July 17, 2008
There's no sucker like an Obama supporter...
Dick Morris has a nice run-down of recent Obama flip-flops. Of course any candidate—any person—should change a position now and then. A person with principles should be expected to stick with those principles, or do some serious explaining if he feels he has to change one. Positions, however, can be changed as new facts emerge, or as one thinks them out...
But none of that applies to Barackmo. His whole public career is signally lacking in any sign of principles or deep core values...
....Obama has carried flip-flopping to new heights. In the space of a month and a half, this candidate - who we don’t really yet know very well - reversed or sharply modified his positions on at least eight key issues:
• After vowing to eschew private fundraising and take public financing, he has now refused public money.
• Once he threatened to filibuster a bill to protect telephone companies from liability for their cooperation with national security wiretaps; now he has voted for the legislation.
• Turning his back on a lifetime of support for gun control, he now recognizes a Second Amendment right to bear arms in the wake of the Supreme Court decision.
• Formerly, he told the Israeli lobby that he favored an undivided Jerusalem. Now he says he didn’t mean it.
• From a 100 percent pro-choice position, he now has migrated to expressing doubts about allowing partial-birth abortions.
• For the first time, he now speaks highly of using church-based institutions to deliver public services to the poor.
• Having based his entire campaign on withdrawal from Iraq, he now pledges to consult with the military first.
• During the primary, he backed merit pay for teachers - but before the union a few weeks ago, he opposed it.
• After specifically saying in the primaries that he disagreed with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) proposal to impose Social Security taxes on income over $200,000 and wanted to tax all income, he has now adopted the Clinton position....
Actually, I take it back. Liberal Obama supporters are mostly NOT suckers. They are getting exactly what they want. They have no principles, and they increasingly hate anyone who does. As witness Joe Lieberman. Obama is perfect for them. A cypher, an empty man, who won't make them uncomfortable...
Posted by John Weidner at July 17, 2008 10:53 AMI would argue with some of the items on that list...the wiretap thing, for example - that's largely a matter of separate issues being bundled together, combined with standard legislative compromise. Part of why Senators have a tough time getting elected president is because the nuts and bolts of legislating opens them up to bogus flip-flop charges like that one.
Similarly, I don't think it's inconsistent to believe the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, AND to believe in gun control. I disagree with him on gun control, but it's not a flip-flop, in any way, shape or form.
He's ALWAYS said he'd work with the generals on troop levels, while setting a policy for getting us out of there. Again, I disagree with him strongly in his stance, but I don't see any flip-flops. I WISH he would flip-flop, but I don't see it.
On the other issues, I think some of them are definite flip-flops - Jerusalem, public financing - and some of them, I don't know enough about - but I'm not too impressed with Morris's indictment here...
In a sense none of them would be a big deal, if they stood alone. It's the quantity that's shocking--where are the things, if any, he won't fudge on? Plus the way he positions himself as more acting on a higher plane than other politicians.
also, I'm pretty sure he used to argue that there is no individual right to bear arms.
Posted by: John Weidner at July 18, 2008 02:35 PMTrying to reason with an Obama supporter reminds me of a Bibical proverb, something about "casting pearls before swine"
Posted by: ron childs at July 23, 2008 10:09 AM
