A lot’s been made of Barack Obama’s recent reneging on his promise to abide by the current public financing system.
He’s the first general election candidate to do that since the system was set up.
But overlooked in most of the stories about Obama’s reneging on that earlier promise is the long litany of such uh-huh “changed” views.
After bashing Hillary Clinton for her vote to list the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization, he changed his view AFTER Clinton conceded that point, saying that he NOW accepts that definition.
Back in October, he claimed to support Free Trade and the expansion of NAFTA, but in March, while campaigning in Ohio, he called for renegotiating that trade agreement. NOW he says that NAFTA has had a very positive impact on the U.S. economy.
After months of claiming he’d meet with the leaders of rogue, terror-supporting states “without preconditions” he NOW has outlined a number of, yes, preconditions for such meetings and has said that he sees no reason to meet with Iran’s Ahmadinejad as, “He’s not the most powerful person in Iran.”
Late last week, after publicly signaling opposition to nuclear power, he told Democratic Governors that he’s willing to consider expanding our nuclear generator program.
On the whole, he’s taken to moderating his positions when confronted on them, which is good – supporting free trade and expanding NAFTA, supporting nuclear generation of electricity and putting preconditions on any meetings with terror-supporting states are all positive steps, from this view, although the penchant to say one thing and mean another is troubling, to say the least.
He’s the first general election candidate to do that since the system was set up.
But overlooked in most of the stories about Obama’s reneging on that earlier promise is the long litany of such uh-huh “changed” views.
After bashing Hillary Clinton for her vote to list the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization, he changed his view AFTER Clinton conceded that point, saying that he NOW accepts that definition.
Back in October, he claimed to support Free Trade and the expansion of NAFTA, but in March, while campaigning in Ohio, he called for renegotiating that trade agreement. NOW he says that NAFTA has had a very positive impact on the U.S. economy.
After months of claiming he’d meet with the leaders of rogue, terror-supporting states “without preconditions” he NOW has outlined a number of, yes, preconditions for such meetings and has said that he sees no reason to meet with Iran’s Ahmadinejad as, “He’s not the most powerful person in Iran.”
Late last week, after publicly signaling opposition to nuclear power, he told Democratic Governors that he’s willing to consider expanding our nuclear generator program.
On the whole, he’s taken to moderating his positions when confronted on them, which is good – supporting free trade and expanding NAFTA, supporting nuclear generation of electricity and putting preconditions on any meetings with terror-supporting states are all positive steps, from this view, although the penchant to say one thing and mean another is troubling, to say the least.
4 comments:
All Obama has to do is cover all the bases. The news media will pick and choose the proper sound bite to meet any criticism.
I like that pic, too.
no, no, no, jmk. he's not flip flopping, he's learning.
heidianne jackson
http://biggirlpants.typepad.com
Sure enough Sloane, that's what will happen.
"I like that pic, too." (Uncle Sloane)
I have my moments, Sloane. Of course, I forget where I found that one, off hand.
"no, no, no, jmk. he's not flip flopping, he's learning." (Heidianne)
I sure HOPE so Heidianne!
Today he came AGAINST the recent SC decision barring the death penalty for child-rapists.
Of course, those are exactly the kinds of justices an Obama would appoint!
Post a Comment