Stroking Obama

The Washington Post calls Obama’s sudden softening of his stance on the Iraq War “sensible” this morning;

BARACK OBAMA has taken a small but important step toward adjusting his outdated position on Iraq to the military and strategic realities of the war he may inherit. Sadly, he seems to be finding that the strident and rigid posture he struck during the primary campaign — during which he promised to withdraw all combat forces in 16 months — is inhibiting what looks like a worthy, necessary attempt to create the room for maneuver he will need to capably manage the war if he becomes president.

Mr. Obama’s shift came when he was asked last week about his withdrawal plan, which he first proposed in late 2006, a time when Iraq appeared to be sliding into a sectarian civil war. Since then, a new U.S. counterinsurgency strategy has helped bring about a dramatic drop in violence, and the Iraqi government has gained control over most of the country. Among other things, Mr. Obama said “the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability” — an apparent acknowledgment that the hard-won gains of the last year should not be squandered. He also said that “when I go to Iraq, and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I’m sure I’ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.”

What the Post doesn’t bother to say is that if Obama had been on the right side in the first-damn-place, he wouldn’t have to “soften”. It was pandering for the votes of the radical Left that has made him “soften”, not any enlightenment, nor any changes on the ground in Iraq. Doesn’t the Washington Post find it strange that the Administration has been touting success for nine months but Obama doesn’t come around to admitting reality until Clinton conceded?

The Post goes on to praise Obama for his political savvy when instead, they should be criticizing him for contributing to the deaths of US troops by demeaning their mission and pushing a timetable withdrawal, despite the fact that the reality on the ground is diametrically opposed to Obama’s rhetoric. The troops had to overcome an enemy who was convinced that he only had to continue to fight in order to win because Obama and the voters he was trying to attract gave our enemy hope.

If Barack Obama was really a candidate for “change”, a different kind of politician running a different kind of campaign, he wouldn’t run an “anybody but Bush” campaign like John Kerry on nebulous promises like Jimmy Carter and be a sniffing snob like Al Gore. He’d strop running on leftist pie-in-the-sky rhetoric and tell the anti-war-at-any-cost crowd they were wrong. And he should admit that his anti-war yapping was wrong. And the Washington Post should call a shovel a shovel instead of praising Obama for being the same old politician with whom they’re most comfortable.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Foreign Policy, Media, Politics, Terror War