Posted on 07/16/2008 9:39:32 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
A funny thing happened over on the Barack Obama campaign website in the last few days.
The parts that stressed his opposition to the 2007 troop surge and his statement that more troops would make no difference in a civil war have somehow disappeared. John McCain and Obama have been going at it heavily in recent days over the benefits of the surge.
The Arizona senator, who advocated the surge for years before the Bush administration employed it, says the resulting reduction in violence is proof it worked with progress on 15 of 18 political benchmarks and Obama's plan to withdraw troops by now would have resulted in surrender.
When President Bush ordered the surge in January, 2007, Obama said, "I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse," a position he maintained throughout 2007. This year he acknowledged progress, but maintained his position that political progress was lacking.
Tuesday, while Obama gave a speech on foreign policy, the New York Daily News was first to notice the removal of parts of Obama's campaign site listing the Iraq troop surge as part of "The Problem." An Obama spokeswoman said it was just part of an "update" to "reflect changes in current events," as our colleague Frank James notes in the Swamp. The update includes a new section on the rise of al-Qaeda violence in Afghanistan.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
fyi
Obama is soft on security. I wonder how well he would be polling if McCain were black.
He was against it before he was for it..............
Rewriting history, a hallmark of communists, nazis, and fascists everywhere.
I am reminded of a post from an earlier Obama thread, which I’ll paraphrase:
“Obama makes me want to say the N-word. No, not that N-word. The N-word meaning the guys with double lightning bolts on their collars.”
If this sort of thing is any indication of how he will treat free expression as president then we are all in big trouble. But we knew that already. And his opponent isn’t so great on the issue either.
Obama’s website flip-flops as much as he does.
Shift on war hits Obama's liberal base
**********************EXCERPT***************************
In talking about his plans to double the size of the Peace Corps and nearly quadruple the size of AmeriCorps and the size of the nation's military services, he made this rather shocking (and chilling) pledge: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
And, of course, there’s no link back to the archives. 1984, indeed, I can’t wait for the communist twit to go down in flames.
Update: Revisionist History
Could be handy again this year..........
Down the memory hole...
And I posted a thread regarding a Blog working to build a list of Obama flip Flops...see If I can find it...
Here we go:
Your Assignment: Compile Obama’s Flip-Flops ( Patterico.com building a list)
Obama purges site of surge criticism
*******************************EXCERPT*****************************
posted at 9:15 am on July 15, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Better late than never, I suppose. Barack Obama has purged his website of criticism of the surge, and has now credited American troops with the security gains of the last year. The move comes as John McCain repeatedly points out that Obama opposed the surge in January 2007 and said it would make the situation worse:
The presumed Democratic nominee replaced his Iraq issue Web page, which had described the surge as a “problem” that had barely reduced violence.
“The surge is not working,” Obama’s old plan stated, citing a lack of Iraqi political cooperation but crediting Sunni sheiks - not U.S. military muscle - for quelling violence in Anbar Province.
The News reported Sunday that insurgent attacks have fallen to the fewest since March 2004.
Obama’s campaign posted a new Iraq plan Sunday night, which cites an “improved security situation” paid for with the blood of U.S. troops since the surge began in February 2007. It praises G.I.s’ “hard work, improved counterinsurgency tactics and enormous sacrifice.”
The scrubbing took place this weekend, and it may signal more changes — or it may just be a way to prep for his upcoming trip to Iraq. If Obama appeared before the troops who defeated the terrorists in western Iraq, he may not get the reception he wants if his website kept discounting their hard work in the face of a despicable enemy. While the Sunni sheikhs have been a critical part of the success in Iraq, it was American tenacity which convinced them to switch sides.
The campaign says they regularly update the site to “reflect changes in current events”. However, the Obama campaign has yet to acknowledge that the changes came from a strategy he opposed and that he predicted would fail. Even more remarkably, he hasn’t changed his policy to incorporate the “changes in current events”. Instead, he just retooled his demand for timetabled withdrawals with a sop to the troops.
What changes will we see on the Obama site when he returns from Iraq? And will we have to compare caches in order to discover them, as the Daily News apparently did?
Is Obama Avoiding Facing the Military?
******************************EXCERPT INTRO************************
Posted on Sun 13 Jul 2008 11:47:44 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
That’s how it appears:
A coalition of military groups is planning a nationally televised town-hall-style meeting with the presidential candidates near Fort Hood, Tex., the largest active-duty military installation in the country. But so far, only Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, has agreed to attend.
CBS has agreed to broadcast the meeting live from 9 to 11 p.m. Eastern time on Monday, Aug. 11. The candidates would face questions directly from an audience of 6,000 people, made up of veterans, service members and military families from the base.
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the presumptive Democratic nominee, has not agreed to participate.
Obama advisor Phil Carter says that Obama “unfortunately had a previously scheduled commitment on the date proposed.”
Patterico.com is going to have to upgrade their server farm in order to accomodate the ever GROWING list of flip-flops.
What a huge surprise. Thanks Ernest.
He posted that on 7/7/2008....has Comments (302).
Must still be working on pulling his list together....
Obama takes more positions than there are in the entire Kama Sutra, and the context is similar (”servicing” the country, in the agricultural sense).
This is what Robert Mugabe has done in Zimbabwe, employed otherwise out-of-work, young thugs to enforce his personal brand of political correctness. The thugs are loyal because they know without the authority, money and food Mugabe gives them, they could just as easily be on the receiving end of their hit squad's brutality. They receive just enough training to wield the weapons they're give to brutalize the populace into submission.
They take to their their trade as a shark experiences blood in the water. As the victims of these mosque-and-ghetto-recruits lie helplessly unarmed before them, they adopt every manner of man's inhumanity to man.
Such squads would be used to quell the riots that would otherwise break out against various waves of industry nationalization Obama would bring, and if we should see such as-well-funded-as-the-military squads in the US, they could break down our society into something out of "Soylent Green" within eight years.
Only Kim Jong Il and his daddy knew to do destroy society more efficently.
Curse you, Democrats and Soros, for ever allowing such an Obamanation to sit for election to the US presidency!
HF
Another thread of Interest:
Obama insists no change in Iraq plan (Obama changes after changing. Expect more change)
****************************EXCERPT INTRO************************
afp ^ | 7/3/2008 | AFP
Posted on Thu 03 Jul 2008 05:21:30 PM PDT by tobyhill
WASHINGTON (AFP) — Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama insisted Thursday he had not changed his plan to order immediate troop withdrawals from Iraq, despite earlier saying he might refine his policies.
Obama's attempts to clarify his Iraq policy, before a looming visit to the war zone, drew a triumphant response from the campaign of Republican presumptive nominee John McCain, a staunch supporter of the current war effort.
Obama held two press conferences within hours in North Dakota, in an attempt to dispel reports that he was softening his proposal to get all combat troops home within 16 months, in the light of recent security gains.
Has he scrubbed his phony birth certificate yet?
And he has a defender...see comments by twist
Not sure what is happening on that....
The Success of the Surge Seemingly Puts Obama on the Defensive
*************************EXCERPT Intro*******************************
abcnews.com ^ | July 15, 2008 | Jake Tapper
Posted on Tue 15 Jul 2008 03:26:36 PM PDT by kellynla
Though a majority of the American people support ending the war in Iraq and think the invasion was a mistake, Republicans have tried to put Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, into a box as he prepares for his first trip to Iraq since securing his party's presidential nomination.
Weeks ago, after Obama said he would be willing to listen to commanders in the ground to "refine" his policy, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Republicans said Obama was flip-flopping.
Then after Obama clarified that he is sticking by his plans to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months, McCain and Republicans painted him as an intransigent partisan whose pending trip to Iraq is nothing more than a photo op.
"Senator Obama is departing soon on a trip abroad that will include a fact-finding mission to Iraq and Afghanistan," McCain said today at a town hall meeting in Albuquerque, "And I note that he is speaking today about his plans for Iraq and Afghanistan before he has even left, before he has talked to General Petraeus, before he has seen the progress in Iraq, and before he has set foot in Afghanistan for the first time. In my experience, fact-finding missions usually work best the other way around: first you assess the facts on the ground, then you present a new strategy."
He is full of shift.
I shudder at the thought of Fedgov with a Psycorp.
The video following the article at the link is great. It contrasts Axelrod saying Obama never said more troops wouldn’t make a difference, and then Obama saying exactly that: more troops won’t make a difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.