Does Obama Stick to Anything?

[kchoya]

First he's against off shore drilling, now he supports it off Florida.

blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/02/obamas_shift_on_drilling.html

Just add it to his growing list of his changing positions.

[EasyEd]

Aug 2, 2008 13:38:57 GMT -5 kchoya said:

First he's against off shore drilling, now he supports it off Florida.

blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/02/obamas_shift_on_drilling.html

Just add it to his growing list of his changing positions.

This is what he meant when he said we needed change.

[jerseyhoya34]

The perspective advocated for by many Republicans is tantamount to irrational adherence, and it sheepishly ignores shifts made by their candidates. President Bush even decided to change course in Iraq by putting in troop levels closer to what Shinseki, Powell, and Armitage rightly argued for before the war. What if he had not "flip-flopped" on that? McCain flip-flopped on offshore drilling, appears to now want to drill in ANWR, etc., but that is passed off as principled all as part of the 2008 incarnation of the Democrat as "exotic," "extravagant," and "the other" media strategy.

It is this closed belief system that perpetuated the incorrect analysis that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that could hit the United States let alone Kuwait at a moment's notice. At the very least, this misguided search cost American taxpayers billions of dollars. It is all particularly underwhelming when weighed against the Bush/McCain record of the last four years.

[HoyaSinceBirth]

Shouldn't you republicans think this is a good thing? why are you upset about him moving to a position more akin to your own? Shouldn't this be a good thing in your mind because he's finally seeing the wisdom of your position and changing appropriately.

[strummer8526]

"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said in an interview with the Palm Beach Post. "If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well-thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage -- I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done."

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080103199.html?wpisrc=newsletter

He's doing what he needs to in order to reach a political compromise. How is that a bad quality for a President?

[The Stig]

Aug 2, 2008 15:33:56 GMT -5 strummer8526 said:

He's doing what he needs to in order to reach a political compromise. How is that a bad quality for a President?

Haven't you heard? Compromise is now illegal for politicians. They have to be hardcore ideologues who do whatever God tells them to do, regardless of rational arguments against their plans. They must be completely inflexible and can never change their policies, otherwise they are weak and spineless cowards who are unfit to lead the country.

Seriously, compromise and flexibility are just as integral to our political system as democracy. Read a history of the Constitutional Convention - it was all about great, courageous men being flexible, compromising, holding firm when they felt strongly enough, but giving in to others when it was needed. All of our great Presidents have backed down and changed course in order to accommodate other views at some point or another.

Is there a danger to backing down too much? Of course - you don't want politicians constantly changing policies depending on the temporary whims of the public. But I'd rather have that versus an irrational ideologue.

I'm not saying McCain is an ideologue - he isn't - but inflexibility and irrational ideologically based decision making has caused a lot of the problems that this country has experienced in the past eight years.

[EasyEd]

I welcome Obama's shift in position on offshore drilling and I congratulate him on recognizing things have changed, like $4 gasoline. Maybe it will help get Nancy off her refusal to even let a vote take place.

[TC]

Aug 3, 2008 8:34:36 GMT -5 EasyEd said:

I welcome Obama's shift in position on offshore drilling and I congratulate him on recognizing things have changed, like $4 gasoline. Maybe it will help get Nancy off her refusal to even let a vote take place.

I'm sure a vote will take place, when it's part of a larger energy package that actually tries to solve some of these problems rather than providing a smokescreen for Republicans. "We need to drill more so I can drive my car that goes VROOM VROOM" is not an energy plan.

[StPetersburgHoya (Inactive)]

bush tax cuts, off shore drilling, the religious right, martin luther kings day, payroll taxes to support social security, tje sixteen month troop withdrawal - all come to mind as McCain flip flops this month

[strummer8526]

I also think there's a distinct difference between flip-flopping, legitimately changing your mind, and compromising.

As best I can tell, McCain's position on the Bush tax cuts = flip-flopping.
McCain's position on MLK Day = legitimate opinion change.
Obama's position on drilling = compromise.

It's a subtle difference, but I think it's an important one. There are certainly instances where each candidate has flip-flopped or just changed their position. This strikes me as a case where Obama recognizes the need to work with the other side in order to make anything happen.

[TBird41]

Aug 3, 2008 9:44:08 GMT -5 TC said:

Aug 3, 2008 8:34:36 GMT -5 EasyEd said:

I welcome Obama's shift in position on offshore drilling and I congratulate him on recognizing things have changed, like $4 gasoline. Maybe it will help get Nancy off her refusal to even let a vote take place.

I'm sure a vote will take place, when it's part of a larger energy package that actually tries to solve some of these problems rather than providing a smokescreen for Republicans. "We need to drill more so I can drive my car that goes VROOM VROOM" is not an energy plan.

Would something like this bill qualify?

www.gop.gov/energy/americanenergyact/

The "All of the Above Plan"? It's got a lot of Democrats as cosponsors (of the various legislation that's been rolled into it).

I think that could be a good bill to start with (take a full week, debate it under an open rule, allow amendments and see what occurs). Pelosi doesn't think so though:

With fewer than 20 legislative days before the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1, the entire appropriations process has largely ground to a halt because of the ham-handed fighting that followed Republican attempts to lift the moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration. And after promising fairness and open debate, Pelosi has resorted to hard-nosed parliamentary devices that effectively bar any chance for Republicans to offer policy alternatives.

“I’m trying to save the planet; I’m trying to save the planet,” she says impatiently when questioned. “I will not have this debate trivialized by their excuse for their failed policy.”

www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/12122.html

[Elvado]

It is categorically incorrect to accuse Senator Obama of flip-flopping. Flip-flopping necessarily means actually changing one's position from one stance to another. Senator Obama does not change positions at all. He simply talks out of every side of his mouth so as to have multiple postions on each issue at the same time.

As far as I can tell, he has two core beliefs:

1. He should be President; and

2. Infants that survive late-term abortions do not merit saving.

[hifigator]

All jesting aside here ... and several of you have done a fine job, I do think that there is a difference between a changing of mind and taking both positions. There have been candidates before that have tailored their speaches to their audience, giving every indication to a logical person that they are adopting a particular position, only to tailor their speach differently to a different audience giving every indication of a different position. To me that is the worst of all options. As for flip-flopping, as I have said before, changing your mind is something that we all do. To expect anything but the same from an elected official is asking a bit much. Obviously, fundamental core beliefs are a bit different. Are you against the death penalty for "certain" offenses? I think that one is pretty cut and dry. Obviously what those offenses are is up for debatel, but you are either in favor of the death penalty for crimes worthy of such punishment or you are not. But with regard to more general issues such as drilling in a region, I think it is wise to understand that parameters will change would cause a reasonable person to reconsider his or her position.

That being said, I find it hard to ignore the fact that his change on the issue closely follows the poll release that Americans are 2 to 1 in favor of increased drilling and here in Florida, the numbers are almost the same. It was 61% in favor to off shore drilling, 32% against and 7% undecided just last week

[kchoya]

Aug 4, 2008 9:45:27 GMT -5 Elvado said:

It is categorically incorrect to accuse Senator Obama of flip-flopping. Flip-flopping necessarily means actually changing one's position from one stance to another. Senator Obama does not change positions at all. He simply talks out of every side of his mouth so as to have multiple postions on each issue at the same time.

As far as I can tell, he has two core beliefs:

1. He should be President; and

2. Infants that survive late-term abortions do not merit saving.

You are correct. I am sorry.

I just fail to see how he can offer "change" when you can't tell what the "change" is. Maybe easyed had it figured out, when he said the change is his "change" in positions.

[Bando]

Aug 4, 2008 9:45:27 GMT -5 Elvado said:

It is categorically incorrect to accuse Senator Obama of flip-flopping. Flip-flopping necessarily means actually changing one's position from one stance to another. Senator Obama does not change positions at all. He simply talks out of every side of his mouth so as to have multiple postions on each issue at the same time.

As far as I can tell, he has two core beliefs:

1. He should be President; and

2. Infants that survive late-term abortions do not merit saving.

Don't forget surrendering to al Qaeda and instituting sharia law, while at the same time forcing your children to become homosexuals.

</snark>

[kchoya]

Aug 4, 2008 11:57:35 GMT -5 Bando said:

Aug 4, 2008 9:45:27 GMT -5 Elvado said:

It is categorically incorrect to accuse Senator Obama of flip-flopping. Flip-flopping necessarily means actually changing one's position from one stance to another. Senator Obama does not change positions at all. He simply talks out of every side of his mouth so as to have multiple postions on each issue at the same time.

As far as I can tell, he has two core beliefs:

1. He should be President; and

2. Infants that survive late-term abortions do not merit saving.

Don't forget surrendering to al Qaeda and instituting sharia law, while at the same time forcing your children to become homosexuals.

</snark>

Aren't you the one who just said:

"Finally, while it gets heated sometimes here in the political thread, the posters here, liberal and conservative alike, generally try to have substantive conversations. All you want to do, in contrast, is flame liberals. I suggest you take this to Townhall or Free Republic instead of sullying up the board here. "

[Bando]

Aug 4, 2008 12:08:23 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Aug 4, 2008 11:57:35 GMT -5 Bando said:

Don't forget surrendering to al Qaeda and instituting sharia law, while at the same time forcing your children to become homosexuals.

</snark>

Aren't you the one who just said:

"Finally, while it gets heated sometimes here in the political thread, the posters here, liberal and conservative alike, generally try to have substantive conversations. All you want to do, in contrast, is flame liberals. I suggest you take this to Townhall or Free Republic instead of sullying up the board here. "

Indeed, and I was replying to the guy I wrote that about. Using hyperbole to mock his hyperbole is not the same thing as starting a thread to say "I hate McCain. Hate hate hate. Who's wants to fight about it?"

[hifigator]

Bando, you should know better than that though. It's not funny in the slightest if you or I make the joke.

[kchoya]

Aug 4, 2008 12:23:46 GMT -5 Bando said:

Aug 4, 2008 12:08:23 GMT -5 kchoya said:

Aren't you the one who just said:

"Finally, while it gets heated sometimes here in the political thread, the posters here, liberal and conservative alike, generally try to have substantive conversations. All you want to do, in contrast, is flame liberals. I suggest you take this to Townhall or Free Republic instead of sullying up the board here. "

Indeed, and I was replying to the guy I wrote that about. Using hyperbole to mock his hyperbole is not the same thing as starting a thread to say "I hate McCain. Hate hate hate. Who's wants to fight about it?"

Assuming you're speaking of the reverse, who on here hates Obama? I don't get that vibe from anyone. A lot of people disagree with his positions and his lack of substance, but I don't think anyone hates the guy.

[Bando]

Aug 4, 2008 12:37:07 GMT -5 hifigator said:

Bando, you should know better than that though. It's not funny in the slightest if you or I make the joke.

Ha!