Obama’s flip to the dark side

is complete: http://elections.foxnews.com/2…

A full 180 degree turn in how Obama viewed the Surge in under two months!  Soon he’ll be saying we are winning in Iraq, promote drilling in ANWR, and call for cutting taxes for most Americans.  Oh wait, he already has on the last: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITI…

This is be the first time in my memory that a Democrat has tried to run to the right of a Republican.  I mean really, does anyone truly believe a Democrat when they say they will cut taxes?  What will he change his mind on next?  Will he come out as pro-life?  Call for military action against Iran?  The possibilities are almost endless!

20 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DavidThi808 says:

    Let’s look at the record.

    The one president in recent time who balanced the budget – Jimmy Carter.

    The one president who had a surplus – Bill Clinton

    And Bill did cut taxes for the middle class. What you Republicans don’t like is that we Dems don’t cut taxes on the very wealthy.

    • cologeek says:

      Bill Clinton raised taxes in 1993.  It wasn’t until 1997 when he was dragged into signing tax cuts passed by the Republican Congress.  

      Bill’s surplus was at least in part due to a Republican Congress that actually controlled spending, unlike what happened after Bush got into office.

      • DavidThi808 says:

        Including G.H.W. Bush’s tax increase. But the bottom line is it’s Dems who balance the budget.

      • parsingreality says:

        Give us an effin’ break.  Do you work for the Department of Truth or something?  

        Clinton’s budgets were voted “No” by every Republican in those early years.  Thank God we had a Dem congress that saw them through.  Rethuglicans did everything they could to stop the best economy we every experienced.


        You hate Clinton so much, but when something went right under his watch you want the credit.

        May I swear now?  

  2. RedGreen says:

    a Republican has tried to run against a Republican administration. If you read McCain’s speech tonight without knowing who was delivering it, you’d think it was a centrist Democrat.

    McCain has set a record for the most 180s from one presidential campaign to the next — since 2000, he has reversed himself and abandoned his hard-fought principles on EVERY issue except abortion (which he has always opposed). And, because it’s hard to keep track what you say when you don’t really believe any of it, he’s switched back again on many of his positions. What’s next? It boggles the mind.

    • ClubTwitty says:

      even though his campaign is run by the latter and Rethugs created the former;  he blasted Obama for his support of EPCA (the Republicans ‘Drill America First’ legislation) even as the crowd chanted ‘Drill, Baby, Drill!!!).

      The whole thing was such a sorry display of fake Mavericktude one must wonder how brain-dead the GOP delegates are…Or is it that they are inured to blatant lies, still grasping to the notion that Bush is somehow successful and will be a historical great?  Are they stupid or merely grossly cynical (they are not really mutually exclusive).  

      Moving on to the other speakers…

      9u11iani actually said that leaving Iraq would be a victory for Al Qeda and Osama, although he never once mentioned Afghanistan–where because of Iraq we have been unable to finish the job, Osama is still lurking and Al Qeda grows stronger.

      Palin lied about numerous things, the Bridge to Nowhere (which she supported while campaigning and kept all the dollars from), etc. etc.

      Huckabee–America’s most lovable Taliban–said that Palin got more votes for mayor then Biden got in the primaries, fudged by a factor of nearly 10,000.

      Can anyone in the GOP ever tell the truth?  

  3. Obama has been saying the surge “succeeded beyond our expectations” for some time now.  And thanks to a few fortuitous cease-fires and changes of heart, we have been able to do more.  We still don’t have a good political arrangement over there, though, and that was supposedly the end goal of the surge – to give space for a political peace.

    His position on taxes has been “in the can” for some time: he will raise taxes on those earning more than $250,000 and lower taxes on the lower and middle classes.  You’ll note that your CNN link has a 2007 date.

    Tonight’s first segment of the Obama-O’Reilly interview has Obama quite clearly stating that he will not commit to using military force on Iran, nor does he think that openly discussing military options is wise for any candidate.

    • RedGreen says:

      It seems to be the only thing McCain can point to that has worked over the last eight years, but it’s still just a vacuous slogan. There’s more to the story. Check out the advance look at Bob Woodward’s new book, The War Within, which includes this nugget:

      The book also says that the U.S. troop “surge” of 2007, in which President Bush sent nearly 30,000 additional U.S. combat forces and support troops to Iraq, was not the primary factor behind the steep drop in violence there during the past 16 months.

      Rather, Woodward reports, “groundbreaking” new covert techniques enabled U.S. military and intelligence officials to locate, target and kill insurgent leaders and key individuals in extremist groups such as al-Qaeda in Iraq.

      Woodward does not disclose the code names of these covert programs or provide much detail about them, saying in the book that White House and other officials cited national security concerns in asking him to withhold specifics.

      Overall, Woodward writes, four factors combined to reduce the violence: the covert operations; the influx of troops; the decision by militant cleric Moqtada al-Sadr to rein in his powerful Mahdi Army; and the so-called Anbar Awakening, in which tens of thousands of Sunnis turned against al-Qaeda in Iraq and allied with U.S. forces.

      Granted, the surge has had a hand in tamping down violence in Iraq — but even the surge’s architects (which don’t include John McCain, who was a bystander, at best a cheerleader) say it’s more complicated than that. But, of course, cologeek loathes complexity because it gets in the way of pat slogans.

      • cologeek says:

        Like the constant refrain from the left that Iraq was a lost cause, that victory was impossible, and that “General Betray Us’s” surge would never work?  One of the cornerstones of the Democratic plan for their success in November has been American defeat in Iraq, and now that particular stone is crumbling, and Obama is scrambling to not look like a defeatist.  

        • Aristotle says:

          cologeek relegates himself to the company of the wingnuts, voluntarily exiling himself from the realm of reasonable discussion. That leaves about 5 or 6 ‘pubs and righties who are able to discuss things rationally. Too bad.

  4. Go Blue says:

    Hand it to the Factor for the dramatization effect of rolling it out over the course of a week.

  5. Whiskey Lima Juliet says:

      or if you are under 36, would you put your life on the line?

    If your answer is no – then the surge is not working.

    Please explain to me how this war is making America safer?  It is a civil war, that we started and now we need to figure out how to fix it and not put one more American life on the line.

    Have you thought about the job of Military Chaplains that have to tell families that their son, daughter, husband or wife has been killed?

    These are real lives we are gambling with.  For those of you that have never been in the military – being under attack is the most terrifying thing you will ever experience.

    Why would you put someone under that kind of terror for anything other than the protection of America?

    • Jambalaya says:

      …this post is crap.  Now matter the cause, no matter how right or wrong it is, no parent would volunteer to sacrifice his/her child for it.   That is hardly the test for righteousness.  If it is, we have descended into a melodramatic morass.  

      • Whiskey Lima Juliet says:

        Civil war should be handled by the UN and other peace keeping organizations with the assistance of the countries involved.  America has a part to play. Absolutely, we broke it.

        However, sacrificing one more life is just not worth the benefit. I am truly sorry you think that this is righteous crap.

        And BTW, about 4200 families have sacrificed their loved ones for a lie. And about 31,000 families have sacrificed by having a family member return wounded and disabled.

        Lest we not forget.

  6. parsingreality says:

    …is negated by the fact we never should have been there.  Ever.

    It’s like saying I finally made a payment on a car I never should have bought.

  7. Half Glass Full says:


    Obama admits that the surge has worked well. He’s honest.

    Meanwhile the Repugs are asking voters to believe that a layover in Shannon Airport is a Palin “visit to Europe,” and that she has foreign policy experience because Alaska is close to Russia! Hooh hah! You guys are freakin’ hilarious.

    Your Rove is showing…

    • ClubTwitty says:

      I also had a refueling layover in Ireland, but have traveled overseas a few times as well.  

      Thus, I’m sending in my resume for Sect. of State should McSame/Failin get elected.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.