Obama, the candidate of [too much] change...

Moving beyond the stale and contrived e-mails that are sufficient proof for those on the right to frame Barack Obama as a clandestine Muslim and [scary] terrorist extraordinaire, let's examine the recent turn of events that are beginning to paint him an unfavorable light.

Now that his campaign has transitioned from the rock 'em, sock 'em primaries to the more nuanced general election, Obama has made some rather dramatic shifts to the right. This troubles me because I looked at Hillary's campaign through the prism of my own progressive views and found her centrist views weren't to my liking, and Obama convinced me that he was all about "change". I don't like being duped.

When he was toe to toe with Hillary Clinton, he was the liberal, progressive candidate.  Remember, he supposed to be a different kind of politician... young, fresh, new ideas and all that... right?  He frequently highlighted the differences between Hillary's rightward leaning, pro-war voting history, and his own anti-war campaign statements, and he was an outspoken opponent of Bush's assault on our Constitution.  But that was then...

In the past two weeks, the media has had a field day documenting each and every one of Obama's shifting policy positions -- Oh, hell… lets just get it over with and call them flip-flops! -- where he has reversed himself completely on the following issues:

• supported Bush's FISA bill, adding unprecedented power to the presidency... can I blame him for not wanting to give up the power Bush has amassed?
• sided with the far right in praising Scalia/Thomas,  the Supreme Court’s premiere conservatives, striking down Washington, D.C.’s ban on handguns
• he now supports the law that extends retroactive immunity to telecoms who helped Bush illegally spy on Americans
• expand Bush's program to use federal tax dollars to fund religious social programs
• support of the death penalty as the state's right to kill certain criminals
• now he supports "free trade" -- NAFTA -- corp $$$ is pouring in
• he is now adding Bush-style conditions on any meeting with Iran's president to look tough
• promising to do "anything" to protect Israel and its apartheid, military occupation policies, even if they attack Iran... and another war benefits us how?
• weakening statements on troop withdrawal from Iraq... welcome to the newest American state of Iraq 

This wasn't a subtle shift to the right, it was a jolting transformation, replete with patented right wing talking points straight from the Republican playbook that diluted Obama's original brand. Seriously, does anyone believe that pandering to a small percentage of undecided independent voters will win elections? Think about it… this was the same fatal blunder that didn't work for Al Gore in 2000. It didn't work for John Kerry in 2004. And it certainly didn't work for Hillary Clinton... sorry Hill.

Obama's shift makes him look just as weak as those who preceded him, and it leaves him vulnerable to attack by the right-wing slime machine. By comparison, conservative politicians do not move to the left, they are uncompromisingly Republican hard-liners because that's what their base wants, and -- drum roll, please! -- they win. Will someone email that to Obama... please?

Watering down his progressive, Democratic message, and moving to the right, won't earn Obama any votes from America's vacillating swing voters, but it will alienate his supporters. Many of whom -- like me -- are probably feeling a bit betrayed or suffering from buyers' remorse about now… 'cause we could have gone with Hillary if we had wanted a centrist, you know?

I don't want an wind-up Obama president who will not govern substantially different than a Bush or a McCain.

I am angry beyond words that he is supporting allowing the government to use phone companies to spy on American citizens without warrants.

I am disgusted that he is backing the notion that needy people should be subjected to religious conversion attempts in order to get aid with such things as breaking addiction and emergency food assistance.

On some of the other issues, I am unsurprised.  Most American politicians believe, for whatever reason, that they must pander to the small percentage of Americans who think Israel should be supported no matter how corrupt their government is and no matter how many innocents they kill in so-called self-defense. And I know that I am in a distinct minority believing that the death penalty is always wrong.

Still, I feel I have no choice but to vote for him, as I cannot vote for McCain.

Typical politician....talks out of both sides of his mouth and says nothing. I shudder to think we could have a first lady who said recently....."For the first time in my life I'm proud to be an American". Guess she should have moved to another country then a long time ago.  Good ridance.

Elizabeth

lindapearl:

I don't want an wind-up Obama president who will not govern substantially different than a Bush or a McCain.

Now you have a glimpse into what I call an Obama-Nation.  Too sad...too bad...carry on.   All those wide eyed (I want to say dead-eyed) but I'll hold back... cheerleader type comparing him to JFK made me sick!   Now we know what all that babbling on about 'change' really meant.

Hillary would have been a fine president.  As usual,  I'm gonna hold my nose and vote for the party...what's left of it. 

Isn't Hilary working alongside of him now?

Lady Fingers:

I am disgusted that he is backing the notion that needy people should be subjected to religious conversion attempts in order to get aid with such things as breaking addiction and emergency food assistance.

 

To me, it sounds like he wants to pull all our country's resources into play to solve problems. From the Columbus Dispatch ... 

“I’m not saying that faith-based groups are an alternative to government or secular nonprofits. And I’m not saying that they’re somehow better at lifting people up. What I’m saying is that we all have to work together — Christian, Jew, Hindu and Muslim; believer and nonbeliever alike — to meet the challenges of the 21 ^{s t} century.”

Obama wants to expand President Bush’s program to steer federal social service money to religious groups, but he put stipulations on faith-based organizations that would receive money under his administration. Among them:

• They would not be allowed to use federal funds to proselytize or provide religious sectarian instruction.

• They could not discriminate against nonmembers of their church or religion, but must remain open to all and cannot practice religious discrimination against populations they serve.

• Religious organizations that receive federal dollars could not discriminate with respect to hiring for government-funded social service programs.

• Taxpayer dollars could only be used on secular programs and initiatives.

“I know there are some who bristle at the notion that faith has no place in the public square,” Obama said. “But the fact is, leaders in both parties have recognized the value of a partnership between the White House and faith-based groups.”

justyouandme20002001:

I shudder to think we could have a first lady who said recently....."

I shudder too, that anyone is still repeating this already debunked right wing smear.

Do your homework, and Google the transcript and/or the video for her ENTIRE statement. After 8 years of this kind of crap there is absolutely no excuse for anyone being so gullible that they still allow themselves to be so easily persuaded be an out of context phrase. 

Aashlee, I would never go to a religious organization for help because I know that they would try to shove their faith down my throat along with whatever help they were officially providing.  Oh, I'm sure separate it in their books so that no Federal money went toward the proseletizing, but they'd still make sure that no help was given without proseletizing.  Not because they are evil, but because they truly believe that their religion is ultimately the answer to whatever might be wrong in anyone's life.

I'm sure I am not the only person who feels this way, and I am equally sure that, if a community already has approved faith-based social service programs, the government will not feel it is necessary to also provide religion-free option to that community.  So I say keep religion private and separate from the government.

lindapearl:

• supported Bush's FISA bill, adding unprecedented power to the presidency... can I blame him for not wanting to give up the power Bush has amassed? ...
• he now supports the law that extends retroactive immunity to telecoms who helped Bush illegally spy on Americans

 

The bill Obama will vote for is not the same Bushwacked bill that was introduced last February. And, he does not support retroactive immunity for telecoms who broke the law.

(CBS/AP) - Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., issued a statement in support of the House's update of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, but said he would try to strip a provision granting immunity to telecommunication companies when the bill comes to a vote in the Senate next week.

The House approved a compromise bill Friday that would set new electronic surveillance rules that would also shield telecoms from lawsuits arising from their participation in the government's warrantless eavesdropping on telephone and computer lines in the United States.

The government eavesdropped on American phone and computer lines for almost six years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks without permission from the FISA Court, the special panel established for that purpose under the original 1978 law.

Some 40 lawsuits have been filed against the telecommunications companies by groups and individuals who say the Bush administration illegally monitored their phone calls or e-mails.

Obama said there is "little doubt" that the Bush Administration, with the cooperation of major telecommunications companies, "has abused [its] authority and undermined the Constitution by intercepting the communications of innocent Americans without their knowledge or the required court orders."

"Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program.

"[The bill] does, however, grant retroactive immunity, and I will work in the Senate to remove this provision so that we can seek full accountability for past offenses." ...

FYI: In whatever form this bill takes, I'm not happy about this, either.

I, too, would prefer a more secular setup. But I agree that we have too many problems right now NOT to draw on these resources.

I have received help from faith-based organizations (not just Christian ones) and have never had the topic of religion come up. Those organizations that are truly committed to helping people do not let religion become any kind of determining factor in whether that help is extended.

justyouandme20002001:

I shudder

Yeah...I hear ya'...I've been 'shuddering' for nearly 8 years!  BTW...I know the truth is a hard concept to grasp for some,  but,  one more time with feeling:  That was taken out of context.  But who cares about that when all you need to do  is keep on repeating it over and over and over again!

lindapearl:

now he supports "free trade" -- NAFTA -- corp $$$ is pouring in

This is Obama's statement on NAFTA from the campaign Web site. The "free trade" is not without restrictions or requirments for fairness. 

Trade

Obama believes that trade with foreign nations should strengthen the American economy and create more American jobs. He will stand firm against agreements that undermine our economic security.

• Fight for Fair Trade: Obama will fight for a trade policy that opens up foreign markets to support good American jobs. He will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to those important benchmarks. Obama will also pressure the World Trade Organization to enforce trade agreements and stop countries from continuing unfair government subsidies to foreign exporters and nontariff barriers on U.S. exports.
• Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement: Obama believes that NAFTA and its potential were oversold to the American people. Obama will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA so that it works for American workers.

Michelle OSAMA is an ungrateful sh!tbag. Nothing was taken out of context.

lindapearl:

promising to do "anything" to protect Israel and its apartheid, military occupation policies, even if they attack Iran...

When did he say this?