WASHINGTON -- When a candidate calls a second news conference to say the same thing he thought he said in the first one, you know he knows he has a problem.I love the comment section on this article, "Obama is just a talker. He likes to hear himself talk."
Thus Barack Obama's twin news conferences last week in Fargo, N.D. At his first, Obama promised he would make a "thorough assessment" of his Iraq policy in his coming visit there and "continue to gather information" to "make sure that our troops are safe, and that Iraq is stable."
You might ask: What's wrong with that? A commander in chief willing to adjust his view to facts and realities should be a refreshing idea.
But when news reports suggested Obama was backing away from his commitment to withdrawing troops from Iraq in 16 months, Obama's lieutenants no doubt heard echoes of those cries of "flip-flop" that rocked the 2004 Republican National Convention and proved devastating to John Kerry.
So out Obama came again to reiterate his time line. "Apparently, I wasn't clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq," he said. "I intend to end this war. My first day in office I will bring the Joint Chiefs of Staff in, and I will give them a new mission, and that is to end this war -- responsibly, deliberately, but decisively."
Republicans are pressing Obama on Iraq because they know that any new moves he makes will be interpreted, fairly or not, as a change in position, and that this will hurt him with two groups: the anti-war base of the Democratic Party, and independent voters, many of whom are just tuning into the campaign.Obama may bust out words like values, but it's just crafty- nothing more. It's rhetoric, and empty at that.
Painting Obama as a shameless shape-shifter is a way for his opponents to dull the enthusiasm (and inhibit the campaign contributions) of the war's staunchest foes. And if this image stuck, it could also hurt Obama among independents. They might vote for a hawk or a dove, but not a chameleon.
Over the last week, Obama has been crafty in the way he has sought the political middle ground. He has emphasized his "values" and touted his patriotism, his call to service and his faith, as he did Saturday at a conference of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. That is quite different from backing off his core promises.
Voters accept that a president may alter the details of campaign promises. What they expect is a clear sense of the direction he will take. At the moment, voters know that John McCain is far more likely than Barack Obama to continue the war in Iraq indefinitely. Obama would be foolish to blur that distinction.
I don't want to say calling Obama a shape-shifter isn't accurate, nor less than a quality war tactic. We all know what the waffles and flip flops did to Kerry's campaign.
2 comments:
Well, I don't think the way Kerry's campaign played out reflected a weakness on Kerry's part or whether he would have actually been a bad president.
Whether he "changed his views" or "flip-flopped" had nothing to do with Kerry himself, it was just a campaign tactic Karl Rove and his kronies are always painting buzzwords and stuff, to mobilize people, and it looks like this aticle is just trying to link Obama to Kerry which is kind of a cheap tactic.
I feel like in the eyes of conservatives, Obama can never win no matter what he does, but that's never been the point of running a political campaign: the goal isn't trying to appeal to the right wing, (or vice versa if you're a conservative candidate) because those people are so far removed and stuck in their opinions, that nothing will way them. Therefore, you aim for the middle voters who can be sqayed.
The question, is whether you, the author, are so far to one side of the political spectrum or the other, that you see the other side as the enemy, and reason wouldn't work. I imagine, that happens a lot if you're working on campaigns and form a do-or-die mentality.
Nice blog, by the way
I think the reality of it is you want flexible people in office,
Kerry was a flip-flopper. He had no spine.
Post a Comment