Is There a Third Choice?
by matt at 10:30 am on March 19th, 2008 in 2008 Presidential, Obama Uber AllesObama: Trust Me to End the War - AP (3/19/08):
“Ask yourself,” Obama told the crowd, “Who do you trust to end a war: someone who opposed the war from the beginning, or someone who started opposing it when they started preparing a run for president?”
Or, you know, the third choice, someone who opposed the war when he didn’t have a vote and then did nothing when he did. And much worse, insisted on using a well worn Republican frame to justify his failure to lead, even after his primary campaign was underway:
Congress will fund Iraq war if Bush uses veto, Obama says - AP (4/1/07):
“I think that nobody wants to play chicken with our troops on the ground.”
And of course this statement, as damaging as it was by itself, led to an attaboy from John McCain:
McCain cited Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, saying Democrats should “heed the advice of one of their leading candidates for president” and pass new legislation to fund the troops.
Obama likes to make war support a binary choice, but in reality, it’s not that simple. He hasn’t used his Senate seat or the constant media focus to lead on Iraq, and on a number of occasions, he’s sandbagged his own party. So it comes down to words vs. deeds. And Obama hasn’t taken any action that would lead a rational person to believe that he is the candidate that will end the war.
Greg wrote:
That’s it Matt, tell it like it is. Obama is all about words and how they matter, but when his words contradict his actions the MSM does not call him on it.. and don’t forget that words should not matter when it comes to his close friend and advisor Reverand Wright.
Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 1:32 pm ¶
matt wrote:
>and don’t forget that words should not matter when it comes to his close friend and advisor Reverand Wright.
this has nothing to do with it. why muddy the point?
Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 1:40 pm ¶
Jose' wrote:
Or, perhaps, once put under scrutiny, Obama did the right thing, instead of reciting ovations of nonsense.
People laud Obama for his ‘visionary’ objection to the Iraq war, when really, it was the knee-jerk response from the far left any time the military has been involved in anything since Vietnam. They decried a non-ending, bogged down war when we went to the gulf before, did the same thing when troops went to Kosovo. People shouldn’t be surprised he was against Iraq, when he had no intelligence or foreign policey experience whatsoever to help him decide.
Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 1:44 pm ¶
Fundit wrote:
The war sucks, yes. But not every American is going to vote accordingly. We are going to vote for someone the world will not hate, laugh at, lament. We’ll vote for someone that won’t embarrass us with every sentence that isn’t pre-written for him. We’ll elect the person who sees how important bringing us together again is rather than dividing us down the middle…
Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 6:21 pm ¶
matt wrote:
>But not every American is going to vote accordingly.
every democrat will. and obama is running for that party’s nomination. why do so many people forget this.
if he wants to be an independent, he should have run as one.
Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 6:24 pm ¶
tom wrote:
DMX ‘08, the only rational choice.
Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 8:03 pm ¶
jamiebeth wrote:
go tom go.
Posted 19 Mar 2008 at 10:30 pm ¶