I’m Not Barack Obama!
Barack Obama launched a vigorous ad campaign coupled with stops across the country presenting an image contrary to stands he has taken in the past on a variety of issues including campaign finance, gun control, free trade, welfare reform, FISA legislation, faith based initiatives and Iraq, supported by a series of statements that are contrary to reality. Denying his own image, the new Barack Obama may be a better representation of a third term for George Bush than John McCain. The “Change” Obama constantly preaches appears to be about changing his position on issues to mirror public opinion and altering the facts to support them betting that most of his supporters never paid much attention to them in the first place.
Campaign Finance
With his “Clean up Washington” mantra, Barack Obama made a pact with John McCain that if they were the nominees of their respective parties he would accept public financing for the general election:
“If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”
Back in early 2007 when the pledge was made neither candidate seemed likely to be in the position they are today. Then just a couple of weeks ago, with a prodigious fund raising machine, the United States Senator from Illinois who had never previously voiced concerns now declared he would not be using public funds stating
“…the public financing of presidential elections, as it exists today, is broken.”
Gun Control
Gun control came to the forefront of the presidential race last month as the Supreme Court overturned the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns declaring, for the first time, an individual’s right to possess a gun. A November 20, 2007 story in the Chicago Tribune regarding the issue quoted Obama as stating he
“…believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.”
In similar fashion he responded, as a state assemblyman in 1996, with a simple “Yes” to a question if he supported state legislation to ban the manufacture, sale and owner ship of handguns in Illinois.
After the Supreme Court decision was handed down Obama’s campaign issued the statement
“As president, Barack Obama will continue to respect the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owners, and for voters who have concerns about this issue, they will find real comfort in Sen. Obama’s record. But when it comes to health care and energy and other economic issues that many gun owners care about, Barack Obama offers a fundamental change, while John McCain offers more of the same.”
Free Trade
During the Democratic Primary race Obama crisscrossed the Rust Belt criticizing Bill and Hillary Clinton for their part in supporting the North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA]. While Hillary held no elected office when then President Bill Clinton pushed the trade agreement he did his best to tie her to it by association stating
“The notion that you can selectively pick what you take credit for and then run away from what isn’t politically convenient that doesn’t make sense. If she suggested she had nothing to do with economic policy in the Clinton White House, then it would not be fair for me to bring it up but as you know, that’s not the claim that she is making.”
It is true Hillary based much of her claims of experience on her tenure as First Lady, Barack should be more careful casting guilt by association when his past is dominated by a host of questionable fellow travelers ["Obama's Chickens Come Home to Roost"].
Speaking in Cleveland Obama stated
“I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced.”
Shortly thereafter, a February 8th memo surfaced describing a meeting between Obama’s economic adviser and Canada’s consul-general in Chicago suppressing any fears our northern neighbor may derive explaining that his statements regarding NAFTA were more “reflective of political maneuvering than policy.” He tried to quash any doubts about his position in a Fortune Magazine interview that followed stating
“I’ve always been a proponent of free trade and I’ve always been a believer that we have to have strong environmental provisions and strong labor provisions in our trade agreements.”
Like most issues, it is hard to gain any understanding of what Barack stands for when it comes to trade and one can’t depend on the sympathetic media ["Obama Gets Media Nod, Hillary Gets Offensive"] to provide any clarity.
Welfare Reform
Obama portrays himself as a champion of welfare reform in a recent television ad claiming to have “passed a law to move people from welfare to work — slashed the rolls by 80 percent.” Yet, back in 1996 when the Federal Legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton the state legislator said he found the act “disturbing.” Then on May 31, 1997 on the floor of the Illinois state Senate he stated, “I probably would not have supported the federal legislation.” But whatever his position is on the issue the office he held had no impact on this legislation and the subsequent reduction was more in the neighborhood of 60%; a stellar achievement itself not wanting for the exaggeration of the ad.
FISA
Perhaps nothing has caused more consternation among ardent Obama supporters than his chaotic statements regarding the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA]. Last December the Illinois Senators office stated
“Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd’s efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same…Senator Obama will not be among those voting to end the filibuster.”
In staunch opposition to President Bush he supported an amendment repealing immunity for telcoms professing
“I am proud to stand with Senator Dodd, Senator Feingold and a grassroots movement of Americans who are refusing to let President Bush put protections for special interests ahead of our security and our liberty. There is no reason why telephone companies should be given blanket immunity to cover violations of the rights of the American people - we must reaffirm that no one in this country is above the law. We can give our intelligence and law enforcement community the powers they need to track down and take out terrorists without undermining our commitment to the rule of law, or our basic rights and liberties.”
Then on June 25th he would put forth a quite different view stating
“My view on FISA has always been that the issue with phone companies per se is not one that overrides security interests of the American people.”
Just yesterday he would confirm the new position he has held all along by casting his vote for the bill.
Faith Based Initiatives
Just last week Barack Obama announced that as president he would expand President Bush’s faith based initiates contrary to the sentiments of his secular left supporters who have been extremely critical of Bush’s plan as a violation of the principal of separation of church and state. While speaking in Zanesville, Ohio Obama proposed a $500 million per year Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships that would create one million summer jobs and educational programs, creating a new bureaucracy in contrast to using resources in place as the Bush program does.
Iraq War
There was some confusion last week regarding Obama’s position on troop withdrawals that required a second interview about the first. He began the second interview with
“We are going to try this again apparently I wasn’t clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq. I have said throughout this campaign that this war was ill conceived that it was a strategic blunder and that it needs to come to an end. I have also said that I would be deliberate and careful in how we got out, that I would bring the troops home at a pace of one to two brigades a month and that at that pace we would have our combat troops out in 16 months.”
Earlier that day, July 3rd, he stated “My 16-month timeline, if you examine everything I’ve said, was always premised on making sure our troops were safe,” Obama told reporters as his campaign plane landed in North Dakota.
“And my guiding approach continues to be that we’ve got to make sure that our troops are safe, and that Iraq is stable. And I’m going to continue to gather information to find out whether those conditions still hold.”
One need only watch Obama’s grilling of General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker last September to see what a pompous fool he has been on this issue ignoring the extraordinary success achieved in Iraq.
Change What?
Time and again we hear the call for “Change” from Obama that has come to ring hollow as we only hear criticism of his predecessors with little detail of what he proposes. What few statements of fact about issues we can glean from his interviews and speeches are changed at will and those that would question him are treated with impunity. He often resorts to castigating those who oppose him and belittles those who cling to tradition as in the case of his arrogant explanation of why Pennsylvania primary voters cling to their guns and religion or earlier today that American children should learn to speak Spanish comparing ignorant Americans to enlightened Europeans who are multi-lingual. And this from a man who never learned the language that the target of most of his venomous criticism, President Bush, speaks so well. And what has multi-culturalism in Europe achieved that we would hope to suffer through here. We’ve let enough tradition slip through our fingers with open boarders and giving foreign combatants access to U.S. courts. More change of this sort is something we can ill afford. Change that has gone undefined would likely be even worse.