What Obama Told the Military Times About His Withdrawal Plans
EmailIn an interview with the Military Times last week, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, said of his plans to withdraw troops from Iraq that if "current trends continue and we’re in a position where we continue to see reductions in violence and stabilizations and continue to see some improvements on the part of the Iraqi army and Iraqi police, then you know my hope would be that we could draw down in a deliberate fashion in consultation with the Iraqi government, at a pace that is determined in consultation with General Petraeus and the other commanders on the ground and it strikes me that that’s something we can begin relatively soon after inauguration."
He added: "If on the other hand you’ve got a deteriorating situation for some reason then that’s going to have to be taken into account.”
The notion that Obama’s withdrawal plan will be impacted by consultations with the Iraqi government, Gen. David Petraeus and commanders on the ground, and could be changed depending on a deteriorating situation, has been seized upon by Republicans as further evidence of Obama’s incoherence, flip-flopping, and zig-zagging on his plans to withdraw US troops within 16 months of his inauguration.
“How can Barack Obama claim to have a consistent Iraq policy?" asks RNC spokesman Alex Conant. "It’s clear Obama is rightly trying to reverse the central premise of his campaign: his pledge to immediately withdraw troops from Iraq. Obama needs to acknowledge that he was wrong in opposing the surge, and he needs to accept that his words mean things and fully explain what his Iraq policy would be as Commander in Chief.”
You can watch the video of Obama’s interview with the Military Times HERE, read the full story from the newspaper HERE, or check out the full transcript HERE.
Writes the Military Times: "Getting U.S. combat troops out of Iraq is a key Obama goal, and one where he said he is misunderstood. His campaign materials say Obama would begin withdrawing combat troops from Iraq, one or two brigades a month, as soon as he takes office. But he added in the interview that the start of the withdrawal also depends on the security conditions on the ground.
"Obama said he wants to reduce combat troops, leaving forces to continue training Iraqi police and military officers, providing security for U.S. officials and facilities and for counterterrorism operations. Exactly when and how quickly this would happen depends on the situation in the field, he said, acknowledging that military commanders on the ground would play a key role in recommending what steps to take.
"Obama said he would not order any ‘precipitous’ withdrawal of combat forces. Instead, he said, his policy is that ‘we should be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless in getting in….I have always said that as commander in chief, I would seek the advice and counsel of our generals,’ Obama said. But, in the end, ‘it is the job of commander in chief to set the strategy.’
"A strategic factor in the decision to keep forces in Iraq includes, for him, a question about the risk of not having enough combat-ready forces for other operations. ‘If we have only one battle-ready brigade outside the Iraq rotation to respond to other risks, that’s not good strategic planning by the commander in chief,’ he said. ‘If we have a situation in Afghanistan where we are seeing more and more violence in the eastern portion of Afghanistan, at a time when we’ve actually increased the forces down there and we’ve got some of the best battle-tested operations deployed there, and we’re still seeing increases in violence, what that tells me is that we’ve got real problems.’"
In some ways, I’m not sure that this is entirely an issue of flip-flopping as much as it is one of emphasis. Many of these wiggle phrases — "as careful getting out as we were careless getting in," etc. — have been in Obama’s speeches for months if not years.
But that said, I have never heard Obama tell a crowd of Oregon liberals that he plans on consulting with David Petraeus. *
- jpt
UPDATE: I mis-read an Obama quote in an earlier version of this post, confusing a reference to combat-ready US troops with a reference to combat-ready Iraqi troops. My bad; apologies. I have removed the incorrect sentence.
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
If this election does not work out for Senator Obama I am sure that he can find employment dealing 3 card Monte.
Or maybe he is already dealing to the voters.
Posted by: smith | July 7, 2008, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm
OBAMA IS DANGEROUS. NO DOUBT ABOU IT. HE SIMPLY DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH EXPERIENCE TO BE PRESIDENT. HE IS A NEWEBIE. IRAN WILL ATTACK OBAMA AND TEST HIM TO THE FULL. THIS ATTACK WILL ENDANGER THE ENTIRE WORLD. THE SAME AS THE ATTACK ON JFK BY KRUSCHEV ALMOST BROUGHT NUCLEAR WAR. AMERICA DOES NOT NEED A PRESIDENT THAT WILL CAUSE IRAN TO BRING THE WORLD TO THE BRINK OF NUCLEAR WAR. I AM A HILLARY SUPPORTER WHO WILL VOTE MCCAIN AND REPUBLICAN FOR THE FIRST TIME IN MY LIFE. ACTUALLY I LIKE MCCAINS POLICIES ON ENERGY AND OTHER POLICIES. IRAN WILL NEVER ATTACK AMERICA WITH MCCAIN AS PRESIDENT.
Posted by: DemocratNoMore2 | July 7, 2008, 5:29 pm 5:29 pm
Iran will not attack America.
Unless we attack them…
They know we can inihilate them…your statement is just stupid…
and Obama is saying we are getting out…here’s is the plan let’s husddle and focus on trying to get to this plan.
McCain…lets huddle and focus on going to war with Iran.
this man said the same things about Iraq.
It’s not Iran that will start the war with us…it is McCain who like his pitch for Iraq wants to go in to iran…
read his speech to AIPAC.
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 5:32 pm 5:32 pm
He’s saying he will do what any good commander in chief will do: watch and deal.
Ok. That makes sense. It is not what he campaigned on to defeat Hillary Clinton. Obama is changing his tune to suit the audience. This is not flip flopping. It’s “the same old wine in a brand new bottle”, aka, “lieing”.
Obama is about Obama.
Posted by: len | July 7, 2008, 5:33 pm 5:33 pm
It should be noted he stated given the current situation he believes withdrawal can begin at inauguration. He only replies consultation would occur on HOW this happens, not if or when which is a genuine question (never apparently) with McCain. This isn’t a shift at all. Or a change in emphasis.
It’s the result of two weeks of memos saying Obama will shift, he doesn’t and people parse his words to death to make it seem like he has.
It’s tiring.
But the fact is: One candidate is ready to pull out of Iraq strategically and focus on Afghanistan/Pakistan while another wants the status quo to remain and even to expand through bases. That’s Obama v. McCain: change v. more of the same.
Posted by: Rhoda | July 7, 2008, 5:34 pm 5:34 pm
mccain is not a military genius—-nothing more than a incompedent plane wreacker—–please explain what you think makes hin otherwise
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 5:36 pm 5:36 pm
You know I just don’t know where the man stands. First, we will begin with drawing troops as soon as he takes office, one or two brigades at a time. Then its I need to talk to the generals and Iraqi people and redefine the plan. Then its I’ve been consistent all along. Then its no precipitous’ withdrawal of combat forces. Instead, he said, his policy is that ‘we should be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless in getting in–and all of this means what? Where does he stand? He doesn’t even know. But we all can go to the huge stadium where he will accept his nomination with the teleprompter allowing him to read great things to inspire the people.
Posted by: Ann | July 7, 2008, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
The entire premise of the Obama campaign was getting us out of Iraq, period! He allowed his supporters to believe this, and they gave him a pass on everything else: lack of experience, Rev. Wright, etc etc.
Now we see he had no intention of following through on getting us out.
Obama supporters have got to be feeling pretty stupid now. Or, maybe not. They fell for his line of BS, hook line and sinker. Now they are stuck with him, and have to follow him over the cliff.
But maybe not. Remember the super delegates? They can still reverse and commit to voting for Hillary. Hillary, with all of her flaws, is at least not not the complete fraud that Obama is.
Posted by: David H | July 7, 2008, 5:40 pm 5:40 pm
This piece is a non-issue. I miss the fight between Barak and Hillary. These posts are boring. I think the core democrats are going to vote for Obama and the ones that are voting for McCain are fakes. Their Republicans in wolf clothing. I have reconciled to vote for Obama because I worry about my children and their childrens future. Anyone that votes for McCain, is insane.
Posted by: Lois, California | July 7, 2008, 5:41 pm 5:41 pm
obama has not changed on anything go back watch his debates with tim russert nothing like republicans twisting but we have yet to hear about mccain flip flop we have been quite many
Posted by: ANGIE | July 7, 2008, 5:42 pm 5:42 pm
Obama expressed concern about enough combat-ready troops outside of Iraq, in the event more would be needed for Afghanistan. I didn’t read his statements as concern for more combat-ready troops within Iraq, but outside of it.
Posted by: kat | July 7, 2008, 5:43 pm 5:43 pm
What is stupid is assuming that Iran will not attack. What if they decide to attack allies like Israel or increase the attacks in Iraq? Soothsayers should leave foreign policy to the government.
Posted by: smith | July 7, 2008, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm
David H
He is still focused on getting us out…
in your worst twist of this…Obama is still the one saying we need to get our soldiers and our money HOME.
That is who needs to be in the oval office …no more c-, wealthy military daddy approval seeking and favor getting…cowboys.
America has gotten smarter by default in 8 years. McCain by default to his partty has gotten dumber.
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm
smith
Iran will not attack us…and if they attack Israel..Israel will blow them up.
get a clue
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 5:48 pm 5:48 pm
mccain will start world 3 the man is very dangerous its clear to see at least obama is being rational unlike mccain that says if we have to stay there 100 years it doesnt matter its not important when the troops come home and mccain first 100 years 4 years possible 6 until besides i rather have a president that commuincates with our military takes advice mccain wont be that way why because he was in the military it would be his way and only his way because he would feel he knows being prior military and too me thats dangerous mccain loves war its in his blood!!!
Posted by: ANGIE | July 7, 2008, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
smith
if they attack israel you may be whitness to the beginning of the end.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
and if they attacked Israel with any substance…we and every other civilized nation as a team would blow THEM up…
they’re not dumb they know that…
McCain is talking about being “pro-active”
sound familiar…same thing he said about Iraq. “
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 5:50 pm 5:50 pm
It is so hard to track his position, but if I am correct in recalling that Obama beleives that our ‘occupation’ is the biggest strategic blunder of foreign policy (bigger than Vietnam?), that we are ‘creating’ terrorists by being there, then he should believe in immediate withdrawl and things should not deteriorate if we start leaving…right?!
Posted by: Ronnie Wrangler | July 7, 2008, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm
Obama defeated Hillary on the premise that Iraq was not working so we need to get out now. Now he’s saying that if Iraq isn’t working, we need to stay in. His inexperience is causing him to shift positions hourly – and his followers are in total denial. Sad, sad, sad.
Posted by: HoosierSue | July 7, 2008, 5:52 pm 5:52 pm
Ann,
I’ll tell you where he stand. If you’ve watched the debates Obama has this common line. “We need to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in”
Meaning. If the generals tell him on the ground we can’t take out 2 brigades this month… he’ll take that information into consideration. #1 goal. Leave Iraq while maintaining the safety of our troops.
Posted by: Vanessa | July 7, 2008, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
ronnie
bush senior knew the consequences of iraq invasion —–and little bushy has proved this..if we had stayed out it would be between iraq and iran as it always was.they would be killing each other and not americans.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 5:55 pm 5:55 pm
Moveon.org is a big $ source for Obama, the same org. that got a sweet advertising deal from NYTimes to place the General Betray us ad. Now Obama will consult with General Petreaus.
As some one said, he ran his whole campaign against Hillary based on getting the troops out in…was it 60 days or 16 months. How stupid does he think Americans are? He is so done.
Posted by: rw | July 7, 2008, 5:57 pm 5:57 pm
rw
what is McCain’s plan to get our troops out and our financing back from Iraq?
one candidate has America’s priorities straight and the other caniddate wants to do to Iran what he pitched for us to do to Iraq.
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 6:01 pm 6:01 pm
I don’t care what Obama says. I just want Bush and the Republicans out of office. Wake up people, our economy is tanking. It will be the end of a lot of programs for our children. No healthcare, and our education will suffer. They will divide the haves and the have nots. Just think, a man that doesn’t know about economic issues and don’t even use a computer. Get real! When democrats go to the voting booth, remember who will be better for our economy. Irag strategy needs to change. So whatever Obama says, it doesn’t mean anything compared to another 4 years of disaster.
Posted by: Lois, California | July 7, 2008, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
Obama is one smart man. I am sure he will not do anything without some hard thought process and I am sure he will listen to those who he needs to. Which by the way is more than Bush has ever done or McCain for that fact. Their theory is my way or the highway. I will never vote for that. I never have.
Posted by: becky | July 7, 2008, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
rw
Actually you are factually wrong. Obama did not run his campaign against Hillary on getting out of Iraq. In fact, Hillary had accused him of not being hawkish enough on getting out of Iraq. Hillary by far was the more leftist candidate on troop withdrawal. Obama has consistently said that he would consult with the Generals on the ground in regards to tactics, but the mission would be getting out. In fact, he criticized Hillary in one of the debates for saying that she would withdraw troops regardless of the condition. The truth is that now that people are actually paying attention to Obama instead of discussing Rev. Wright and race issues, they are seeing that he is a moderate, not a left-winger like Hillary. Obama’s edge on the war was the fact that he was against it from the start. Obama has flipped on issues like FISA and campaign financing, but he has not flipped an inch on Iraq or abortion, or taxes, or gun-control. Obama is a moderate Democrat. Read his books. He is a pragmatist.
Posted by: Kevin | July 7, 2008, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
lois
when he was in canada spouting off how prosperous our country is due to nafta i could not believe what i was hearing…i am at a total loss as to how this can be rationalized.our area has lost thousands of jobs and left us with nothing.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 6:05 pm 6:05 pm
It is funny all those posting comments about Obama was sooo left wing…and we all argued…”no”
he isn’t and now all of you are like…
“see he fooled you”
No we were listening obviously none of you were.
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 6:10 pm 6:10 pm
on a real note—–what is mccains great leadership experience with military—i think if you investigated it would be -o- the guy wrecked four planes and was supposidly shot down in another—where are the leadership qualifications–not a good pilot one of worst in class—-family power got hin through not deed—–print this and post on wall and read regular.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
I am happy this entire episode is happening now. The truth is that Obama has been consitently moderate on the war in Iraq and on other issues. He even disagreed with Biden in 2007 when Biden tried to pass legislation that would set a hard timetable for troop withdrawal. The fact that the press and McCain’s campaign got this thing so wrong, is shocking. I can see the press is beginning to see that Obama has always been copnsistent, but the McCain campaign keep hitting their lies. You can argue that Obama’s position on the war is not much different from McCain’s (and that’s a plausible argument even though i disagree). But that has always been Obama’s position. His biggest beef was authorizing the war in the first place. What he has always said is that he wants to end the mindset that allowed this to happen. But the brilliance of this man is in towing the middle line of reason everytime.
Posted by: Kevin | July 7, 2008, 6:15 pm 6:15 pm
This is a huge dissapointment. People voted and supported Obama because he promised that he would withdraw the troops within 16 months after he took office. There was no conditions stated in his promise. His promise was unconditional.
Posted by: Beto | July 7, 2008, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm
Iran even if they have the nukes they still gotta get it here and thats where the Air Force comes to play
Posted by: Country folk | July 7, 2008, 6:17 pm 6:17 pm
countryfolk
want to see what hell is like–all we need is for iran or anyone to fire nuke at someone—this has to be avoided at all cost-or whatever force it takes.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 6:20 pm 6:20 pm
Beto
His promsie WAS NEVER unconditional. Go back and watch the debates or read every single thing he has said about the war. Research hsi senate fight with Joe Biden.
Posted by: Kevin | July 7, 2008, 6:21 pm 6:21 pm
The price of gas will never be high enough for me to even consider handing the keys to the country over to Obama, Soros, Wright, Farrakhan, Ayers and the rest of Obama’s merry coalition of hard-left hate and socialists.
Posted by: The Obama Con | July 7, 2008, 6:27 pm 6:27 pm
The Republicans are trying their utmost to box Obama into a precipitous withdrawal commitment, a characterization which is entirely of their own manufacture. Obama’s only proposal in this regard is and has always been an immediate, careful and resolute withdrawal. Besides, noboby in his or her logical mind really thinks Al Qaeda is in Iraq to take over Iraq; instead, we all know that the only legitimate reason Al Qaeda could ever have for being in Iraq is the American presence there, an indispensable gift they got from Bush–a crucial distraction from Afganistan and Osama bin Laden. If there were no Americans to fight in Iraq, Al Queda would not have a prayer in the Arab world remaining in Iraq. Al Queda’s only prayer now in this war on terror is that Americans don’t leave Iraq and reconcentrate on routing them in Afganistan. McCain and his Republicans don’t seem to know this, a very crucial judgement call on the war on terror.
Posted by: TK | July 7, 2008, 6:30 pm 6:30 pm
From claiming Iran is a “tiny country” that poses “no threat” to wanting to meet with the world’s dictators without preconditions (but he’s not been willing to meet with American General Petraeus in Iraq), Obama instills zero confidence in his ability to handle anything more substantial than sliding money across the counter at 7-11 to buy his next pack of cigarettes, a long-time habit he hides from the public like a frightened school girl.
Obama is a top-flight con man to be sure, but nothing close even remotely close to presidential material.
Posted by: Jack W | July 7, 2008, 6:31 pm 6:31 pm
wish gas would go to 10.00 per gallon–maybe then our leaders will do something about it—–where it is now they wont guaranteed.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 6:32 pm 6:32 pm
The way to achieve peace abroad and at home is to demonstrate the willingness to become peaceful. That means finding peace in one’s own thoughts. That means expressing peaceful actions, and calling for peace in and by one’s speech. That means calling for an end to existing wars by peaceful means. That means not going to war at all except as the last resort. That means becoming peaceful Beings, everyone.
Posted by: thegoldenplover | July 7, 2008, 6:33 pm 6:33 pm
Kevin,
I wouldn’t call Obama a pragmatist, I would call him an OPPORTUNIST. He has usurped position after position and made them his own in order to advance at the polls. His associations and his political supporters confirm his extreme left ideology…..we can only go by that because he makes no commitment on issues.
First he was a extremist now he is a centrist….a man for all seasons.
Posted by: rw | July 7, 2008, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
On the military and foreign relations fronts, Obama is a like a child splashing around in the kiddie pool. He can’t swim and his back-up strategy is to yell for mom to pull him out if he drifts to close to the deep end.
Obama’s incompetence and arrogance is a dangerous combination.
Posted by: Ottoman | July 7, 2008, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
This is wonderful that all the idiots that thought he was a radical left wing liberal can now see that Obama is much more like the moderate Bill Clinton. Some folks will whine about anything. As an Obama supporter, I for one was not fooled by the nonsense here on these blogs. I got it early- I read Obama’s books, and I am very comfortable that he is a very moderate, thoughtful, and pragmatic man. Hillary is and always has been the true radical left wing liberal, except of course, that for seven years, she’s illogically and consistently voted with McCain and the conservatives as a pro-war, pro-Israel, pro-Jewish, and pro-NY vote panderer.
Posted by: Jillian | July 7, 2008, 6:36 pm 6:36 pm
“as careful getting out as we were careless getting in,”
—
What the Moon does this mean?! As much thin air he blows as many substanceless speeches he delivers? But, can as much be paralleled with as many?
Posted by: lazy to think | July 7, 2008, 6:37 pm 6:37 pm
Jeff,
And you want to hand over the keys to the White House to a man whose only, I mean ONLY attribute is that he is a POW?
McCain is too old and angry. He may take us into another war just because he
wants to. And at the same time watch our economic situation tank into further chaos. I was a Hillary supporter but I ain’t insane by voting for McCain.
Posted by: Lois, California | July 7, 2008, 6:40 pm 6:40 pm
This is really a non-issue since the security and political termoil in Iraq is vastly improving. At the current rate of improvment the Two year schedule is very likely. The next president will get the credit. Unfortunatly the total defeat that has been hoped for by many on the left won’t happen.
Posted by: boulderhippie2 | July 7, 2008, 6:43 pm 6:43 pm
HAS ANYONE STILL FIGURED OUT —WHAT THE HELL ARE WE DOING THERE—–OIL-OIL-OIL—–WATCH WHAT HAPPENS IN THE NEXT THREE OR FOUR MONTHS—THE MOVE IS NOW ON.BIDDING HAS STARTED—WOW AND WE ARE SO DUMB—-HOPE ABC LETS THIS POST ON.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 6:56 pm 6:56 pm
They will leave Iraq and go back into Afghanistan… it’s a shell game! How is he any better than McCain on this issue? One wants to occuppy Iraq and Iran, the other Iran and Afghanistan. Where’s the difference??? There is none of any real substance on this issue!
Posted by: pity | July 7, 2008, 6:57 pm 6:57 pm
boulderhippie2
you don’t know what you are talking about…
the “success” we have seen in Iraq is based on promises made to the insurgents for positions or power and wealth to join the sons of Iraq…and the fact they took those deals because they knew that a “change” is coming because one candidate promised to end the war.
those positions they were promised exist at a ratio of 3 insurgents to every one position that possibly could be created…
so tell me how long it will take them to figure out those positions don’t exist…or what happens when they realize those positions aren’t coming?
and how much money do we have to continue to spend to settle this civil war…that has gone on for hundreds and hundreds of years?
It is not the left wanted there to be a failure but some people realize this is all a charade built on some very bad promises made by our government for wealth and power that doesn’t exist.
No matter how long we stay or leave…
so how long until we leave? because as soon as we start pulling out is war going to erupt again…chances are…yes…whether it be now or worse…20 years from now.
This is a civil war based on much longer tribal differences then we have ever dealt with… in a country that was a cork.
there was never a question we had the military might to occupy a country as we are doing. The question is do we have the reputation and respect to for our motives to build a lasting government that stands wiothout us.
Most Probably still not.
False promises are bandaids.
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
LINDA
NO OIL IN AFGANISTAN
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 7:00 pm 7:00 pm
Obama, “I was for it while I was against it!” He sounds like a damn fool — oh right, he is a damn fool.
Posted by: maggie | July 7, 2008, 7:01 pm 7:01 pm
MCCain flip flops: Immigration, social security, windfall profit tax, GI bill, campaign reform, torture, MLK holiday. gay marriage……
Posted by: linda n carolina | July 7, 2008, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
Obama has stated we are getting out.
McCain did not understand the dynamics of Iraq when he pushed for us to go in… and he does not care about it now.
He knows promises have been made to the insurgents that will be defaulted…but not before the election and all the morons on here will keep saying the “surge is working”
read the reports from the ground… the surging occupation has quieted violence…
that was not the GOAL.
the steps toward the goal of political reconciliation were made by promises to insurgents that are a shell game…that the Bush and McCain team are hoping isn’t discovered until after the election.
Has any of you listened to McCain’s speeches on Iran?
He wants to go to war with them…just as he thought it was noble to go to war with Iraq.
Posted by: dl | July 7, 2008, 7:08 pm 7:08 pm
Lois in Ca.
It is so obvious that you are neither a student of history/politics/government nor have you followed anything….ANYTHING…political until Obama, otherwise you would not make the statements you make about McCain. One can oppose him, but one has to acknowledge his long political background…
Obama followers are bewildering…in another post Hillary is called the left extreme and Obama is called a centrist like none other than….yes, Bill Clinton. OMG
Posted by: rw | July 7, 2008, 7:11 pm 7:11 pm
Jillian:
“I got it early- I read Obama’s books, and I am very comfortable that he is a very moderate, thoughtful, and pragmatic man>>>”
You got it early and oily… out of those quasi-semi-autobiographical novels filled with Obama’s hype!
He should be a writer…… another Tolkein or Hans Christian Anderson.
As for his being President of this great and troubled country…..
let the voter be aware.
very very a w a r e!!!
COUNTRY BEFORE BROKEN DOWN DNC PARTY!!!
Posted by: hmmmmm | July 7, 2008, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm
O is a wannabeee that will NEVER be. His constant flopping with his words no doubt make him a disengenuous phony.
Dem for McCain!
Posted by: rey | July 7, 2008, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm
hey john wrong country sudan sudan–i will never forget–he did not know what country he was talking about—what a shame.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 7:14 pm 7:14 pm
what’s this about Sudan?
Posted by: 57 states 1 to go | July 7, 2008, 7:17 pm 7:17 pm
All you Obama bashers in here….come on tell us all why McCain is so great. How come no one talks about him and his policies..How about the holiday gas tax ha ha afraid to admit how stupid and pandering it is. Drilling offshore, come on you got to love that one. that will get you something in about 10 years HA Ha.Ok don’t want to talk about that one either. Hey there must be something about McCain you support.
Posted by: linda n carolina | July 7, 2008, 7:20 pm 7:20 pm
he was making speach about inhuman treatment in sudan–but kept saying wrong country-and was constantly reminded—right on tv.
Posted by: rodney | July 7, 2008, 7:26 pm 7:26 pm
It takes my breath away to read posts saying that Obama is and always was a centrist. I guess this attempt at spinning Obama into the middle is meant to justify his reneging on his pledge to get out of Iraq. Talk about the audacity of chutzpah!
Before we settle Obama too comfortably in the middle, let us review the facts:
1. He is the darling of Moveon.org. Moveon.org is dead set against the war in Iraq. Would the powers that be at Moveon.org have chosen him if he had not promised, either explicitly or implicitly, to get out of Iraq immediately, no matter what?
2. His close associates for 20 years were people like Rev. Wright, Father Pfleger, and Mr. Ayres — all fire breathing leftists. How is it possible that these are his mentors, his close associates, and his friends, unless he is also hard left?
3. Obama is the chosen one of the Democratic left. Once again, how could he be centrist if he has been annointed by the likes of Dean and Pelosi? The Democractic left hates centrists. They hated the Clintons because they were centrists.
Posted by: David H | July 7, 2008, 7:34 pm 7:34 pm
I do believe it was Hillary that told Obama that withdrawal has to be done in a smart manner. It wasn’t until she called his hand on this that he started working this withdrawal within so many months “in a safe way” position. But, then most of her positions morphed into his positions as they went along.
Posted by: Ron | July 7, 2008, 7:42 pm 7:42 pm
“…how could he be centrist if he has been annointed”
Because the people who will vote the party line are already committed. The party members who are not voting the party line can be won over. The people who are not sure will make up their minds driving to the polls based on the last positive or negative emotions they have just before they vote.
Otherwise, the memory of most people regards the issues are very short and very rewritable. Unless he makes a searing mistake that simply can’t be forgotten, he can reinvent himself every few weeks just like Madonna.
Or so the theory goes. Sometimes the voters surprise everyone. See Truman. Sometimes it’s a nasty surprise. See Bush.
But the belief at the top is that this is the Republican’s to lose therefore any candidate they put up will win. It couldn’t be Hillary because she can’t be controlled by the DNC. Obama meets their objectives neatly.
Will he meet yours? The problem is when someone keeps reinventing themselves, you won’t know if the person you voted for going into the booth is the same person when you come out. Obama is for Obama. Your best bet is to find out what THAT Obama really wants to achieve. To do that, you will have to dig and consider all of the things he has done and seen and felt. A man doesn’t change that much despite everything he intends to change.
Posted by: len | July 7, 2008, 7:43 pm 7:43 pm
Well I can see no one could come up with something good to say about McCain. I thought someone would mention his speech today saying both wars would be over by 2013. Seems like no one listens to him anyways.. Well Keith is on..I’m out of here…Obama 08
Posted by: linda n carolina | July 7, 2008, 7:57 pm 7:57 pm
..should we fight in Iraq or Afghanistan. If we win in one we win OIL or Heroin fields. I would rather fight for OIL. OIL makes America strong. I vote for McCain. Afghanistan is a nothing mountain range. It is the poorest land in the world. Iraq is one of the richest lands in the world.
Posted by: DemocratNoMore2 | July 7, 2008, 8:00 pm 8:00 pm
Rodney,
Got it, the Sudan-Somalia thing. Sort of like the Obama: we’ve been to 57 states and one to go…that basic American geography lesson one gets yearly starting with pre-school puzzles.
Posted by: 57 states and 1 to go | July 7, 2008, 8:13 pm 8:13 pm
Flip-Flopper Obama! LOL! I have lost count of how many times he has flipped his flop! OMG – Just pray that, if God forbid, he becomes POTUS, he does not have to go back to an enemy after a ‘Talk” (remember he wants to have talks with such countries as Iran, Cuba, Venezuela with no pre-conditions) to explain what he said he said, or refine what he said, or clarify what he said!!!!!!! Could result in an international catastrophe!!
For a man who is lauded for his brilliant words, it puzzles me how he does not get his message across the first time – oh, I forgot – it is hard to work without a teleprompter!!! The man is too green – but I do have to give this to him – he is a REAL POLITICIAN! The good Rev. had that one down pat!
Posted by: Beckie | July 7, 2008, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm
How does this guy fool so many people?
Posted by: Soetoro No! | July 7, 2008, 8:19 pm 8:19 pm
Mr. Obama,
What-else’s next?
Posted by: Alex | July 7, 2008, 8:22 pm 8:22 pm
Rodney…Suppose you tell us what experience Obama has in the Military. I really need to hear this. Do you have Military experience? Anybody that has had Military experience would not be taking credit away from anyone that has. McCain fought for this country. He certainly deserves our admiration for his courage and service. I never thought this country would forget our Military men and those that have died and were willing to give their lives for us. OPnly a small person would belittle that. You should be ashamed of yourself. This is being said to get a Chicago crooked politician elected. Just ask Rezko.
Posted by: carolyn | July 7, 2008, 8:26 pm 8:26 pm
ABC reported this below, and if true McCain is ignorant about the war on terror:
McCain acknowledges the importance of the conflict in Afghanistan but maintains the focus should remain on Iraq, which he considers to be the main front in the war on terror.
Posted by: Mr. Coffee | July 7, 2008, 8:49 pm 8:49 pm
MR COFFE
the man is ingorant remember 100 years and now today he said he is gonna balance the budget while winning the war in iraq the mans a quack!!!!
Posted by: ANGIE | July 7, 2008, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
Mr Coffee
I’m sure McCain and the entire military would welcome your experience and insight. Why don’t you contact them and let the know the facts of combat and strategy.
Posted by: Aston | July 7, 2008, 8:58 pm 8:58 pm
That is the most panty-waist non-leadership statement I’ve ever heard. Mr. Obama claimed he was against the war when he lived back in Illinois and everybody in Washington was in favor of the war. Now the Mr. Obama lives in Washington what is he now? Who knows? Do not give this yokel the reigns of power!
=======================================
Nobama no time!
=======================================
Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | July 7, 2008, 9:20 pm 9:20 pm
“But that said, I have never heard Obama tell a crowd of Oregon liberals that he plans on consulting with David Petraeus.”
As I wrote in response to Mr. Klein post “Obama’s Iraq Quagmire” that Barack Obama is using his “talk to some of the commanders on the ground” (or General Petraus), as a way to neutralize a very effective criticism by the McCain camp and conservatives of Obama “willingness to meet Iran President” while he (Obama) has not met the US commanders in Iraq the last 2 years.
Barack Obama retreat from his previous Iraq war position may cause some casualties among his youngest soldiers (voters).
Posted by: Angel | July 7, 2008, 10:08 pm 10:08 pm
Backtrack is at it again, its really funny how he played so many for fools during the primaries saying just the right things to knock Hillary out of the game and win the nomination.
Now that is done mission accomplished we are now seeing and hearing the real Obama, he sure caught a few out there I wonder what they are thinking now, well some of you wanted change, you got it now deal with it !!!
Posted by: SJ | July 7, 2008, 10:31 pm 10:31 pm
“the ones that are voting for McCain are fakes. Their Republicans in wolf clothing.” Lois, fighting against bigotry and prejudice is JUST as important! Obama supporters can’t claim the mantle to fight equality for all while remaining silent when bigotry flies from other Obama supporters the past 6 months or more. This election is about punishing the DNC, bigoted Obama supporters and their fellow Obama supporters who remained silent when bigotry was spewed against Hillary and her supporters. Two wrongs do not make a right, Obama supporters. If we don’t speak up and stand up against Obama bullies when they trample others’ rights, then who will be left to defend us when they come to trample on our rights as well. We will never give up this fight against the unchecked bigotry from the Obama supporters. We all have to make our stand somewhere to stem this bigotry. And this stand for us is now. We will vote NO to the DNC and Obama supporters.
Posted by: former dem in chicago | July 7, 2008, 10:54 pm 10:54 pm
I do not know what exactly Obama’s positions on major issues are. I just do not trust him any more.
Posted by: J | July 7, 2008, 10:56 pm 10:56 pm
For everyone that voted for Obama in the primaries and are now voting for him the GE What a bunch of SUCKERS!!!
I thought Great minds think for themselves…Well I guess I was wrong. I can’t believe how many dumb Americans are out there voting for the biggest fraud in this lifetime.
Please bring back Hillary maybe she can tell Obama what to say…He is obiviously a stupid man!!
To be a President of the U.S. is for adults only.
Posted by: Chris | July 8, 2008, 12:50 am 12:50 am
Obama’s plan to withdraw the troops
from iraq is UN-AMERICAN…….
Americans NEVER surrender…..
Posted by: ROBERT | July 8, 2008, 2:13 am 2:13 am
Shouldn’t the pace of withdrawal be in accordance with what the Iraqis want? I supported Obama to the point of cheering when he won the nomination. Now, like so many Democratic “leaders”, he is now turning on us. McCain, 3rd party candidate or sit it out … what to do?
Posted by: Dennis | July 8, 2008, 3:12 am 3:12 am
to all those making statements that Obama changed his position…or that he is “unAmerican because Americans never surrender” oy
He has not changed his statement this is political play by people who weren’t listening in the first place…he is focused on withdrawal and as he has said almost every single time he has talked about it the pace of withdrawal will be careful and smart…unlike Bush OR McCain for that matter.
and to those with the whole “surrender” comment…
unAmerican is to wage a war offensively by twisting facts….John McCain was one of those leaders in charge of Bush’s PR campaign for this war in Iraq as Scott McLellan has now reported.
this tactically stupid and unAmerican blunder…
the war that we are holding back is a civil war… the insurgents that have backed down did so because they have been promised power positions and money that does not exist.
which is less American…wasting money and lives on a civil war while al quaeda fools us into focusing on Iraq…alll the while where they live in Afghanistan and Pakistan falls into their hands again.
vote smart…not dumb
Obama for President
Posted by: dl | July 8, 2008, 9:08 am 9:08 am
J and Dennis
what is Mccain’s plan for Iraq?
google Obama’s statements on Iraq…he has said time and time again the EXACT same thing he said this past week…
You all are creating this …just like the reasons for the war were created.
Once again the right republicans are playing “don’t look at the man behind the curtain…look look he’s a flip flopper…but don’t look at all the exact words of the statements he made over the past year… that would show he has been overwhelmingly consistent on message”
outside of Obama saying I am not taking public finance because the republicans refuse to (in their words) “spend time corraling the private groups and 527′s” and as we see the RNC and another “vets” group is suddenly throwing a bunch of bologne up on the airwaves as they did with Bushy.
outside of that very smart turnObama has been consistent on his statements…Mccain…and the repubs…
yeah not so much.
Posted by: dl | July 8, 2008, 9:15 am 9:15 am
How could anyone in their right mind allow this guy to waltz in to the Oval Office and play “president”?
How on earth is this nobody even remotely seen as competent or qualified to lead the free world?
Please, someone tell me.
How could any adult deliver into the hands of this man such power?
Who has hypnotized the electorate?
Posted by: tanarg | July 8, 2008, 9:22 am 9:22 am
Let me get this straight, if things are working out he will follow Pres. Bush’s plan, which is working, but he did not give a coherent plan if things faulter, which unfortunately because the terrorists are in tune with the Democrats/liberals, they will spike violence purposely after inauguration if God forbid Obama wins!!
McCain 08 the only answer!!
Posted by: spock | July 8, 2008, 9:59 am 9:59 am
WaPo continues to demonstrate why its editorial pages are light years ahead of the NYTs
1- Theyre willing to concede that a too-quick withdrawal from Iraq will erase all of the accomplishments that have been made there and 2 – theyre telling Obama he needs to continue to soften his stance and revise his initial plans regardi…
Posted by: Sister Toldjah | July 8, 2008, 11:08 am 11:08 am
So Obama may leave non-combat troops in Iraq for maybe 100 years if necessary.
Notice he hasn’t used that line against McCain lately?
Obama thinks he can use sneaky rhetoric to fool voters. We are smart enough to see a politcian with no backbone.
Posted by: cindy in nc | July 8, 2008, 11:29 am 11:29 am
A wise pundit yesterday said “when you need two press conferences in one day to explain what you really meant to say-you are in trouble”.
But that is one thing Obama has been consistent about–he says something then his advisors have to explain later what he really meant to say.
The empty suit syndrome.
Posted by: riley | July 8, 2008, 11:38 am 11:38 am
BS Alert!!!
In September 2007 Barack Obama demanded immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Obama said the following:
“Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was.
The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq’s leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year – now.
If we start now, all of our combat brigades should be out of Iraq by the end of next year.”
Then to the Military Times Obama said the following:
“This whole notion that I would initiate a precipitous withdrawal just isn’t borne out by anything that I’ve said.”
LIAR! Obama is a pathological liar. He may be an even bigger liar than Bill Clinton was/is.
Cheers!
Posted by: DFL | July 8, 2008, 11:39 am 11:39 am
it seems that Obama’s plan to withdraw troops in in line with what the Iraqi government itself wants and that the Bush/McCain plan is counter to what the Iraqi government wants. We wanted the Iraqis to govern themselves, but now Bush and McCain are trying to control them because they don’t like the decisions they make. You can’t have it both ways. Iraq has a soverign right to make its own decisions, and that is to have US troops withdrawn on a set timetable.
Posted by: bernadette | July 8, 2008, 11:44 am 11:44 am
He can promise for anything you ask for but can he keep his promises?
Posted by: catleya | July 8, 2008, 4:40 pm 4:40 pm
OK, Jake, now let’s see you analyze John McCain’s inconsistent, incoherent ramblings on any issue with the care taht you you just examined Barack Obama’s multiple, consistent, detailed explanations of his Iraq position.
For example: What is McCain’s position on Social Security?
Posted by: Dollared | July 8, 2008, 7:35 pm 7:35 pm
16 months.
Over and over and over he said they’d all be out in 16 months.
Obama is a liar.
Posted by: drjohn | July 8, 2008, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm
“Who has hypnotized the electorate?”
As we will see in November, it’s not the voters who are hypnotized, but the Democratic “leadership”.
The “leadership” and the media thought it would be nice to sideline John Edwards’ honesty, plain talk and populism with a little birthday-suit contest — a “woman”! a “black” guy! –between two corporate constructs with identical (until The One started moving right, fast) “positions” on the “issues”.
Better nominate Edwards. By the time this is over, NObody’s gonna vote for Barky.
Posted by: Belle Starr | July 8, 2008, 10:29 pm 10:29 pm
I am very, very disappointed. The center pillar of my support for Senator Obama for the Democrat nominee for President was based on believing his promise to get our troops out of the nation of Iraq within 16 months of his inauguration. Only he, in my estimation, seemed truly sincere and determined to do so. Now, by his latest pronouncement, he is proving to me he is yet just another politician (Chicago machine-politician at that), promising whatever it takes to get elected. I am truly very disappointed…
Posted by: Disappointed | July 9, 2008, 11:05 am 11:05 am