Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Exploding the Obama myth: The anti-war candidate? Beyond politicking?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 08:39 PM
Original message
Exploding the Obama myth: The anti-war candidate? Beyond politicking?
Edited on Sat Feb-02-08 08:41 PM by bidenista
The thread highlighting Obama's equivocation over the Alito appointment (a worrying sign given that the next prez will probably be making SC appointments) brought up a 2006 piece by The Nation. Recently on DU we've seen Obama painted as the natural candidate for anti-war Dems, and as a unifier who transcends party politicking.

Really? This may be a bit of an eye-opener. Note especially the Lieberman connection:



Mr. Obama Goes to Washington

David Sirota


...Just one month into his term, the former civil rights lawyer defied the Democrats and voted for the class-action "reform" bill. Opposed by most major civil rights and consumer watchdog groups, this Big Business-backed legislation was sold to the public as a way to stop "frivolous" lawsuits. But everyone in Washington knew the bill's real objective was to protect corporate abusers. A few weeks later, though he voted against the credit-card-industry-written bankruptcy bill, Obama also voted against an amendment that would have capped credit-card interest rates at a whopping 30 percent (he defends his vote by claiming the amendment was poorly written).

Then there is the Iraq War. Obama says that during his 2004 election campaign he "loudly and vigorously" opposed the war. As The New Yorker noted, "many had been drawn initially by Obama's early opposition to the invasion." But "when his speech at the antiwar rally in 2002 was quietly removed from his campaign Web site," the magazine reported, "activists found that to be an ominous sign"--one that foreshadowed Obama's first months in the Senate. Indeed, through much of 2005, Obama said little about Iraq, displaying a noticeable deference to Washington's bipartisan foreign policy elite, which had pushed the war. One of Obama's first votes as a senator was to confirm Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State despite her integral role in pushing the now-debunked propaganda about Iraq's WMD.

In November Obama's reticence on the war ended. Five days after hawkish Democratic Representative Jack Murtha famously called for a withdrawal, Obama gave a speech calling for a drawdown of troops in 2006. "Those of us in Washington have fallen behind the debate that is taking place across America on Iraq," he said. But then he retreated. On Meet the Press in January Obama regurgitated catchphrases often employed by neoconservatives to caricature those demanding a timetable for withdrawal. "It would not be responsible for us to unilaterally and precipitously draw troops down," he said. Then, as polls showed support for the war further eroding, Obama tacked again, giving a speech in May attacking the war and mocking the "idea that somehow if you say the words 'plan for victory' and 'stay the course' over and over and over and over again...that somehow people are not going to notice the 2,400 flag-draped coffins that have arrived at the Dover Air Force Base."

Another area of retreat and equivocation for Obama is his role in party politics. He had previously said he didn't "want to be the kingmaker," because "it's never been sort of a role that I've aspired to in politics." Yet Obama forcefully intervened in a suburban Chicago Congressional primary on behalf of Iraq veteran Tammy Duckworth, the candidate handpicked by Democratic power brokers, against grassroots contender Christine Cegelis, who in 2004 garnered an astonishing 44 percent against GOP incumbent Henry Hyde and who almost beat Duckworth. Wasn't this the very kingmaking role he'd said he didn't want to be a part of? Obama said only, "There are going to be strategic questions about who do I think is best equipped to win the general elections." One senior Congressional aide said, "Obama showed himself to be the pure political hack he is. Here you have a guy whose own success was predicated on winning primaries against party-backed candidates now using his enormous political capital to go to bat for the same party machines he says he doesn't want to be a tool of." Although Obama said such high-profile primary endorsements were rare, a similar controversy arose a few weeks later. Just as Ned Lamont's antiwar primary campaign against prowar Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman was gaining momentum, Obama traveled to the state to endorse Lieberman. Like the Duckworth endorsement, Obama's move was timed to derail an insurgent, grassroots candidate. To progressives this may seem surprising, given Obama's progressive image. But remember, according to the New York Times it is Lieberman--one of the most conservative, prowar Democrats in Washington--who is "Obama's mentor in the Senate as part of a program in which freshman senators are paired with incumbents."...

More: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060626/sirota
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. Obama's will use the anti-war movement like a Kleenex
Holy Joe and Zbiginew as mentors? The same exact record as Hillary since becoming senator?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. i fear you're right. a lot of people will be disappointed. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thunder rising Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. He sure blew the Lamont/Lieberman endorsement.
But when you look at him and his family and the rest of the things he has done, it makes me forgive him that.

AND I HATE LIEBERMAN!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
3. He is too willing to compromise with the other side.
"Just as Ned Lamont's antiwar primary campaign against prowar Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman was gaining momentum, Obama traveled to the state to endorse Lieberman. Like the Duckworth endorsement, Obama's move was timed to derail an insurgent, grassroots candidate. To progressives this may seem surprising, given Obama's progressive image. But remember, according to the New York Times it is Lieberman--one of the most conservative, prowar Democrats in Washington--who is "Obama's mentor in the Senate as part of a program in which freshman senators are paired with incumbents"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellacott Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. That was in the primary
The Clintons and most democrats also supported him in the primary. When Lamont won the primary Obama endorsed him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alteredstate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. This is from June 2006
And it's been posted here before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. it seemed relevant in view of some recent claims about obama...
...being the anti-war Dems' best pick, and the embodiment of non-machine politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlackVelvet04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. And now it's been posted again. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheozone Donating Member (839 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. SO WHAT! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
7. So why did Ned Lamont ENDORSE HIM?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. because he's forgiving?
Don't see how his endorsement answers the behavior described above. But then, maybe there is no answer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Maybe Lamont knows more about him than you do? NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. maybe. but that doesn't change the facts above. nt
Edited on Sat Feb-02-08 09:21 PM by bidenista
Or do you think I should support Obama on the basis of hypothetical secret information which would mitigate his pathetic record?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Obama supported Ned Lamont:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. and yet facts remain facts, and you haven't answered the facts in the OP. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kikiek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
12. The facts in this article haven't changed. It highlights what personally I suspect.
Edited on Sat Feb-02-08 09:19 PM by kikiek
Obama isn't as liberal as he is trying to make people believe. His campaign is about his charismatic star like appeal. Hillary will make a much better president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. i'm afraid that's exactly what it is
The problem with movements based on religious enthusiasm rather than substance is that the fervor can fade as fast as it grew.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kikiek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. He can't say how he WOULD have voted. He wasn't there.
It is popular now to say that though. Good article here that says a lot.
….Obama has refused to join genuinely antiwar forces in calling for a rapid and thorough withdrawal of troops and an end to the occupation of Iraq.…..repeated references to the need to “defeat” the “insurgency”—a goal that means continuation of the war.…… As commentators Ford and Gamble noted in a critical analysis of Obama’s CFR address: “In essence all Obama wants from the Bush regime is that it fess up to having launched the war based on false information…… Obama and many of his colleagues are more interested in consulting the Bush men on the best way to ‘win’ the war than in effecting an American withdrawal at any foreseeable time.”

…. Never mind that the recent mid-term elections and a mountain of polling data show that the majority of Americans support rapid U.S. withdrawal, as do the vast majority of the Iraqi people…..

……Fallujah is a leading symbol of U.S. imperialism in the Arab and Muslim worlds. It is a deeply provocative and insulting place for Obama to choose to highlight American sacrifice and “resolve” in the occupation of Iraq.

….Obama’s blindness (intentional or not) to the important and welcome fact that many troops do in fact strongly question the war…..

….It is because of Obama’s “rare ability to mix charisma and deference to the establishment,” Sirota finds (in an overly respectful assessment), that “Beltway publications and think tanks have heaped praise on Obama and want him to run for President.”

http://thisisbunk.wordpress.com/2007/12/05/obama-antiwar-critical-or-just-plain-clever/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasoline highway Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #18
25. :roll:
Yeah he totally would've voted for it after speaking out against it days before.

:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
REDFISHBLUEFISH Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #12
23. Yes She Will!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
17. k.
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kikiek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Another one..
His opposition to the war never even became a major campaign issue. In fact, Obama underscored his stance during a February 2004 debate in which he tried to score points by accusing a primary rival of not speaking out against the war.

He may not like to admit it but Obama is essentially an ambitious pragmatist -- as his decision to invoke his 2002 speech on its anniversary today underlines.

You want to be president? You use every asset in your portfolio.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/583542,CST-NWS-hunter02.stng
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasoline highway Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Defense of Obama (from an Edwards supporter)
I'm sure as you guys know, the game of politics is fought a certain way, you think an anti-war hope cadidate would gain any round without following some of the rules of politics? If he had committed political suicide, how could he make it to the point where he is at now? Lets not sit here and pretend that he would be a household name if he hadn't endorsed many other democrats (popular or not) and didn't conform to some standards.

Every candidate has some pretty terrible votes on their record. I'm not defending his vote for the "reform bill" talked about in this article, but I think Obama is a stickler for quality written amendments and he rejected the 30% interest rate for that reason. Just because you vote against something doesn't mean you are opposed to the whole idea and I think you guys are getting caught up in that.

I think that LaMont endorsed Obama speaks volumes.

Would you rather have the candidate who spoke out against the war or the one who voted for it? Surely you're not claiming that Obama conforming to some of the rules, because politics is the most established games, full of posturing, and plenty of behind the scenes work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. fair enough
But the article does undermine a lot of the Obama backers' attacks on Hillary. Obama is no "purer" than she is. He's just less experienced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasoline highway Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. umm...
I think he is quite a bit purer then she is because he never voted for or advocated the war. He has said that it would be fatal to remove troops at points and voted for continued spending to make sure there wasnt a bloodbath because our good boys couldn't get the things they neeeded to fight.

So what, he endorsed Lieberman, endorsing Lieberman wasn't a PRO-WAR endorsement anymore then anyone endorsing HILLARY is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kikiek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-03-08 07:05 AM
Response to Reply #22
31. The point being is he does what is politically convenient. He isn't the great liberal hope people
make him out to be. He is using the charged up phrase, and once again we fall into place just like sheep. All rhetoric I see little substance. Mark my words he will disappoint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
21. KICK
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasoline highway Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:17 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. what the hell do you mean by kick?
Edited on Sat Feb-02-08 10:18 PM by gasoline highway
Why not offer a meaningful response to my post? Hillary and just about every other politician (Edwards and Obama included) have made terrible votes. There are certain rules to "the game", the most corrupt game ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. oh wow. take a chill pill
"Kick" means I want to send the thread back up. WHAT THE HELL DO YOU MEAN BY QUESTIONING MY USE OF KICK, HUH?!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasoline highway Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:30 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. respond to my post #22
instead of kicking this thread to try to get attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bidenista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-02-08 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. i have done. stop being such a rude ass. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC