Change You Can Believe In… or Honestly, Would I Lie To You?

(9:45PM EST – promoted by Nightprowlkitty)

In efforts to strengthen his somewhat faltering presidential bid after last weeks shuffle to the center to the right in his reversal of a long held campaign promise with his support for preemptively pardoning retroactively legalizing years of Bush criminal behavior and expanded domestic surveillance at the low, low price of gutting your fourth amendment rights, Barack Obama has made more major position “adjustments” with changes to his campaign website today.

The AP reports about an hour ago: Obama Web site removes ‘surge’ from Iraq problem

Barack Obama’s aides have removed criticism of President Bush’s increase of troops to Iraq from the campaign Web site, part of an effort to update the Democrat’s written war plan to reflect changing conditions.

McCain said Obama is failing to acknowledge success. “Today, we know Sen. Obama was wrong” to oppose the surge, McCain said.

As first reported Tuesday by the New York Daily News, Obama’s campaign removed a reference to the surge as part of “The Problem” section on the part of his Web site devoted to laying out his plan for Iraq.

The change was part of many broader changes that Obama spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said were made to reflect current conditions.

Designed to appeal to the center right likely in hopes of drawing voters away from the McCain camp, which he’ll need to replace progressive support lost over FISA, Obama takes more steps towards offering another “Bush Third Term” coke or pepsi choice between himself and McCain to voters this year.

The AP article continues…

The change was part of many broader changes that Obama spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said were made to reflect current conditions. She provided the full text of the old site and the updated version, which includes a new section on the recent resurgence of al-Qaida in Afghanistan and another on this year’s negotiations over a Status of Forces Agreement that would detail the legal basis for the ongoing presence of U.S. military forces operating in Iraq.

The changes stress that Obama’s plan to end the war is responsible and designed to improve national security. They include:

_ An updated Obama quote at the top of the page. The previous quote stressed how Obama had the judgment to oppose the “rash war” from the start. This was a popular message among Democratic voters and was meant to draw distinctions with primary rival Hillary Rodham Clinton, who initially supported the war. The new quote focuses on how ending the war will make Americans safer – a message aimed at general election voters who are more likely to trust McCain on issues of national security, according to polling.

_ A description of Obama’s plan as “a responsible, phased withdrawal” that will be directed by military commanders and done in consultation with the Iraqis. Previously, the site had a sentence that has since been removed that flatly said, “Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq.” Morigi said that his plan hasn’t changed, but they wanted to expand the description. “There’s not an intent to shift language,” she said.

_ A new sentence that says Obama “would reserve the right to intervene militarily, with our international partners, to suppress potential genocidal violence within Iraq.”

Only one of his plan’s subheads remains unchanged, the first one – “Judgment You Can Trust.” That’s a message the campaign wants Americans to embrace.


Skip to comment form

    • Edger on July 16, 2008 at 00:52

    …and Bush Obama says, “Whad’l’ya have, pardner?” and Osama says, “Well, George Barack, what are you serving today?” and Bush Obama says, “Fear,” and Osama shouts, “Fear for everybody!” and George Barack pours it on for the crowd. Then the presidential bartender says, “Hey, who’s buying?” and Osama points a thumb at the crowd sucking down their brew. “They are,” he says. And the two of them share a quiet laugh.

    Hat Tip to Greg Palast

  1. Here is a portion of an Op-Ed to the New York Times, written by Barack Obama, of July 14, 2008:

    . . . . Ending the war is essential to meeting our broader strategic goals, starting in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the Taliban is resurgent and Al Qaeda has a safe haven. Iraq is not the central front in the war on terrorism, and it never has been. As Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently pointed out, we won’t have sufficient resources to finish the job in Afghanistan until we reduce our commitment to Iraq.

    As president, I would pursue a new strategy, and begin by providing at least two additional combat brigades to support our effort in Afghanistan. We need more troops, more helicopters, better intelligence-gathering and more nonmilitary assistance to accomplish the mission there. I would not hold our military, our resources and our foreign policy hostage to a misguided desire to maintain permanent bases in Iraq.

    In this campaign, there are honest differences over Iraq, and we should discuss them with the thoroughness they deserve. Unlike Senator McCain, I would make it absolutely clear that we seek no presence in Iraq similar to our permanent bases in South Korea, and would redeploy our troops out of Iraq and focus on the broader security challenges that we face. But for far too long, those responsible for the greatest strategic blunder in the recent history of American foreign policy have ignored useful debate in favor of making false charges about flip-flops and surrender.

    It’s not going to work this time. It’s time to end this war.

  2. This is just doing wonders for the Dem base.

    Of which I am one.

    I need a drink.  Now.

    Good catch, edger.

  3. meant to confuse the opposition!

    Yeah…that’s right…confuse the opposition!

    Sure, it makes his base and those further left think he’s been lying to them, but gosh, they’re supposed to be mature enough to understand that he’s just doing the political thing so that he can be elected.  After all, isn’t that what this is all about?  Making sure that Obama, and nobody else, gets elected?

  4. am I wrong?

    Obama was the first on the left to use the language of the right, I saw that as a sign of strength not weakness.  

    We are talking about words here…and there is too much talk about words and not enough actions in general.

    • JayV on July 16, 2008 at 04:46

Comments have been disabled.