Obama and Bush...one in the same??

[jayhawk]

Read and decide - an editorial.

Almost everyone is talking about Barack Obama’s flip-flops, as the Senate’s most liberal member steadily moves to the political center and disowns firebrands like Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Fr. Michael Pfleger.

But less noticed is that Obama is not just deflating John McCain’s efforts to hold him to his long liberal record, but also embracing much of the present agenda of an unpopular President Bush on a wide variety of fronts.

Take social issues. Obama is now a gun-rights advocate. Like Bush, he applauded the Supreme Court’s overturning of a Washington, D.C., ordinance banning the possession of handguns.

The senator, also like Bush, supports the death penalty. He recently objected to the court’s rejection of a state law that allowed for the execution of child rapists.

And although Obama is still pro-choice, he now — like the president — thinks “mental distress” should not justify late-term abortion.

In addition, the new Obama would like to continue — and even expand — Bush’s controversial faith-based initiative program of involving churches in government anti-poverty programs.

In fact, Obama is sounding a lot these days like those red-state, small-town conservatives he once caricatured in his infamous comment about Pennsylvanians who “cling” to such hot-button, but extraneous, social causes.

Consider also the campaign trail. Like a Republican in good standing — but unlike the maverick John McCain — Obama has, by his sudden forgoing of public funds, rejected the idea of campaign-finance reform.

In fact, he’s the largest raiser of private cash in American political history, and seems to have dropped opposition to accepting pernicious “special-interest money.” Like a Republican, he raises the most among the nation’s wealthiest on Wall Street.

During the primaries, Obama seemed to advocate the dismantling of the North American Free Trade Agreement. But now candidate Obama has little desire to overturn the present Bush trade policies.

On foreign policy and the war against terror, Obama once leaned left in his primary battles against Hillary Clinton. But his latest mutations move him once again closer to George W. Bush.

For all his prior talk of the loss of civil liberties, a President Obama, like President Bush, would give telecommunication companies exemption from lawsuits over tapping private phone calls at government request.

Obama wants to continue Bush’s successful multilateral efforts to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan, and now praises the Bush-inspired six-party talks with North Korea that led to the apparent dismantling of Pyongyang’s nuclear program. Like Bush, he advocated expanding the military after the Clinton-era troop cuts. Obama once advocated lifting the embargo against Cuba — but no longer. Like Bush, he thinks that it is wise to leave it be.

There is suddenly not much difference when it comes to the Middle East, either. Palestinian supporters were dismayed to hear Obama promise that Jerusalem must be Israel’s eternal and undivided capital.

Obama once criticized Bush for his unwillingness to meet directly with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and exaggerating the danger from Iran, which supposedly didn’t “pose any serious threat.” Lately though, he agrees with the president that Iran now in fact is a “grave threat.”

Obama’s most serious about-face is on Iraq. He once promised a rigid and rapid timetable for withdrawing our troops. But given the radical success of Gen. David Petraeus’s surge and change in tactics, Obama is now calling for withdrawals to be based on conditions on the ground in Iraq. How different is this plan from the present administration’s policy of incrementally sending home brigades as Petraeus hands off security responsibilities to Iraqis in additional provinces?

It makes political sense that Obama is moving to the center, since he knows that a Northern liberal like himself has not won a presidential election since 1960. So don’t expect Obama’s metamorphosis to stop now. Before this campaign is over, he may well flip some more; Would anybody be surprised if he starts supporting some part of Bush’s proposal for expanded domestic oil drilling or backtracks on raising trillions in new payroll taxes?

In fact, replace George Bush’s Texas twang, cowboy strut, and evangelical Bible thumping with Barack Obama’s mellifluous “hope and change” rhetoric, easy grace, and leftwing Christianity, and we may discover a flashy new cover to an old book.

A final question: If, even as Obama trashes Bush, he seems to agree with him on so many fronts, why don’t conservatives and Republicans adopt Obama as a welcome convert?

Some may, but most I’ve talked with don’t think Obama is sincere and feel he will flip back to being left-wing if elected. Or they think that Obama is changing so fast and so radically that it’s hard to believe he really knows who he is — or who he would be as president.

Source.

[Viper007Bond]

I'm sorry, but there is only one Bush. Anyone is better than that retarded monkey.

[Twerp128]

Oh, damn that sounds like a good movie premise. A retarded monkey becomes President of the United States. They could call it Hail to the Chimp.

[argatoga]

I don't like either. Any chance of me voting for McCain died when I heard he relies on Philip Gramm for economic advice. Everyone here who pays for gas currently or lived through California's rolling blackouts is familiar with Mr. Gramm's work.

I think I'll just write in either Ron Paul or Cthulhu. The former may be a bit too libertarian for me but I tend to agree with him the most. As for the latter like Obama he promises change, but unlike Obama he actually has made it known what change he plans to make.

[Scott]

If I had to do a write in vote I think I would go for Bob Barr....

[Momentum57]

More evidence that hardcore liberals would be disappointed with Obama. Also that Obama would give way on important measures and work with the Republicans. Question is will Americans see the cold realities of the situation as what they are or view them as a betrayal.

[RUU-CHAMA]

Originally Posted by argatoga

I don't like either. Any chance of me voting for McCain died when I heard he relies on Philip Gramm for economic advice. Everyone here who pays for gas currently or lived through California's rolling blackouts is familiar with Mr. Gramm's work.

I think I'll just write in either Ron Paul or Cthulhu. The former may be a bit too libertarian for me but I tend to agree with him the most. As for the latter like Obama he promises change, but unlike Obama he actually has made it known what change he plans to make.

Yeah, Cthulhu would be a great candidate. We need someone who say what they mean and means what they say.

[JipJopJones]

Originally Posted by Twerp128

Oh, damn that sounds like a good movie premise. A retarded monkey becomes President of the United States. They could call it Hail to the Chimp.

or MVP 4(?): Most Viable Presedent

[anti-net]

Well....yeah National Review are going to say stuff like that, they want people to vote for McCain, but Americans are concerned that voting republican will give them another Bush, so they claim that McCain isn't like Bush, Obama is. Very well spun, but not fooling anyway!

[Scott]

Anyone who think McCain will be another Bush is seriously confused... and I found this article to be interesting, but I would have to do some research to see how much of it is truly accurate before allowing it to influence me in any way.

[LeVeL]

Glenn Beck for President!!!



yeah, I wish

[Scott]

Originally Posted by LeVeL

Glenn Beck for President!!!



yeah, I wish

The guy is funny sometimes... but no thanks on that one! I am actually starting to find him increasingly annoying.

[Momentum57]

Originally Posted by anti-net

Well....yeah National Review are going to say stuff like that, they want people to vote for McCain, but Americans are concerned that voting republican will give them another Bush, so they claim that McCain isn't like Bush, Obama is. Very well spun, but not fooling anyway!

The thing is that it is no claim, the items are facts, perhaps the conclusion can be argued with. You are right that the majority of Obama's appeal is voter cycles. Both candidates are broadly the same as are both parties, although the number one reason why people vote for one or another is they want something different. I always look at it as going to your local restaurant having prime rib then switching to steak, both are beef with a side.

[smib]

I might vote for McCain just because of his stance on nuclear power. Other than that I really know very little about all of this, but I keep getting a very srtong impression that Obama is a panderer that leans to the left.

[Momentum57]

Hey look at this Obama votes for the federal surveillance law that he said he would not vote for. Guess when doing what is right is more important than being LEFT.

SOURCE