10.01.2008 0

The Radical, Waffling, True-Believing, Flip-Flopping Obama

  • On: 10/15/2008 12:58:41
  • In: Barack Obama
  • In 2004, by far the most damaging aspect of Senator John Kerry’s failed presidential campaign was his inability to craft a consistent message. At their national convention, Republicans enthusiastically clapped flip-flops together when the charge was leveled against the Democrat nominee for president.

    Senator Barack Obama could be facing a problem of similar, if not greater magnitude. He has thus far waffled on a number of issues, including but not limited to:

    1. Taking union money—was against, now for;
    2. Public financing—was for, now against; 
    3. Lifting the Cuba embargo—was for, now against; 
    4. Cracking down on illegal immigrant employers—was against, now for; 
    5. Telecom immunity in the FISA—was against, now for; 
    6. D.C. gun ban—was for, now against; 
    7. Taking Big Oil money—says he’s against, but takes money from Big Oil execs; 
    8. NAFTA—was against, now for; and 
    9. Death penalty—was against, now for.

    Some of these shifts were matters of expediency, as with the three items on campaign finance. The rest, however, are the difference between night and day, between the primary season and the general election, and between radical and moderate.

    And the rationale is eminently pragmatic in nature: Conventional wisdom holds that Democrat candidates, in order to secure both the nomination and the presidency, ought to run to the political left during primaries and to the center during the general election. So, in truth, Mr. Obama’s and Mr. Kerry’s moves on the issues were and are really a part of a general political strategy, and one that many voters will be familiar with and, so the candidates hope, will be forgiven.

    In other words, a political moderate cannot win the Democrat nomination, and a liberal Democrat cannot win the general election. All of which tells us nothing about how these candidates will govern once in office.

    One barometer to use would be the Clinton administration, which governed to the left from 1993-94 and to the center from 1995-2000 after the Democrats lost Congress. If that is the proper metric, then how a Democrat president would govern in office is dependent upon the composition of Congress.

    So which Barack Obama will govern if elected?

    With Democrats in solid control of Congress, it will be Obama the Radical. The capital gains tax increasing, windfall profits taxing, carbon emission capping, universal health care implementing, free trade abolishing, housing entitlement creating, Treasury bankrupting, Big Government Radical.

    And the triangulation, positioning, and waffling now are merely means to enacting that radical agenda.

    ALG Perspective:
    Barack Obama is the worst kind of radical: He will lie about what his true intentions really are, leaving the American people to wonder what he will do exactly. But the American people should really just go by what his platform was during the primary season, because that was the true Barack Obama: the Radical.


    Copyright © 2008-2020 Americans for Limited Government