Jul 26 2008
Senator Obama has made it very easy on John McCain. First off, Obama has flip-flopped on so many issues has he has dumped his liberal base and moved to the center he has take the strategy of becoming an echo of McCain (and Bush) on a host of issues. Here are some prime examples:
(1) FISA: The Holy Grail topic of the liberal left, the years long effort by the SurrenderMedia to disable this nation’s protections on the fear of a second coming of Nixon. When the vote finally came to make semi-permanent the FISA fixes – and give telecom companies immunity – Obama threw out all his promises to fight the bill, throwing out the threat of a filibuster. But then he did more – he voted FOR the bill.
(2) Campaign Finance: Another darling of the left is the effort to take campaigns away from the people by limiting donations. Obama promised to use public financing – then threw that promise away once he started hauling in the money. Funny thing is, for all that money he has not gotten very much return.
(3) Hand gun control: If liberals could decimate conservatives their targets are religion and guns. Obama’s remarks about bitter Americans running to their bibles and guns still haunts the man. And yet, when the Supreme Court came out and overturned the DC handgun banÂ
More examples here. The only prime issue issue Obama has staked out a stand far left of McCain on is Iraq – and that is a gift to McCain. As John Hindraker noted yesterday, McCain clobbered Obama on his obstinate stance on The Surge and our victory in Iraq.Â
We both knew the politically safe choice was to support some form of retreat. All the polls said the “surge” was unpopular. Many pundits, experts and policymakers opposed it and advocated withdrawing our troops and accepting the consequences. I chose to support the new counterinsurgency strategy backed by additional troopsÂ – which I had advocated since 2003, after my first trip to Iraq. Many observers said my position would end my hopes of becoming president. I said I would rather lose a campaign than see America lose a war. My choice was not smart politics. It didn’t test well in focus groups. It ignored all the polls. It also didn’t matter. The country I love had one final chance to succeed in Iraq. The new strategy was it. So I supported it. Today, the effects of the new strategy are obvious. The surge has succeeded, and we are, at long last, finally winning this war.
Senator Obama made a different choice. He not only opposed the new strategy, but actually tried to prevent us from implementing it. He didn’t just advocate defeat, he tried to legislate it. When his efforts failed, he continued to predict the failure of our troops. As our soldiers and Marines prepared to move into Baghdad neighborhoods and Anbari villages, Senator Obama predicted that their efforts would make the sectarian violence in Iraq worse, not better.
And as our troops took the fight to the enemy, Senator Obama tried to cut off funding for them. He was one of only 14 senators to vote against the emergency funding in May 2007 that supported our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. …
Three weeks after Senator Obama voted to deny funding for our troops in the field, General Ray Odierno launched the first major combat operations of the surge. Senator Obama declared defeat one month later: “My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now.” His assessment was popular at the time. But it couldn’t have been more wrong.
By November 2007, the success of the surge was becoming apparent. Attacks on Coalition forces had dropped almost 60 percent from pre-surge levels. American casualties had fallen by more than half. Iraqi civilian deaths had fallen by more than two-thirds. But Senator Obama ignored the new and encouraging reality. “Not only have we not seen improvements,” he said, “but we’re actually worsening, potentially, a situation there.”
If Senator Obama had prevailed, American forces would have had to retreat under fire. The Iraqi Army would have collapsed. Civilian casualties would have increased dramatically. Al Qaeda would have killed the Sunni sheikhs who had begun to cooperate with us, and the “Sunni Awakening” would have been strangled at birth. Al Qaeda fighters would have safe havens, from where they could train Iraqis and foreigners, and turn Iraq into a base for launching attacks on Americans elsewhere. Civil war, genocide and wider conflict would have been likely.
Above all, America would have been humiliated and weakened. Our military, strained by years of sacrifice, would have suffered a demoralizing defeat. Our enemies around the globe would have been emboldened. …
Senator Obama told the American people what he thought you wanted to hear. I told you the truth.
Combine this delusional stance with his rebuff to our injured soldiersÂ in Germany and McCain has his signature issue to win in November. As long as Obama stands pat, McCain should hit him every day on what kind of fool it takes to prefer defeat at the hands of al-Qaeda (who WERE in Iraq and fighting us at the time) in a dangerous world. As McCain said from the link above:
Senator Obama said this week that even knowing what he knows today that he still would have opposed the surge. In retrospect, given the opportunity to choose between failure and success, he chooses failure. I cannot conceive of a Commander in Chief making that choice.
Neither can 90% of America. My bet is Obama is afraid to admit The Surge worked, and so he will continue to claim it was better we lost, and it would have been better that all those injured soldiers he turned his back on sacrificed in vain. Right now I cannot see how any amount of money can save Obama.
Update: The liberal media is starting to report on this – no less from The Tingle-Network (MSNBC):
n his official capacity as a sitting US senator,Â ObamaÂ has every right to stay in touch with America’s men and women in uniform. According to Pentagon officials, the problem was that Obama’s request to visit Landstuhl included two members of his campaign staff — retired Major General Jonathan S. Gration and Jeff Kiernan. US military officials in Germany informed the campaign the two political operatives would not be permitted on base.
Pentagon officials say Gration was the campaign’s point of contact at Landstuhl in arranging Obama’s visit and “got torqued” when he was told he would not be permitted to join Obama. It was Gration who later suggested to reporters that the Pentagon short-circuited Obama’s visit.
Are there some in the Pentagon or military resentful because Gration has climbed on board the Obama campaign? Did Gration overreact? As a former policy director for the US European Command, he would surely be disappointed — if not offended — by being excluded from the visit. It’s also been my experience that even retired generals do not want to hear the word “no.”
Look, a former general should damn well know better. He is not a general now, he is a political campaign operative and he KNOWS the difference. No general worth his salt would be confused and few would try to exploit the wounded for political or personal gain. The news media may start to uncover this unforgivable act of Obama’s campaign. Â
More here. What happened? Obama lost control of one of his “generals” who torpedoed the trip and Obama on the grounds he was not being fawned on enough. Obama IS weak and clearly cannot lead this nation. He can’t even control one egotistical general.
Update: Allah Pundit noticed how the McCain Campaign jumped on this Achille’s Heel for Obama – which will keep him in the good graces of the far left, liberal media AND slam a wedge between him and the majority of Americans:
My view is that Obama can’t move off this limb he put himself on. My guess is the liberal elite leadership and moneybags for the Surrendercrats have mandated this is the issue he stays pat on. And given how he bowed to a couple of irate campaign aids when he turned his back on our injured troops, I get the feeling The Messiah has zero backbone and will stay on this limb as McCain and the GOP saw it off over the following months. Only a truly delusional person stands by a plan for defeat, even in the face of victory (more on that in the next post).