Obama on Iraq, General Election Edition
03 July 2008 6:11 pm by Taylor Marsh
BY TAYLOR MARSH
He’s backtracking!
He’s… er… George Bush!
Give. Me. A. Break.
Throughout the primary season one of the things that infuriated me the most,
something I highlighted often, was that the difference between Obama and Clinton
on Iraq going forward, if either one became president, was non-existent.
What’s now playing out further proves it.
However, the McCain camp, needing something to deflect from McCain’s South American Distraction Tour, struck hard. I got this from the McCain camp earlier today, which was accompanied by a link to this post, which I offer so you can see where they’re going with this one.
“It’s official. The Obama campaign has entered John Kerry territory
when it comes to changing positions on Iraq.” – Phil Klein
Good luck with that one, Phil.
For a long time it’s been clear that Iraq was not going to be the issue it
was for Democrats in 2006. Why? Because the Democratic Congress and Speaker
Nancy Pelosi blew it by doing nothing. Not even a PR campaign. It’s been the
most pathetic display of floundering seen in a long time, trumped only by Pelosi’s
recent collapse on FISA.
However, on Iraq, the fact remains that John McCain has now adopted the Democratic view, particularly after his 100 years remark, which landed like a thud. No
doubt Karl Rove quickly advised McCain to get out of that one. So move he did,
talking about withdrawal by 2013. It’s actually McCain that’s showed his most twisted
self on Iraq, though Obama and his team have yet to capitalize on that one,
which is how they should have reacted today. Not by defending Obama’s views,
but by drawing out McCain’s recent comments.
“By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom,” Mr. McCain said at the Columbus Convention Center. “The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is spasmodic and much reduced.” The United States, Mr. McCain added, “maintains a military presence there, but a much smaller one, and it does not play a direct combat role.”
Always be attacking.
Responding very defensively, Obama gave the talking heads a lot to squawk about.
Scarborough was all over Rachel Maddow today, who was exactly correct on Obama.
Because Senator Obama has been saying the same things for months and months.
He’s just gotten more credit than he deserved for his speech, which had nothing
whatsoever to do with his actions in the Senate.
Obama won the primaries with his anti-Iraq war speech being his image foundation, so now he’ll have to live with it in the general election. That’s why Scarborough and others reacted like they did. Win by the speech, die by it? I don’t think so.
Let’s go back to the most telling moment in the primary season to review. Obama
in the Dartmouth debate, when Russert
called the Dems out on Iraq, asking for a pledge to pull out by 2013. Here’s
the exchange with Obama:
RUSSERT: Will you pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term,
more than five years from now, there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq?OBAMA: I think it’s hard to project four years from now, and I think it would
be irresponsible. We don’t know what contingency will be out there.What I
can promise is that if there are still troops in Iraq when I take office —
which it appears there may be, unless we can get some of our Republican colleagues
to change their mind and cut off funding without a timetable — if there’s
no timetable — then I will drastically reduce our presence there to the mission
of protecting our embassy, protecting our civilians, and making sure that
we’re carrying out counterterrorism activities there.I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don’t
want to make promises, not knowing what the situation’s going to be three
or four years out.
Clinton and Edwards joined Obama in refusing to pledge a full redeployment
from Iraq by 2013. It was a big moment.
What McCain and his team are doing is getting on record as Obama prepares to
take a trip to Iraq and beyond. They sense Obama’s caution on Iraq, something
that doesn’t comport to the “wild-eyed flaming liberal” label they
want for him. They also expect him to be more circumspect after talking to the military brass in Iraq. They believe they’re setting a trap.
But guess what? Obama never was a flaming liberal, as I’ve documented over and
over. He’s not a progressive either. He’s a pragmatic Democratic politician
with superior gifts of communication who convinced many he was something he’s
not so he could win over Democratic primary voters and activist support to get
the nomination.
Obama has been saying the same thing on Iraq forever. It’s why Samantha
Power’s Iraq gaffe could have been so much trouble for him if Obama’s supporters
had been paying attention. They weren’t. They thought the bottom line was his
now famous anti Iraq war speech, on which, by the way, no
one reported at the time.
The truth is that Senator Obama is much more in his element now, in the general
election. Winning the primary was always going to be his toughest battle, because
appealing to partisans just isn’t his thing, because he’s not a partisan. McCain’s
getting an education. His team better ramp up fast. At this rate the only way they’ll beat Obama is to swiftboat him. They’ve wasted too much time already.
