m waiting for the list.
Hurry or I’ll pay you even less money.
RealDemocrat:
My apologies, my last comment was out of line and I’m sorry.
Ever notice our REAL questions/concerns dont’ get answered? The reply is with an accusation of Hillary or McCain. No one answered why Bill saying Obama’s stance on Iraq was a fairy tale was race baiting. No answer to Obama’s ties to Ayers, Farrakhan, Phleger adn Wright-sitting in a racist, Anti American, hate spewing church for 20 years.
Hey guys, I know this is off topic, but I just read that Google is eliminating anti-Obama/pro-Hillary blogs. This could be the result of flagging by the Obamabots. Many of his supporters are mentally unbalanced as far as I am concerned. I can’t believe Google is doing this. So much for free speech.
Everyone should switch to WORDPRESS as a blog host . . . problems solved.
that pic looks just like him right now in his patriotic speech. he keeps looking to the right and left of the audience…why won’t he look straight at the camera and talk to the world?
change of subject
Obama is giving a speech on Patriotism. It is totally bizarre! I won’t go into the details, you’ll have to see it if you can stomach it, but he was talking about patriotism meaning (this is greatly paraphrased)standing up for country but not standing up for government when it goes against what America stands for. That got the biggest cheers.
It is so bizarre because it sounds like he is defending us when his purpose is to make us look unpatriotic.
The whole speech is bizarre (coming from Obama). He’s trying to make everyone believe he is all about democracy. You have to hear it to believe it.
I think he doth protest too much.
Where is he giving this latest “profound” speech?
Independence Missouri. FOX, and I’m sure the other networks, were airing it.
Was Claire there swooning in the front row?
Actually, for me it was, and remains, THE reason I will not vote for him. I was originally an Edwards supporter and I would have voted for any other candidate–any single one of them, even that worm Richardson–if the nomination process had been fair. It wasn’t, and his and the DNC’s actions should be punished, not rewarded.
That he is also a pandering, unqualified, lying, hypocritical, empty-suit, sexist, race-baiting, fraudulent Dubya in Democrats’ clothing, are just bonuses for me.
Possum, I love that “Dubya in Democrats’ clothing.”
The way I look at it. Obama will do or say anything to get elected. If he is elected, he will do whatever the people who are paying for him tell him to do. Of course, I mean the big donors.
The people’s only hope with either candidate is to have split control between the executive and legislative branch and to boot from office every other sociopath and fraud running for reelection and stop any new ones from infesting the Congress.
I keep looking for more blogs on exactly who is handing Obama his money and the scoop on his Congressional sponsors, but I haven’t found much.
The fact is that the Democratic Party DID have rules. According to those rules Michigan and Florida delegates couldn’t be seated at the DNC since the primaries in those states were held too early.
Those rules were changed and/or ignored for the sake of political expediency. Now, for similar reasons we see Obama rushing to the center of the political spectrum.
Both party and candidate show a lack of courage and moral integrity. Traits that are admirable in any presidential candidate. Traits which McCain, contrary to what General Clark may think, proved he has an abundance of while detained in North Vietnam.
It’s like the DNC is trying to outdo the RNC’s 2000 and 2004 corruption.
Wesley Clark just lost ALOT of peoles respect! ANd he should be ashamed of himself for making these comments. VERY dishonorable… Sad.
This may be a little off topic, but have you noticed that the Obama campaign is using the Hillary supporters who have now gone over to help him being given outrageous and controversial platforms - like Rendell and his HOUND, and now Clark stating we shouldn’t count McCains’s POW experience and flying for the military as background for Commander-in-Chief. I think they are trying to make her former supporters look like a bunch of dopes. I wonder what they have in mind for Bill?
Yep. Actually I think they did outdo them because they used the same tactics — but not against their opponents, against their own voters! Yeesh!
Remember how Democrats (rightly) kept saying “Nope, not over it” about the stolen Dubya elections? Yet we same Democrats are supposed to just “get over” our own party doing the same thing to us. Boggles the mind.
Who is Michael Tomasky? His excuses for Obama’s lack of principles, ethics and core values and beliefs sure sound like those cheering the third Reich circa 1937.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDTJDv4hevU
LOVE IT!
That is funny!!
Yeah we should phootoshop meeeshell on the Statue of Liberty!!! (oh second thought… that would be insulting our Lady Liberty!)
Why would anyone trust Obama? What has he done for you?
What has he said and defend that makes you believe he will fight for you?
NOTHING.
He has done NOTHING nor defended any principle that makes me belive that he’ll do anything to help solve any problems. Au contraire, he is so inexperienced, so insec ure and has so much to prove that he will screw up big time and it will be us paying the consequences. Mr Pontius Pilate will declare: “This is not the
Presidency I knew.”
Yet to Come: The Biggest Flip-Flop of Them All
Obama was a relative moderate on the war during his first year in the Senate. He gave one speech against the war in 2002, but by the time it became clear he would face no serious challenger in his Senate race, he cooled his rhetoric, and even spoke out against timetables for withdraw. When he arrived in Washington, he waited 18 months before making his first floor speech on Iraq. Then Obama began his campaign for the presidency. Playing to the Democrartic party’s antiwar base, Obama pledged to withdraw troops regardless of the facts on the ground. He opposed the surge, and even warned that it would make the violence worse. And as progress became apparent, he stubbornly refused to recognize the gains our troops were making.
But Obama is a man of change. Just in the last week he dropped his opposition to telecom immunity, his support for handgun bans, his pledge to take public financing and renegotiate NAFTA–all core issues for Obama, or they were supposed to be. So what issue will he shift on next? After looking at the numbers from yesterday’s Quinnipiac battleground polls, we’re betting Iraq. It turns out that Americans as a whole aren’t nearly so eager for surrender as the left-wing of the Democratic party, and Obama isn’t much for staking out unpopular positions.
The left should brace itself: Obama’s going to be pro-surge, pro-troops, and pro-victory by this time next month.
Medusa and Bud White;
The line BO pushes is constantly getting hit by lightning.
I would not want to be anywhere near him in a thunder storm. The next thing we will be reading is BO got a cameo in “Twister”…the movie AND the board game.
Thanks for a great read.