Jump To The Latest News Blog Topics:

Obama "puzzled" by Iraq comment frenzy

CONTENTS:

It must be difficult for Mr. Obama to keep straight what audience he is addressing. (More...)
Obama just got 2 days of free media coverage to make sure people understand he wants to end the war as soon as possible but to do in a sensible way. (More...)
Aides were seen carting Hula Hoops, colouring books and whiffle balls so the girls could be photographed playing. (More...)
I never voted for Bill Clinton either. (More...)
The invasion of Iraq was unnecessary, and the Bush administration led the nation into a pre-emptive war based on "propaganda" and dishonesty, former White House. (More...)
Obama has held the same position for over 2 years and the MSM only believes he has flip flopped because they don't do nuance very well. (More...)
Senator John McCain was performing relatively smoothly as he unveiled his energy plan. (More...)
Congressional Republicans are anything but confident following three special election losses and seeing their presidential nominee consistently out-raised in money and out-tallied by the Democrats in primary votes. (More...)
Iraq is the Germany or Japan of the Middle East - the strategic linchpin to wider reform. (More...)
If Bush and McCain had refined thier policies, our troops would not have died and the country will not be in debt, the economy will not be going down south, we might be paying $4.00 in gas. (More...)
The freshman Senator is in for a very rude awakening when/if he is finally allowed to talk to people who actually serve in the military, know how troop movements work, and what is involved in moving a force of that magnitude out of that area. (More...)
I can't wait for the first debate when your new old fool senile candidate goes up against Barack. (More...)

It must be difficult for Mr. Obama to keep straight what audience he is addressing. Is it the one that sees him as an agent of change; you know, 'change we can believe in?' This would comprise mostly people who see the war for the oil-driven, murderous exercise that it is. Or he is standing before a group of aging veterans who tend to support their equally aged former fellow soldier, Republican presidential candidate John McCain of Arizona? These are mainly the people who will accept anything as long as it is delivered wrapped in an American flag. Mr. Obama seems to feel, perhaps justly, that now that he has wrested the nomination from New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, he has a different opponent who requires a different offensive posture. During the agonizing primaries he was able to hammer away at Mrs. Clinton's initial vote for the war, a vote that she, and many other members of both houses of Congress, will never be able to live down. Mr. Obama need not mention that he did not vote for the war because he was not a member of Congress at that time, and therefore couldn't, nor did he ever spend much time explaining why he has consistently voted to continue funding the war every chance he got. Now he is going to Iraq, "to do a thorough assessment," and continue to refine his policy. This is a reasonable statement, and if he had only left it at that, those who oppose the war would not have had alarms ringing in their heads and red flags suddenly waving all over the place. He went on to say the following: '"I have said throughout this campaign that this war was ill-conceived, that it was a strategic blunder and that it needs to come to an end. [1] Obama has called the war a mistake and McCain has strongly supported keeping troops in the country. The Democrats stance on the Iraq war took center stage in the campaign on Thursday after he indicated that his talks with military commanders during an upcoming visit to Iraq could refine his policy on the 16-month timetable hes discussed for withdrawing combat troops from Iraq. His remarks quickly drew criticism from Republicans and others that he was backtracking on his commitment to end the war. In two news conferences on Thursday, Obama said any refinement of his position on Iraq would not be related to his promise to remove combat forces within 16 months of taking office, but rather to the number of troops needed to train Iraqis and fight al-Qaida. He also acknowledged that the 16-month timeline could indeed slip if removing troops risked their safety or Iraqi stability. Obama told reporters Saturday that he is "absolutely committed to ending the war." He said he did not misspeak in his comments earlier in the week and suggested the media and critics read unintended significance into the remarks. "I was a little puzzled by the frenzy that I set off by what I thought was a pretty innocuous statement," he told reporters. Obama has always said his promise to end the war would require consultations with military commanders and, possibly, flexibility. McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said Obama needs to "understand that his words matter." "We are all absolutely committed to ending this war, but on Thursday Barack Obamas words indicated that he also shared John McCains commitment to securing the peace beforehand," he said.[2]

McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds responded in a statement: "Improving America's schools will take bipartisan leadership and a commitment to the issue, but Barack Obama has never spearheaded education reforms while in the U.S. Senate and has no record of working across the aisle for change." In Missouri, Obama was also to address the oldest predominantly black Christian denomination in North America, marking a key campaign stop after scrutiny of his faith. He was expected to speak to delegates and leaders of the African Methodist Episcopal Church on Saturday. The speech comes the candidate came under fire during the Democratic primary for his relationship with longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright had called from the pulpit for God to "damn America" for its treatment blacks and claimed the United States brought the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on itself. Obama, whose father was from Kenya, has also battled false but persistent rumors that he is a Muslim. They have been kept alive on the Internet despite his repeated talk about his longtime devotion to Christianity. McCain was spending the long U.S. Independence Day holiday weekend in his home state of Arizona after wrapping up a three-day visit to Colombia and Mexico on Thursday to promote free trade and burnish his foreign policy credentials. McCain, who has made support for the war in Iraq and especially President George W. Bush's troop buildup there the centerpiece of his presidential campaign, is also getting some help from a national veterans' organization.[3] ST. LOUIS (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said on Saturday his plan to end the Iraq war was unchanged and he was puzzled by the sharp reaction to his statement this week that he might "refine" his timetable for withdrawing U.S. combat troops. "For me to say that I'm going to refine my policies I don't think in any way is inconsistent with prior statements and doesn't change my strategic view that this war has to end and that I'm going to end it as president," Obama told reporters on his campaign plane. Obama, who based his drive to capture the Democratic nomination on his early and ardent opposition to the war, said earlier this week he might alter his plan to bring combat troops home within 16 months of taking office if conditions on the ground changed. The comment drew heavy coverage and sharp criticism from some on the left and the right, with Republicans saying it showed he was vacillating on Iraq. "I was a little puzzled by the frenzy that I set off with what I thought was a pretty innocuous statement," he said on a flight from Montana to St. Louis.[4]

More anti-war figures are voicing their opinions about contradictory and confusing statements regarding Iraq made Thursday by presumptive Democrat presidential nominee Barack Obama, and the news is clearly not good for his campaign. One such concerned party is Tom Hayden, the famed ex-husband of Jane Fonda who, along with Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, was part of the Chicago Seven that incited riots at the 1968 Democratic National Convention. Call him slippery or nuanced, Barack Obama's core position on Iraq has always been more ambiguous than audacious. Now it is catching up with him as his latest remarks are questioned by the Republicans, the mainstream media, and the antiwar movement. He could put his candidacy at risk if his audacity continues to shrivel. The most shocking aspect of Samantha Powers' forced resignation earlier this year was not that she called Hillary Clinton a "monster" off-camera, but that she flatly stated that Obama would review his whole position on Iraq once becoming president. Again, no one in the media or rival campaigns questioned whether this assertion by Powers was true. Since Obama credited Powers with helping for months in writing his book, The Audacity of Hope, her comments on his inner thinking should have been pounced upon by the pundits. Well, Tom, as media have been sheltering him from any examination up to this point, why should anyone have cared about what Powers said, or, for that matter, what Obama said? Until now, his positions on issues have been totally irrelevant. It has taken the pressure of the general election to raise questions about whether his parsed and lawyerly language is empty of credible meaning.[5]

WASHINGTON (AFP) — After months vowing to get U.S. troops home from Iraq, Barack Obama has succumbed to the war's political entanglements, struggling to explain his plan in the light of recent security gains. More than five years after the U.S. invasion, the Iraq war is now enmeshing not only the Bush administration which started it, but both men fighting to inherit it, Democratic White House hopeful Obama and Republican John McCain. Obama is torn between a vow to end the war, which underpinned his win over Democratic foe Hillary Clinton and Republican claims his plan invites U.S. humiliation, would delight terrorists and waste gains bought in American blood.[6] FARGO, N.D. (AP) - Democrat Barack Obama struggled Thursday to explain how his upcoming trip to Iraq might refine, but not basically alter, his promise to quickly remove U.S. combat troops from the war. A dustup over war policy - one of the main issues separating the Illinois senator from his Republican opponent, John McCain - overshadowed Obama's town-hall meeting here with veterans to talk about patriotism and his plans to care for them. Republicans pounced on the chance to characterize Obama as altering one of the core policies that drove his candidacy "for the sake of political expedience." He denied equally forcefully that he was shifting positions.[7] ABC News''' Sunlen Miller reports: Sen. Barack Obama told reporters he was '''puzzled''' by the press coverage he received on Thursday when he held two separate press conferences to explain his plan to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq. On Thursday in Fargo, N.D,, Obama told reporters in a morning press conference that he will '''continue to refine''' his plan to withdraw all U.S. combat troops from Iraq in 16 months. Reporters immediately jumped on the comments that showed that Obama'''s expressed openness to adjust his long-held 16-month withdrawal plans was at odds with the stance that he took during the primary campaign. At his second hastily called press availability Thursday, Sen. Obama insinuated that the McCain campaign had primed the press and were to blame for the interpretation of his position. En route to a speech in St Louis today, the Senator told reporters on his plane that the news cycle his comments caused was perplexing. '''I was a little puzzled by the frenzy that I set off by what I thought was a pretty innocuous statement, which is that I am absolutely committed to ending the war,''' he said. Obama reiterated his commitment to his withdraw plan again. '''I will call my joint chiefs of staff and give them an assignment and that is to end the war,''' he said.[8]

"I wasn't saying anything that I hadn't said before." Obama has always said his promise to end the war would require consultations with military commanders and, possibly, flexibility. The Illinois senator also said he and rival-turned-ally Hillary Rodham Clinton plan to help each other raise money in a series of fundraisers in New York next week. Two events are scheduled for Wednesday night _ one to raise money for his general election campaign and one to help Clinton pay off debts from her primary campaign. A third fundraiser, for Obama, is a breakfast Thursday morning with women donors that Clinton, a New York senator, will attend. The fundraisers will be the first joint appearances by the former foes since their lovefest in Unity, N.H., on June 27. The events were put together to showcase his campaign's commitment to helping Clinton retire her debt and her commitment to helping him get elected, Obama told reporters. The candidate said his aides and those to former President Clinton are still arranging their first campaign appearances together. What role Bill Clinton will play in Obama's campaign has been a glaring question mark ever since the former president made comments earlier this year that Obama's supporters said injected race into the nomination contest. "I'm looking forward to his advice and counsel and participation in the race ahead," Obama said. Earlier Saturday, Obama took a swipe at Republican rival John McCain, saying that for "someone who has been in Washington for 30 years he's got a pretty slim record on education and when he has taken a stand it has been the wrong one."[9] Fair or not, Kerry never recovered and lost to President Bush. It's now the Republican weapon of choice against Obama. The Illinois senator has excited many with the notion that he is a new, transcendent type of politician. He is giving the GOP effort ammunition and endangering his "Change We Can Believe In" motto with several shifts to the center, most recently on the Iraq war, his campaign's defining issue. General election campaigns invariably find candidates fine-tuning what they said during primaries. When politicians compete against others in their party, they must appeal to the most partisan, who tend to make up the majority of enthusiastic voters at that stage.[10] Somehow the mantle of change seems to have worn a bit thin for Mr. Obama. Not that Mr. McCain has embraced it; astonishingly, he talks about change as continuing the 8-year-long disasters of President George Bush. Talk about change we can't believe in: an elderly white male taking the oath of office as the clone of his predecessor is a frightening thought. As the national candidate he must appeal to Democrats, independents and even some Republicans. There is a danger in believing that Democrats will vote for him no matter what because the alternative is so frightful. Many in the party have not forgiven him, nor will they easily do so, for usurping the title that the crowned princess coveted. Making nice with her will be insufficient; all this change talk has to be seen as having some substance. He may be right, however, in assuming that hordes of voters will flock to the Democratic lever in the voting booth come November, simply because the thought of having yet another old, out-of-touch, incompetent, war-mongering, rich, white male running the show simply cannot be tolerated. If that is the case, why not maintain the theme of change? Why bother to indulge in verbal gymnastics on the topics of wiretapping, gun control and that hot-button issue for so many voters, the Iraq war? Why not stick to the views that got him where he is today? Prosecute those who violated the law by listening in on, or providing the government with records of, private telephone conversations.[1] WASHINGTON (AP) - -- Barack Obama, continuing with his theme this week of highlighting his faith and patriotism while visiting traditionally Republican states, called on a nearly all-black room of churchgoers in Missouri to help fix national and local problems. Speaking at a national meeting of the African Methodist Episcopal Church in St. Louis, one of the nation's largest and most politically and civically active black denominations, Obama said the government had an obligation to address what he said are "moral problems," such as war, poverty and homelessness, and work with religious institutions to solve them. Obama repeatedly referenced his religious faith in terms that would be familiar to white evangelicals as well as his black audience. He hopes to draw more support from evangelical Christian voters than is typical for Democratic presidential candidates, although analysts are skeptical about whether that is possible considering his support for abortion, gay rights and other issues. The Illinois senator has visited a number of states this week including Missouri, Montana, and North Dakota, that have tended to vote Republican but where he thinks he can make inroads with voters. Next week he'll be in North Carolina, Georgia and Virginia, all Southern states that have been the province of Republicans but where his campaign thinks he might find election success in part because of their large black populations.[11] Safe ride: With violence at a four-year low in Iraq, some Iraqis feel safe to have some fun at an amusement park in Baghdad. BARACK Obama has been forced to fend off charges from right and left that he has abandoned the core promise of his U.S. presidential candidacy - the withdrawal of all U.S. combat forces from Iraq within 16 months of taking office - in an attempt to attract voters from the political centre. The controversy, which erupted after Senator Obama said he might "refine" his stance, seemed to reinforce suspicions about a series of policy shifts since he emerged as the Democratic candidate. Commentators took Senator Obama to task for saying that he might revisit his withdrawal plan after his coming trip to the Middle East.[12]

Barack Obama says he doesn't think he said what the media thought he said about the Iraq war. The Democratic presidential candidate - an early opponent of the invasion - made headlines last week when he said he might "refine" his plan to bring the troops home within 16 months of winning the White House, depending on the ground conditions. While his comments unleashed criticism from both ends of the political spectrum, Obama said yesterday he has not changed his position on the war in the least.[13] Sen. Barack Obama said the media's response to remarks he made regarding Iraq were overblown, and he reaffirmed he would the war if elected. The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee was in St. Louis speaking to a mostly black group of churchgoers, where he talked about "active faith" as an obligation for religious Americans to help effect societal change. When speaking to reporters, Obama said he was surprised at how the media has "finely calibrated" his latest comments about Iraq.[14]

More than any other issue, opposition to the war in Iraq defines Obama's candidacy. He can't go soft on Iraq. To his credit, Obama quickly moved to clarify his statement. He repeated his determination to end the war and to start bringing homes immediately at the pace of what he hopes will be one or two brigades a month - by which schedule all American troops would be out of Iraq in 16 months. There was, Obama insisted, no change in his position. In fact, during the primaries, Obama repeatedly expressed the caution (perhaps lost on his supporters) that how quickly we could pull troops out of Iraq would depend on conditions on the ground. As he put it so artfully: "We have to be as careful getting out, as we were careless going in."[15] On Thursday in North Dakota, Obama said that "I'll. continue to refine my policy" on Iraq after an upcoming trip there. With a promise to end the war the central premise of his candidacy, the Obama campaign has struggled over the past two days to push back against Republicans and others who say his recent statement could be a softening or change in policy. Obama has always said his promise to end the war would require consultations with military commanders and, possibly, flexibility. "The tactics of how we ensure our troops are safe as we pull out, how we execute the withdrawal, those are things that are all based on facts and conditions," he said.[16]

March has long since passed, the troops are still there and big buck spending with the Senate´s approval continues with no visible end in sight to it. Meanwhile Obama has added yet another wrinkle to his Iraq drama and that´s that he´ll go to Iraq and listen to what the commanders on the ground and military brass there have to say about where we need to go with the war. This sounds less like the hard line one time verbal antiwar advocate named Obama speaking then a certain Republican presidential rival named McCain speaking.[17] Ever heard of "trial balloons"? Wonder what happens with "all news all the time" when there's no news? Obama is letting off little balloons of centrist thinking to see what happens. He probably believes the evangelical vote is up for grabs so is trying to show he "gets it" with the God crowd. He may well be right as the Evangelical Church is fragmented on generational and social agenda lines. Many otherwise solid Republicans may well swallow their dislike of some of his stands (abortion, gun control, capital punishment) if he tempers them slightly in their direction. As for "refining" his position on Iraq - this is a media pundit and Republican manufactured bit of silliness. I watched CNN's Jessica Yellin trying to spin this last week and was thoroughly disgusted. He's going to listen to the experts on the ground and "be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in". This has been his mantra for months. What do you think this means? He'll withdraw the troops on a timetable ensuring as little mayhem and killing as possible.[18] Obama's position on Iraq has been consistent, and is not that tough to understand people. He has every intention of ending the war when he takes office, but the speed and manner in which troops are removed from the country will be dictated by conditions on the ground to ensure the safety or our troops. Is this so confusing to you all? At times like this I wish there were an IQ test given before one has the right to hold a job in the media, or even to vote.[18]

Nothing is Obama's fault. I will anxioulsy await the refinement of the refinement of the orginial refinement on his Iraq policy, a policy that is very wishy-washy. When Obama gave a speech about being against a dumb war, as he put it, he must have had preconceived ideas. He was not in Congress to know what evidence the Bush administration was putting forth. Now he needs facts. He should have said that from the beginning, back when he gave the DUMB WAR speech. Obama cannot make up his mind about what to say when it comes to Iraq. He is trying to be all things to all people, which is something that cannot be done. The timing of this is not coincidence. Obama scheduled his press conference for July 3 when he said he was refining his Iraq policy, a time when he and his strategists knew the number of people following the news would be much lower.[18]

Once in the Senate that no quickly became yes. He promptly voted for four separate war appropriations that totaled more than $300 billion. A year before he pledged in Iowa to get the troops out now, he opposed a proposal by Senator John F. Kerry to withdraw most combat troops from Iraq by July 2007. Obama didn´t just cast a quiet vote against Kerry´s troop removal proposal he added the veiled chastisement that an "arbitrary deadline" could "compound" the Bush administrations mistake. A year later he joined with Republicans and backed their resolution that the Senate would not cut off funding for troops in Iraq. Money and votes aren´t the only issue in which Obama sent a different message then the impassioned get out of Iraq now speeches he still thundered before audiences.[17] I have always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed. His very public record of his very public pledge to end the war NOW in stump speeches the year before he said that had changed, and his words and voting record on the war had changed too. This has caused much grief, anguish and disappointment among fervent Obama backers. The war was the single biggest reason why many of them bought his sale that as president he would do what no other Democrat or Republican in the White House would do and that was to immediately end the war. That was more than enough for them to flock to his banner, lustily cheer him on, and furiously hector anyone who dared poke at his twists, turns, shifts, and deep knee bends on Iraq.[17] There are no roads, no power, no running water, no sanitation, but plenty of Taliban. The temperature is approaching 120 degrees this time of year, and the Marines are wearing 80 pounds of body armor. The supplies you are providing must be air-dropped to them. It is likely the unit won't be coming out of that hellhole until September. Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain are ready to square off to see who will become this nation's 44th president.[19] "There appears to be no issue that Barack Obama is not willing to reverse himself on for the sake of political expedience," said Alex Conant, a spokesman for the national Republican Party. It might be working. Despite disarray in Republican John McCain's camp, Bush's dismal approval ratings and just 17 percent of the public saying the nation is moving in the right direction, recent polls show Obama unable to build a solid lead over his GOP rival.[10]

Republican John McCain, who has said the war was mismanaged early on but has been a vocal supporter of the later troop surge, pounced on the chance to criticize Obama. "We are all absolutely committed to ending this war, but on Thursday, Barack Obama's words indicated that he also shared John McCain's commitment to securing the peace beforehand," said spokesman Tucker Bounds. "What's really puzzling is that Barack Obama still doesn't understand that his words matter."[13]

The media is trying to sell McCain by disparging Obama and his message.There is no confusion about Obama's plans to end the war in Iraq.His intentions are clear.What the world will look like after he becomes president is not known and cannot be known at this time.The confusion in this campaign exists with McCain and the Republican party.But the media disregards the obvious in its attempt to keep the horse race alive.The media is trying to make news where none exist; it should stict to its traditional role which is to report the news and the facts about the two campaigns.[18] There have been about 4,800 foreclosures, well below the national average. Obama: He wants to cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the Social Security tax. He wants another economic stimulus package, with new tax relief of $300 per family. He would establish a $10 billion foreclosure-prevention fund to help homeowners facing the loss of their homes. He would eliminate the income tax for all seniors making less than $50,000 a year. McCain: He would double the personal tax exemption for each dependent from $3,500 to $7,000. He wants to extend President Bush's tax cuts, which are scheduled to expire in 2010. He would create a new mortgage plan to allow hard-pressed homeowners to retire the existing loan and replace it with a loan guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration. He would reduce the federal corporate income tax from 35 percent to 25 percent. Obama: He wants to expand preschool and Head Start funding and reform No Child Left Behind by fully funding the program. In higher education, he would create the opportunity tax credit to ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is free for most Americans. McCain: He believes parents should be allowed to choose where their children go to school. He thinks all federal financial support should be predicated on providing parents the ability to move their children from failing schools. He does not address higher education. Obama: He believes in full disclosure of earmarks. In his first three years in the Senate he proposed $740 million in earmarks, of which about one-third were approved.[20]

Since Truman, control of the executive and legislative branches is almost twice as likely to be split - 18 to 10 over the last 28 Congresses - between the parties. Americans are so comfortable splitting control it could be argued they implicitly desire it. This split is like a political coin toss. On the Republican side, presidential dominance has not helped them with Congress - holding the White House 36 of the last 56 years - but having control of even one house of Congress for only 20 of those years. On the Democratic side, congressional dominance has not aided them with the presidency - holding both houses of Congress for 36 years but the presidency for only 20 years. Neither party has seen its strength in one branch help it succeed in the other. The presidential candidates in this election likely only reinforce this. Mr. McCain often has been at odds with his congressional brethren - his opposition on many issues earning him the "maverick" label now propelling him. Mr. Obama's message of "change" also is not entirely appealing to his congressional colleagues in charge for the last two years.[21] As an elected politician yourself, you should clearly understand the goal of Obama's compaign strategy: win, damnit, and end the 8 year reign of the war criminals. Early polls suggest his strategy might be appealing to the majority of voters that decide our national elections (like it or not). Edwards was my dog in the fight because he was closest to a pro working class candidate (not by a lot), but in this election any old yellow dog gets my vote. Your article at the outset gives all the right reasons for voting Democratic this year, then you turn left-wing progressive pissy--the current version of the infamous 'Infantile Disorder".[22]

Starting with his former policy advisor who said 16 months to pull out of Iraq was a best care scenario, his campaign has been trying to find ways out of that promise. They're going to wiggle out of it whenever it will not cost them the election and big jobs for all the big players in his campaign. It's incredibly cynical that he suggests that saying he's going to "refine" his timetable is not a change. It's amazingly cynical, but the Obama campaign is used to getting away with worse, since the biased media doesn't hold him to the same standards as other candidates.[18] "I was a little puzzled by the frenzy that I set off by what I thought was a pretty innocuous statement. I am absolutely committed to ending the war," Obama told reporters on his campaign plane. "For me to say that I'm going to refine my policies I don't think in any way is inconsistent with prior statements and doesn't change my strategic view that this war has to end and that I'm going to end it as President," Obama said. Obama also said he did not misspeak on the war last week. Obama suggested the media might have overanalyzed what he was trying to say about his phased timetable for getting U.S. forces out of Iraq.[13] Today, there was a different rationale. The confusion was not his fault, Mr. Obama said, but rather the media'''s for seizing on three words he uttered in Fargo, N.D., when he suggested he would be open to '''refine my policies''' on Iraq. '''I was surprised by how finely calibrated every single word was measured,''' he said, speaking to reporters as he flew here from Montana. Mr. Obama touched off a stir on Thursday when he said he would consult American military commanders in Iraq before saying whether he would continue to pursue a proposed timetable of withdrawing combat troops within 16 months of taking office. A few hours later, he took the rare step of calling a second news conference to reiterate his commitment to end the war. '''I was a little puzzled by the frenzy that I set off by what I thought was a pretty innocuous statement,''' he said, speaking on Saturday about the episode for the first time.[18]

Call him slippery or nuanced, Barack Obama's core position on Iraq has always been more ambiguous than audacious. Now it is catching up with him as his latest remarks are questioned by the Republicans, the mainstream media, and the antiwar movement. He could put his candidacy at risk if his audacity continues to shrivel. I first endorsed Obama because of the nature of the movement supporting him, not his particular stands on issues. The excitement among African-Americans and young people, the audacity of their hope, still holds the promise of a new era of social activism. The force of their rising expectations, I believe, could pressure a President Obama in a progressive direction and also energize a new wave of social movements.[22] ST. LOUIS (AP) - Barack Obama says he was "a little puzzled by the frenzy" set off by what he considered "a pretty innocuous statement" on Iraq earlier this week. Obama said he would "continue to refine" his policy after an upcoming trip to Iraq. Republicans and other said the statement sounded like he was softening his position on a troop withdrawal.[23] There's some snarkiness out there today toward Barack Obama from reporters after he chided them for their coverage of his recent statements on Iraq. We reporters, like all humans, do sometimes bristle at criticism, but everyone who erroneously reported that Obama had somehow changed his position ought to just go ahead and swallow this medicine. Obama simply did not change his position, as some reported he did.[24]

Barack Obama is an adult who treats us like adults. Maybe we will get an adult in the White House this time. It's clear, Bill Press, that Obama and his brain trust are uncertain of how far they must move to the center so as not to antagonize the non-idealogists who make up much of the middle class on such phony issues of patriotism and faith while appealing to all segments of society on economic issues which are painfully very real. This strategy is particularly important in the traditionally red state push now being tried. They're pretty sure the left will not abandon them even as their stances on Iraq and FISA soften, just as they're pretty sure that Hillary's supporters, still smarting from their recent defeat, will eventually come home. Time will tell if their fine tuning will work.[15] Barack Obama talks about hope and moving the country in a new direction. All these people here just post Hate. They hate everyone that doesn't look like them or think like them, just like Rove and the rest of the Repukes. At least the Hillary supporters a couple of months ago were halfway decent (delusional, but decent) compared to these McInsane supporters.[8]

While the Obama campaign's principal goal is to win the presidency, "I think in a state like Texas, there's House races, there's state Senate races, and we're going to encourage people to get involved," Plouffe said. The better-heeled Obama campaign, which is bypassing public financing and its campaign limits, also hopes that efforts in some states normally ceded to Republicans will force the John McCain campaign to spend some of their limited resources defending turf usually taken for granted.[25] "Refinement" is merely a three-dollar''political word for "Snafu." It didn't change Obama's fundamental position on Iraq one bit.'' Obama's terminology was also invested''in the happy quality of playing to the middle -- those voters who, like most others, detest our presence in Iraq but are susceptible to John McCain's argument of Democratic hastiness.[26]

PM is a dupe, and as long as sites like buzzflash keep hoping for change with Wall Street bought candidates (backed by Buffet and Soros after all) like Obama, it will just be more of the same. Insanity is as they say, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Adlai Stevenson once said that he'd stop accusing the Republicans of lying if the Republicans started telling the truth.And this poster will stop complaining when the Democrats start doing what their constituents want--out of Iraq, impeachment, end to assaults on civil liberties.[26] The reason these statements by Obama are picked up by the press and kept alive by discussion is not because the press is out to get him or he's being too closely scrutinized. It's because there is a growing unease about Obama and his constant flip flopping and his habit of blaming others for campaign setbacks. Whether Democrats want to admit it or not there exists out there in the world an anxiety about this man's character. If that anxiety wasn't real and growing these stories would disappear quickly. They're sticking and they're not going to go away, no matter how much Obama's PR people want to market him as the young, cool candidate. He's no JFK and the truth is if JFK lived in the kind of paranoid post 9/11 media world we live in today, he wouldn't fare all that great.[18] The Media just can't get it right. Obama plans to talk to the generals and learn "first hand" in a few hours the entire situation in Iraq but plans to continue on with his full plan of removing all of our troops from Iraq in 16 months no matter what the generals tell him. Obama has judgment based on his own judgment.[8] Politicians are usually willing to risk that for the chance to court the center. Obama has been highlighting positions anathema to the left on several issues, though some have long been part of his policy. On Iraq, Obama said Thursday that his upcoming trip there might lead him to refine his promise to quickly remove U.S. troops from the war. He now supports broader authority for the government's eavesdropping program and legal immunity for telecommunications companies that participated in it, supporting the bill after some protections were added. The handgun control proponent reacted to the Supreme Court overturning the District of Columbia's gun ban by saying he favors both an individual's right to own a gun as well as government's right to regulate ownership.[10] "I'm sure I'll have more information and continue to refine my policy." He left the impression that his talks with military commanders there could refine his promise to remove U.S. combat troops within 16 months of taking office. Less than four hours later, after the town hall meeting, Obama appeared before reporters for another statement and round of questions to "try this again." "Apparently, I was not clear enough this morning," he said. He blamed any confusion on the McCain campaign, which he said had "primed the pump with the press" to suggest "we were changing our policy when we haven't." "I have said throughout this campaign that this war was ill- conceived, that it was a strategic blunder and that it needs to come to an end," he said.[7]

During the Missouri stop Obama, who has made history by becoming the first black major-party presidential nominee, made frequent references to the civil rights movement and continuing struggles in the black community. Acknowledging that he might be criticized for "blaming the victim," Obama also preached individual responsibility by talking of the need for parents to help children with homework and turn off the TV, to pass on a healthy self-image to daughters, and teach boys to respect women. His Republican rival, John McCain, who was taking a break from campaigning during the long U.S. Independence Day holiday weekend, got some support from a national veterans group.[2] Montana - Barack Obama spent the U.S. Independence Day holiday in the western state of Montana, watching a parade, eating a hot dog and trying to woo moderate voters in the traditionally Republican stronghold. Obama, accompanied by his wife, two daughters, sister and other relatives, watched the town's Fourth of July parade before going to a campaign-sponsored "family picnic" for hundreds of people. The presumptive Democratic nominee, who has highlighted the theme of patriotism throughout the week, talked to the crowd about his personal background of being raised by a single mother.[27]

Senator Barack Obama said that on December 12, 2007 in a speech in Clinton, Iowa. At the time he was still one of the pack of Democratic presidential candidates jostling and elbowing trying to get a knock out edge over the others for the Democratic presidential nomination. That included first and foremost Hillary Clinton. He mercilessly pounded her then and afterwards in speeches for backing the war and dutifully voting for war appropriations.[17] Senator Barack Obama has passionately and eloquently articulated his position on the Iraq war, and how the nation was bamboozled into sacrificing its precious youth for this disaster. Recently Obama stated that his intention while in Iraq is to evaluate the changing nuances so he can refine his plans to end the war.[8] Obama's position, which always left a trail of unasked questions, now plants a seed of doubt, justifiably, among the peace bloc of American voters who harbor a legacy of betrayals beginning with Lyndon Johnson's 1064 pledge of "no wider war" through Richard Nixon's "secret plan for peace" to Ronald Reagan's Iran-Contra scandal and the deep complicity of Democrats in the evolution of the Iraq War. It is difficult to understand Obama's motivation. Perhaps it is his lifetime success at straddling positions and disarming potential opponents.[22]

I'd predict a 50-0 sweep in that matchup, or in Obama's case, maybe a 57-0 sweep. As it is, a corrupt and deeply biased media establishment has inflated this paper tiger into a giant.'' The MSM are totally in the tank for Obama and their reporting shows it.'' A lot of people are sick of this.'' 4 more months of this crap will be more than the American public can stomach. I believe the two decisive factors in the elections are going to be (1)'' A sizeable majority of the public is going to blame the Dems for the oil+food shortage.'''' (2)'' The Iraq War is won and everbody is beginning to realize this, destroying the credibility of the MSM on this topic. There is a third factor that is taking its toll:'' Obama throws his "friends" under the bus at the first sign of political trouble.''[5] Mr. Obama formed his opinion about the war with Iraq without the facts. He has admitted that he did not have access to the intelligence in 2004, and we know he did not have access to it in 2002. He passed off his opinion formed without knowledge of the intelligence as proof of his "good judgment" and the media lapped it up and promoted him for his good judgment in being "right" about the war. He was happy for the media support and their taking his words as gospel then. Why is he complaining now. He now states that he is going through some form of internship of sorts about being a presidential candidate and he would be better in six months.[18] "We need to finish the job no matter who is president," the ads say, according to Hegseth. The organization will also send its members to about a dozen swing states as part of a four-month education campaign that will "call for victory in Iraq and Afghanistan." Earlier, Obama spent July 4 in the western state of Montana, continuing his attempt to woo moderate voters who could be key to the November presidential election.[3] Costas Panagopoulos, of Fordham University's elections and campaign management program, argued that while the Iraq trip could help Obama show flexibility, politics might dictate otherwise. "It seems on both the right and the left that most people more or less agree with his position on the issue of Iraq."[6]

All was lost. Obama had abused and''abandoned''his base for the last time, said the former, with the latter''lapping it up.'' He's an unprincipled cad of the old, not the new, politics, they said, and''thereby undeserving of the left's angelic support. We'''re going to try this again. Apparently, I wasn'''t clear enough this morning on my position with respect to the war in Iraq.[26] If who ever against the Iraq war for any reason, then would you serve the country for any reason? If you don't serve the country in uniform like Obama, then the Iraq war in some how, some way is not your business. Obama is the socialist, he will take money form the middle class and give to the lazy, the tax payer will pay for all the bill, not him.[8] '''I am absolutely committed to ending the war.''' When asked whether his Iraq views would be difficult to explain to voters, Mr Obama said: '''What's important is to understand the difference between strategy and tactics. The tactics of how we ensure our troops are safe as we pull out, how we execute the withdrawal, those are things that are all based on facts and conditions.[18]

The two candidates remain divided on the Iraq war. Although he says mistakes have been made in the implementation of the war, McCain has been in favor of the war. He was one of the foremost proponents of the military surge. The surge is working and Obama should acknowledge this, he says.[20] I personally am glad to see that Senator Obama is willing to admit that he may have to refine his policies when and if he enters the White House, due to update intelligence. Senator Obama will obviously be better informed and be better able to make a concrete judgment when and if he enters the White House and has greater access to information. His policy right now is based on the information he currently has. I, personally, am glad to be voting for a candidate who, unlike our current president, is willing to refine his policies as new information arises. This is not "flip-flopping," as Senator McCain and parts of the media are emphasizing, but rather sound policy-decision making.[18] Obama likes comparing himself to G.W. as pretty much anyone comes out okay by comparison. Compared to Senator Clinton, or Senator McCain for that matter, Obama's change with every political wind philosophy establishes him as the no character, no integrity, and no honesty candidate.[18] At a time that public interest in the war is receeding before economic concerns, it is time for the strongest possible reassertion of voter demands for peace. The peace movement assumption should be that there is no one in Obama's inner circle of advisers to be counted on, no mainstream columnist to catch his eye with a persuasive column favoring withdrawal. They never have. Only the voice of the peace voters - and the countless activists who have volunteered on his behalf - can command his attention now. Are you beginning to realize just how serious this issue is becoming? Just imagine if Hollywoodans like Sean Penn, Susan Saradon, Tim Robbins, and Hayden's ex-wife Jane Fonda start voicing such views about the junior senator from Illinois. The only question remaining is whether anti-war media members will keep the pressure on Obama concerning this issue, or let their own pragmatism rule the day.[5] Later the same day in two news conferences, Obama sought to clarify. He said that any refinement would not be related to his promise to remove combat forces within 16 months of taking office, but rather to the number of troops needed to train Iraqis and fight al-Qaida. Speaking to reporters flying with him between campaign stops today, Obama said he didn't misspeak and suggested the media and critics read unintended significance into the remarks. He added: "I am absolutely committed to ending the war."[23] I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position." He promised to summon the Joint Chiefs of Staff on his first day in office "and I will give them a new mission and that is to end this war, responsibly and deliberately, but decisively." He said that when he talked earlier about refining his policy after talking with commanders in Iraq, he was referring not to his 16-month time line, but to how many troops might need to remain in Iraq to train the local army and police and what troop presence might be needed "'to be sure al-Qaida doesn't re-establish a foothold there."[7]

I don't blame Obama for reconsidering and recalibrating his stance (vis-a-vis Iraq) as new information becomes available. It's what GW should have done. I don't buy the DNC koolaid and anti Bush talking points, but neither do I buy the inference that a presidential candidate needs to set his agenda in stone and stick to it.[18] No, Nero makes Bush look like a pillar of strength and wisdom; Obama makes Bush look like a near-do-well frat-boy who was born with the inverse-Midas touch; no, scratch that, Bush makes Bush, McCain and the neo-conservative play for executive power look like yesterday's news.[18] McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds responded in a statement: "Improving America's schools will take bipartisan leadership and a commitment to the issue, but Barack Obama has never spearheaded education reforms while in the U.S. Senate and has no record of working across the aisle for change."[9] "There appears to be no issue that Barack Obama is not willing to reverse himself on for the sake of political expedience," said Alex Conant, a spokesman for the national Republican Party. "Obama's Iraq problem undermines the central premise of his candidacy and shows him to be a typical politician."[7]

Obamas flipflops are growing to legendary proportions here. Iraq is what he won the nomination on and if he changes course on that,I think it could ruin him.This was his main point in all the Primaries and if he flips on this, it shows he has no backbone. The Clintons were hailed and mocked for triangulating, this guy invented "Full Circle Politics".Even his surrogates can't keep his issues straight.[5]

Despite all the negative signs for Republicans - trailing badly in generic balloting and most important issues - Mr. McCain trailed Mr. Obama by only 46 percent to 42 percent in Gallup tracking polls at the end of June. Just over four months from the election, he could very well win the presidency. Congressional Republicans can take only limited comfort from this. Many Republican presidents did little for their party's congressional fortunes.[21] The problem was that a lot of people were goaded into believing that Reverend Wright defined Obama. Thats why they never saw all these intrinsic and wonderful qualities coming from Obama. Some views regarded as flip-flops are infact not but have always represented his views on those issues. Take the issue of support for death penalty, if I had not read the Audacity of Hope, I would had regarded that as a flip-flop. Most of these things are embellished in his books. There are some things like the Public finance, which is a flip-flop but as far as am concerned, his flip-flops are progressive while those of Mccain are retrogressive.[8] John McCain spent more than five years in a Vietnamese prison and was brutally tortured for much of that time. When his father was named commander of U.S. forces in the Vietnam area, McCain was offered early release in an obvious propaganda ploy, but he turned it down. He would go only if every prisoner taken in before him was released as well. The offer, of course, was refused, and McCain continued to suffer abuse from his captors until his ultimate release. He is one tough cookie. I've dealt with McCain in the past and found him unpleasant and intemperate, but I admire his determination. His candidacy was all but written off a year ago by most people, but he persevered and won the Republican nomination in a romp. Whether you like him or not, don't bet against him.[19] Before leaving Montana, Obama took a swipe at Republican rival John McCain while speaking via satellite to a conference of the National Education Association, the largest teachers union. Of McCain, Obama said for "someone who has been in Washington for 30 years, he's got a pretty slim record on education and when he has taken a stand it has been the wrong one." He said McCain had voted against such popular proposals as increasing funding for higher education scholarship and hiring 100,000 new teachers.[11]

Answers included high gas prices, the war in Iraq and the economy. Taking note of the high gasoline prices, Republican John McCain has changed his position and now wants to allow oil companies to drill off the nation's coasts, if the affected states approve.[20] I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position." Republican presidential candidate John McCain says a shake-up in the leadership of his campaign was part of a "natural evolution" as the organization becomes more national in scope. McCain's campaign announced this week that top adviser Steve Schmidt would assume a broad portfolio of duties, with nearly full control over message and strategy.[28]

"Sen. Obama insinuated that the McCain campaign had primed the press and were to blame for the interpretation of his position." That is exactly correct. I do not want to find out what it would be like when he tries to explain himself through a second press conference after a period of hours when he has made a boneheaded comment that he didn't realize he did, after 20 years of listening to the shapers of his thinking, when those he irritated have nukes.[8] Obama is a simpleton who will sell us down the river, and I hope to God the people that really run the military will not do as he says. He is an utter disaster. What's worse is that what we know about him is far less than what we don't know. We have no idea of his true political allegiance. We know that he's a fake Christian, from that black liberation nonsense. We know his brain's been fried on drugs and that he has memory problems (he writes one thing in his books and then says different things on the campaign trail). He's had Islamic indoctrination -- who really knows whether he's not a plant? I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. He's got associates that are smarmy and evil, he lies about everything (like working his way through college), and he simply is someone who doesn't deserve to be president. He shouldn't even be running. He's a snake-oil salesman and you bozos who bought stock in his company haven't got the intestinal fortitude to admit you were hoodwinked. The military will not follow this anti-American pig.[8] At one campaign stop Senator Obama promised a "thorough assessment" of the plan to withdraw a combat brigade every month. In a second, hastily convened press conference, he insisted his policies had not changed, and he had "not equivocated" or "searched for maneuvering room" on Iraq. Consultations with commanders in coming weeks would be focused on the size of U.S. forces needed to train and equip Iraqi military and police units, as well as maintaining a "counterterrorism strike force" to prevent al-Qaeda from making a comeback, he said.[12] Senator Obama also faced an online backlash from liberal supporters. He made his comments on Iraq at the start of a campaign through western states, traditional Republican territory.[12]

Last month, more American troops were killed in Afghanistan than Iraq. Under rising Republican pressure, Obama on Thursday said he may "refine" his policies after meeting U.S. commanders in Iraq on a trip expected this month. Hours later, he hurriedly called a second press conference to insist he had not made the "flip flop" on Iraq that many observers are expecting, as he retools his message for the political center ground.[6]

Blaming the media for confusion over his Iraq policy, Senator Barack Obama says was surprised by "how finely calibrated every single word was measured."[18] I really enjoy your show. On this topic you are worrying about nothing. Barack Obama came out again on July 3 and reiterated his postion. He was crystal clear. It was wonderful to a leader talk so clearly about what he was going to do. He was the one that will make the mission decision to end the war. This focus should be why does Bush/McCain/McBush want to stay indefinitely. It is imperialism or empire building. They want a permanent presence in Iraq.[15] Democrat Barack Obama may not win Texas -- most analysts still rank Texas among the reddest of the red states -- but his team is watching to aid strategic races. Even while Obama talks about reaching across the aisle in office, his campaign handlers are mindful that gains in Democratic House and Senate seats will be important to Obama's efforts should he reach the White House. They know that legislatures are where congressional districts are drawn.[25] Each of us are proud of our heritages but do not use it as a badge of honor to try to elevate ourselves above others.Kelljoy, here's a pragmatic suggestion, why don't you take your racist inflated egos and white pride and move to another country where you can enjoy only people of the same skin perduasion. I wonder who would be superior there? You had better, because here in America, your kind are about to be shattered, because Barack Obama, "the spook", as you referred to him, is about to upset your world as you know it, because Bsrack Obama will be the next president of these United States, so I hope your racism gives you comfort when you will have to answer to him.[8] There is something to the idea that the MSM has an incentive to make the contest closer than it is, incite hype where none is warranted, etc. Take, for example the way everyone threw out all the leading context of Gen. W. Clarks famous "I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president," it was in direct response to Scheiffer's statement that: "I have to say, Barack Obama has not had any of those experiences either, nor has he ridden in a fighter plane and gotten shot down."[15] Barack Obama clearly said we are getting our troups out. He gave a time table with common sense adjustments as required, but his intent to get the troops out within 16 months. He is quite comfortable with his position and that he will have the authority to do it as President.[15] Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Saturday thanked the National Education Association for its endorsement but also made it clear that he continues to support merit pay for teachers. His position is a controversial one with the 3.2 million member group and it has earned him criticism when he addressed the NEA in 2007.[9]

WASHINGTON (AP) - Barack Obama denied Saturday that he intends to do anything but end the war if he wins the White House, attempting to put an end to speculation that he is inching away from a promise to withdraw combat troops within 16 months of taking office.[3]

Nixon did not got us out of VN you guys need to dig and study more of your history.Ixon was forced out VN by congress not funding anymore money. I just want to put that message out to you Obama lovers to understand the President cannot just say "That's it no more war". Come on guys think for just a little I don't even think at this point Congress can even be able to do such a thing however they did prommised so to win their o6 majority in the house.[8] '''I wasn'''t saying anything that I hadn'''t said before,''' Obama said. '''I don'''t think in anyway it is inconsistent with prior statements and doesn'''t change my strategic view that this war has to end and that I am going to end it as president," he repeated again.[8]

I want to pay attention to what'''s happening on the ground.''' Sen. Obama -- who plans a trip to Iraq this month -- took issue with reporters who '''finely calibrated''' his statements, and specific words, on his Iraq War plan.[8] Issues on which Democrats can honestly disagree. Then he reversed course on providing immunity to phone companies who joined George Bush's wiretapping blitz. Those were not issues central to the campaign. Obama could shift positions on such secondary issues, most observers agreed, as long as he didn't waffle on the war.[15] I watched all the debates and the only democrats calling for an immediate and complete withdrawal were Kucinich, Gravel, and Richardson. Hillary and Obama both hedged their bets all along. As far as oil goes, we went to war for oil, we gave billions in subsidies to oil companies, we gave Saudi Arabia and it's allies everything they want and we still have $4.00+ a gallon gas prices in an election year.[8] Of course, there is the need to end the Republican reign that began with a stolen election followed by eight years of war and torture, corporate gouging, environmental decay, domestic spying and right-wing court appointments, just in case we forget who Obama is running against.[22]

Making a less than two-hour stop in the battleground state of Missouri, the Democratic presidential nominee implored the thousands attending a national meeting of the African Methodist Episcopal Church, one of the nation's largest and most politically and civically active black denominations, to help fix national and local ills. He preached individual responsibility, saying he knew he risked criticism for "blaming the victim" by talking of the need for parents to help children with homework and turn off the TV, to pass on a healthy self-image to daughters, and teach boys both to respect women and "realize that responsibility does not end at conception." Obama's main message was the government's duty to address what he said are "moral problems" — such as war, poverty, joblessness, homelessness, violent streets and crumbling schools — and to employ religious institutions to do it. "As long as we're not doing everything in our individual and collective power to solve the challenges we face, the conscience of our nation cannot rest," he said.[16]

In 2005, Obama joined Republicans in passing a law dubiously called the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) that would shut down state courts as a venue to hear many class action lawsuits. Obama in effect voted to deny redress in many of the courts where these kinds of cases have the best chance of surviving corporate legal challenges. It forces them into the backlogged Republican-judge dominated federal courts. Why would a civil rights lawyer knowingly make it harder for working-class people to have their day in court, in effect shutting off avenues of redress?; 16.[26] Obama has said from day one that we will be as careful leaving Iraq as we were careless getting in. He's said that for months- every body knows we can't rush for the exits and leave half our people there like Vietnam.[26] Perpetual anti-war activist Hayden is frustrated that people like he and Cindy Sheehan have failed to mobilize a '60s-like anti-war movement, and now has to confront the fact thta Obama and the Party will push not risk losing an election by pushing for immediate withdrawal when the Iraq situation is (at worst) in doubt, and at best, leaning toward victory.[5]

We've also had Administrations who install inexperienced managers into positions of great responsibility. Obama does want to pull out everyone from Iraq on his first day on the job. He knows that doing so wouldn't work. It seems clear that he's not just going to listen to people, he's going to make 'em do some of the work.[18] Exactly. but not by Obama, but by the drive-by media. Obama said exactly the same things he has said for over a year, but somehow the media is twisting his words to mean he's changing his Iraq position.[15] I think the only people who are confused is the media - Obama hasn't changed his position at all. It must be a slow newsweek.[8] Look at the polls. Bactrack Obama is outspending McCain 6 to 1, but can't increase the distance from him in the polls. Now, Obama is finally being vetted by the media, political analyst, and yes, he is flip flopping all over the place. America is turning their backs on Obama and I continue to see his campaign implode.[8] It might actually be better that the pathetic media keeps pushing the perception that McCain can actually win. This will help keep the Obama campaign and Obama supporters on their toes until November.[8]

Why does it seem as though journalists are working together with the McCain campaign? I don't understand. From my point of view, it is either that or they are simply borderline incompetent. Sen. Obama said that he will "refine his policies" after talking with the generals in Iraq.[18] You do speak for many of us. Don't forget to add that, unlike McCain, Obama intends to take responsible action that is best for America, Iraq, and our soldiers even if it means he must go slower or more piece by piece than he and our people would prefer.[15]

McCain has said troops may have to be kept in Iraq for years. There should be only limited withdrawals until the country is stabilized, he says. Both senators voted for the recent legislation extending the GI Bill to veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, although McCain initially had reservations because he thought it would encourage personnel to leave the military service.[20] "Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was. The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraqs leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops.[17]

Mr. Obama is a vacuous, antiwar leftist. He champions appeasement abroad and milk-toast socialism at home. His call for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq would snatch military defeat from the jaws of victory. On abortion, he is to the left of many in his own party.[29] Obama has always and consistently said that he would disengage from Iraq, that he would be as careful getting out as they were getting in, and that he would consult with military leaders about what would be the best way to get that done.[18]

Republicans, who have claimed Obama needs an update on the situation in Iraq, e-mailed a midday broadside.[7] Republicans pounced on the chance to characterize Obama as altering a core campaign policy "for the sake of political expedience." He denied equally forcefully that he was shifting positions.[28] Puzzled? That's a new defense for Obama. What happened to throwing the race card out there? I must admit puzzled does sound better than his claims of not remembering--lies in the past when confronted with the gun ban document he signed, or the reception he attended at Rezko's for Auchi, or the ever-changing amount his campaign received from Rezko, relationship with Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi--and on and on. Nothing but a racist fraud--no integrity, poor judgment, completely untrustworthy man with no credentials at all for the job he is seeking.[8] In his excellent book on the media, Breaking the News, James Fallows points out an odd irritability that tends to creep into many reporters' political coverage. This post seems to me to embody this irritability. If you're frustrated about how Obama's campaign treats the media, or are trying to express some aspect of your opinion about Obama, I and I presume many other readers would prefer a straightforward, separate account of your observations, so posts like this might come out minus the snark.[18] Perhaps Senator Obama is shocked at how much frenzy there is over the statement because what he said is actually no different than anything he had said previously on the subject. I thought he called the second news conference to remind the media of that.[18] After the Rev. Wright situation, it is quite a stupid statement for Obama say that he is surprised as how measured his statements are to the media. I've read "Audacity of Hope" and Obama has written a section in his book about how the media tends to use a politician's words against them - so you will have to excuse me if I ask the Senator from Illinois to really stop making lame excuses as to why his statements can be taken out of whack when you're not watching what you say.[18]

Obama just got 2 days of free media coverage to make sure people understand he wants to end the war as soon as possible but to do in a sensible way. [18] The right would have had a field day. At which point those''abovementioned few on the left likely would have said, Yep, Obama had best watch himself. He's''placing himself''in a right-wing trap, he's opening himself to''Catch-22''fire -- precisely what we feared. He should have known better, because we always do. My other guess -- and there's no polling available on this yet, so guessing is as good as it gets -- is that actual''disappointment from the''progressive base''over Obama's actual words was far more limited and narrow than the media would have had us believe.[26] Obama is right. the press coverage of this non-story has been embarrassing. A year-and-a-half ago (October 2007) Obama said he was committed to a sixteen month plan tailored to conditions on the ground and the counsel of the military. this week he said exactly the same thing. The herd mentality of the media jumps on his use of the word "refine," and then it's off to the races.[18] Clearly Obama's become a republican. I think this might have been the Republican plan by having the corporate controlled media back him with such bias. Once he's elected, he will announce he's switched parties.[18]

We could not have two more different choices. Obama not only couldn't have run for president when I was a kid, he couldn't have used the same water fountain, attended the same school or sat beside me on the bus. His nomination says we are getting beyond race in the country. Of course, if Obama doesn't win, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and their ilk will scream racism, and the liberal media will be willing accomplices. Most whites I have talked to who say they won't vote for Sen. Obama are more concerned with his politics than with his skin color.[19] Obama is waaaay to urban-centric for my vote today. The candidate field is weak enough that he could gain my vote by election time. That just drives the repubs nuts, I know. Since the repubs have turned into democrats these days, I don't care.[18] Texas Democrats also hold out hope that the Obama campaign, if it continues to raise money like it did during the primary elections, will have enough resources to indeed continue a 50-state strategy, and actually spend money on TV ads in Texas.[25] The proper response?''The ambiguity of "refinement." It's general-election wiggle-room galore -- that marvelous stuff that''victorious campaigns are made of. As for those few, dyspeptic voices on the left who''already seem habitually unsettled by Obama's pragmatism? I think they misunderstood what he''meant by a "new politics" for Democrats, which in fact embraces a certain bifurcation.'' He intended a kinder and gentler mode of the art, but''he also''meant the''winning kind.''[26]

Arriving in Fargo, Obama hastily called a news conference to discuss news of a sixth straight month of nationwide job losses, but the questioning turned to Iraq policy and his impending trip there. "I am going to do a thorough assessment when I'm there," he said.[7] We would have immigrants coming in who are high quality individuals that respect America and her laws. McCain's immigration policy shows that he is not willing to stand up and make the tough calls. To me that's a bigger deal than Obama saying he'll make the decision on troop withdrawal after talking with the generals on the ground and assessing the dynamics at that time.[18] Obama wants to start bringing troops home immediately, McCain says the earliest we could bring troops home is 2013.[15]

McCain has now put Schmidt at the helm, and hell hath no fury with Schmidt running the show. He will make sure Obama's dark side is brought to the forefront and will not leave any stone unturned about Obama. You see, McCain, has been in politics, people know his faults.[8] We all know that most of the bloggers that post negative biased message against Obama are either working for Mccain campain or pro Hillary extremists. It is very clear that regular voters don't have this kind of ruthless attitude against Obama.[8] Submitted by vtjozef on Sat, 07/05/2008 - 12:01pm. I hope you are not disappointed because instead of "Obama. positioning himself to be president of all states and regions of the USA", I see Obama as being a president of the ruling elite like Zbigniew Brzezinski and the corporate establishment that has allowed and abetted him to get this far[26] Perhaps the 'change we can believe in' was all an illusion, something sufficient to tip the scales from the first viable female candidate for president to the first viable African-American candidate for president. Now that his nomination is secured, Mr. Obama can focus his attention on saying and doing the good corporate thing, rather than the good moral thing; any intersecting of the two is purely coincidental.[1] Sen. Obama has changed many of his positions on many issues since. He will have to do that over again and again in the future. Pretty soon you'll find him to be just another politician, as he was, before he ran for president. He'll find these changes necessary as his idealist glitter wears out in the face of reality. You're saying he might, sometime in the future, change his position on something.[15] Submitted by robertjones2001 on Sat, 07/05/2008 - 1:27pm. The problem is that nobody noticed that Obama never stated his positions during the the primary campaign. He just talked in platitutdes about "change". His die-hard supporter cult has their head in the sand. They want to believe and they want change. It is sad that those Obama apostles are in for quite a shock when reality sets in.[26] Obama has now declined public campaign financing and is poised to vote for telecom immunity next week ''' in spite of promises to filibuster against it. Obama has fallen into a dangerous pattern of capitulation that he cannot reconcile with his growing popularity as an agent of change. Fasten your seat belts, kids -- it's going to be a bumpy ride.[26]

Smooth talker tries to smooth things over as usual. Nothing was over blown He changed his stance and time table. After being so Infatic on His Iraq plans. When you change your mind, ideas and how you stand on you own polices and platforms, It shows instabilty. He can lead a country or have the people believe in him, when he doesn't know what he believes in Himself. The Past two weeks He has let americans down with his changing his mind and stance. Trying to fluff it over only makes him look worse. We he ever stand up and be a man and be firm on any of his polices, I think not. I honestly do not think he knows what he wants besides a vote.[8] American really dodged a bullet on that one. Most people in America would never want a president that stands up in front of the country and LIES about being under SNIPER FIRE! Too reminiscent of her "has been" husband BillyBob wagging his finger at all of us lying about "not having sex with that woman." Vote for McBush if you want you and the handful of die hard loser supporters she has left.[8]

After all McCain's so called military experience he led us into the most senseless war. If as a military guy and all the experience in the senate McCain got the war wrong then why is he even in the senate, let alone run for president. I can not vote for a person who gets his area of expertise so wrong.[8] Mr. McCain consistently supported a strategy for victory. President Bushs mistake was not in waging war; rather, he failed to formulate a policy that would simultaneously achieve our political and military goals.[29]

Aides were seen carting Hula Hoops, colouring books and whiffle balls so the girls could be photographed playing. The relatively low-key campaign day came on the heels of a dustup Thursday for the Illinois senator over his Iraq war policy. [27] All too often our politics still seems trapped in these old, threadbare arguments ''' a fact most evident during our recent debates about the war in Iraq, when those who opposed administration policy were tagged by some as unpatriotic, and a general providing his best counsel on how to move forward in Iraq was accused of betrayal. That's a shot across the bows of MoveOn, whose "Petraeus/Betray Us" ad generated a wave of controversy.[8] We won extremely high energy prices, we won an economy teetering on the brink. That's what we "won". We won a stronger Iran because there is no counterbalance to them. That's what we won. The Iraqi's could have taken care of Saddam in their own way. It was not worth the $TRILLIONS in borrowed money we've spent or the hundreds of thousands of lives ruined or lost on all sides. Invading Iraq based on a pack of Bush lies was the worst foreign policy debacle of this generation.[15]

No wonder you hide behind a made up email handle. "Troll" is such a stupid word that all of you ignoramuses use when you can't support your vapid politics. An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. That would be a description of you - you ignorant slut. I give up on trying to talk any sense to you, and will now report you to the moderator and ask that you be removed from this list so that the adults can have a serious discussion about the future of democracy in America without your Koolaide-drunk spewing about Obama -- a candidate you know nothing about.[26] Would the media ever admit to getting too excited over nothing? No, no, a snarky post blaming it on Obama is the best thing. What the post fails to explain in how Obama's statement actually differed from his previous statements of consulting with his commanders.[18]

You are exactly right, Obama has not changed his position. You see the media needs to make this a "horse race" to keep ratings up. If they find even some fake chink in Obama's armor they go after it and trump it up.[8] Our HuffPollstrology chart helps keep you up to date on the latest poll results, along with the latest horoscope predictions, and the latest online political betting lines - and will hopefully help the polling junkies in the media keep polls in the proper perspective. Mccain vs obama in the General election mccain 43% Gallup Daily VIRGOAugust 29, 1936 It might feel as though you're finally coasting toward the finishing line in a project.[9] Oh yes, the media is trying to influence this election. McCain is given a free pass from the media regarding his flip flops on Iraq. Mcwar stated USA will be in Iraq for 100 years, then he said maybe 50 years. Then he said, in his dream USA be in Iraq until the year 2013. Last week he said "we will withdraw, but we will withdraw with victory and honor". Notice in his earlier statement he gave a timetable for withdrawing and now he is not given a timetable. The media has clearly showing their bias.[8]

I understand when the gullible ditto-heads succumb to mind-control from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and FauxNews. I am stunned on how college trained professional journalist, especially those who fancy themselves as politically astute, get hypnotized into believing whatever the lying GOP war-mongers claim. The media didn't ask the 'Right' questions leading up to the Iraq war, and apparently the media haven't learned their lesson because they are still repeating GOP claims without question.[8] Incidents like the recent spate of reporting and "analysis" on Obama's Iraq stance give dishonor to that profession.[24] Obama just does not have the background to make the important decisions re. foreign affairs. He was so sure of a defeat in Iraq and now he is probably coming to realize just the opposite, but even more than that, Iran has to be considered big time in any decision about Iraq.[8] Obama doesn't get it. In 2002 he made a speech opposing the war, without access to Intelligence paper, trumpeting his superior judgement over then generals, without the responsibility of voting since he was not in Senate at the time. Now in 2008, he said that he will listen to the generals and refine his strategy.[8] I was watching the right-wingers on tv congratulating Obama for coming over to ther side. Can't you see their game? Obama said no such thing, but now the mainstream parses every word (too bad they didnt do this in the run-up to the war) to try to find its secret meaning.[26] "I wasn't saying anything that I hadn't said before." Obama has always said his promise to end the war would require consultations with military commanders and, possibly, flexibility.[30] Obama: "But the overall strategy has failed, because we have not seen any change in behavior amongIraq's political leaders. That is the essence of what we should be trying to do inIraq. That's why I'm going to bring this war to a close.[31] Barack Obama celebrated "active faith" as an obligation of religious Americans and a chief agent of societal change while speaking Saturday to a nearly all-black.[29] Wall Street knows how sick and tired Americans have become under the Republicans and are desperate for normalcy. Wall Street knows Obama fits the old saying about the more things change the more they stay the same.[15]

Colin Powell endorsing Obama would shock the world and hopefully rock all the scary Republican attack dogs who always win.[8] Heh, since I am playing with a "deck" that is "missing a few cards", let's all agree to come back a year from now and see what President Obama has accomplished.[26] Obama also said "mental distress" should not count as a health exception that would permit a late-term abortion, saying "it has to be a serious physical issue," addressing a matter considered crucial to abortion rights activists. The GOP increasingly has sought to take advantage of any opportunity to permanently pin the flip-flopper label on Obama, with all its unappealing associations, and strip him of the shiny-new-penny one he's cultivated up to now.[10] More important than Iraq, however, is the issue of abortion. It is the seminal moral question of our time: Do innocent unborn babies have rights - especially the most precious and fundamental of all, the right to life.[29]

"I will bring our troops out at a pace of one two brigades a month" which would mean the United States would be totally out of Iraq in 16 months. "That is what I intend to do as president of the United States." Later in the session, he said it is possible the 16-month time line could slip if the pace of withdrawal needs to be slowed some months to ensure troop safety.[7] If it was good governing to withdraw troops on an absolutely inflexible schedule regardless of new developments, any stubborn moron would make an excellent president. Look no further than the last eight wonderful years of Cowboy George to see how this theory works out. People who live their lives like that are ultimately taken care of through a form of natural selection, but it takes a bit longer with those born into rich families with political connections.[8] People criticizing Obama for legitimate reasons (e.g. issues, experience) are not racist. I have to wonder about the people who insist on calling him stupid. I realize that "stupid" is what people with small vocabularies always call other people they don't like, but since Obama is so obviously NOT stupid, I do wonder about the motivations.[8] People need to realize that Mccain didn't design any millitary strategy or didn't give any millitary instruction from a high ranking position. He was also a pow and didn't have a chance to learn or give more attention to national security related issues during the vietnam war. This means he is a hero but doesn't have the necessary experience to make decision on national security. As a proof we saw when he was confused betweem Shite and sunni. Apart from that he is too old to be alert on 24/7 to examine and assess the national security situation of the nation.[8]

Grass-roots people power is the only force that can keep alive the astute sense of pragmatism that led Obama to criticize the coming war in 2002.[22] The other issue was when to withdraw. Obama backed up his end the war now rhetoric with another public demand that a firm timetable be set for withdrawal.[17] I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term." Last year, after the Supreme Court upheld a federal ban on late-term abortions, Obama said he "strongly disagreed" with the ruling because it "dramatically departs form previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women."[28] Obama became the first major-party candidate to reject public financing for the general election after earlier promises to accept it. He not only embraced but promised to expand Bush's program to give more anti-poverty grants to religious groups, a split with Democratic orthodoxy. He objected to the Supreme Court's decision outlawing the death penalty for child rapists, drawing attention to his support for the death penalty if used only for the "most egregious" crimes.[10] "We are not shocked when a candidate moves to the centre for the general election. Obama's shifts are striking because he was the candidate who proposed to change the face of politics."[12]

Obama was held out as the only candidate for self-described "true progressives," while Clinton was villified as power-hungry and insufficiently progressive (DLC centrist, Repug-lite, Khrister-right appeaser, willing to say/do anything, blah, blah, blah. ). Now that Obama's the nominee, PM attempts to justify his move to the right as just part of a strategic plan to win the game - a smart, pragmatic politician allowing himself "wiggle room" for the GE. Now if Clinton had done any of these things.[26] Obama, who has made history by becoming the first black major-party presidential nominee, made frequent references to the civil rights movement and continuing struggles in the black community.[16]

Barack Obama says "mental distress" should not qualify as a justification for late-term abortions, a key distinction not embraced by many supporters of abortion rights. In an interview this week with the Christian magazine Relevant, Obama said prohibitions on late-term abortions must contain "a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother."[28] You are old and dispendable. That is part of why I am against the dem. party now. They are not valuing all equally. they have selected barack obama, he was not elected. That is a very different thing.[8] On this site, Arianna Huffington was the first to warn Barack Obama that he would disappoint a lot of his enthusiastic supporters, and not necessarily gain any new ones, by moving too fast to the center. Apparently, he wasn't listening. He started out safely enough: renouncing a pledge to take public financing.[15]

There is still no date for the trip. German news sources are reporting the Obama team is working on a visit during the "second half of this month".[9]

Jose: "Our military will never bow down to a black Marxist - if Obama is elected there will be a coup." Well, now that you guys are all inventing sock puppets with one different letter in your name to hide behind, and then agree with - it's hard to say if you'd be foolish enough to suggest that the U.S. military are traitors.[8] Obama flip flopping, getting caught lying, getting caught with terrorist pals. or just the fact that Obama is so "puzzled" by people not being okay with all of it.[8] I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position." Obama said his overall problem is that he was incorrectly tagged to begin with as being a product solely of his party's left wing, so that statements displaying a broad ideological range are portrayed as shifts when they are not. "When I simply describe what has been my position consistently, then suddenly people act surprised," he lamented earlier this week. His problem may in fact be that he's not handling the shifts quietly enough -- and maybe not forgivably either.[10] Being puzzled? Obama should have felt ashamed to lie to the public again and again in order to get elected. I am puzzled American people are so easy to be fooled by him.[8] Support your XXXX (fill in the blank). It's more than just the base. Listen to the blogs and liberal talk radio and you will see that people are so pissed off that they are soaked in the liquid of Obama's betrayal. That betrayal will become more and more evident as time goes by.[26] There was, of course, some left-leaning outrage expressed by the''vocationally outraged. That, in turn of course, always makes for good copy.'' Asked the media: "Has Obama gone too far this time with his winning strategy? Has he finally lost those who brung him to the dance? Joining us tonight to discuss this internal rebellion[26] At the time, Obama skipped a vote on condeming MoveOn. In general, he seems willing -- almost eager -- to make enemies on the left now that the primary is over; the FISA fight similarly pits him against MoveOn.[8] Obama changing his mind on every issue once he has convinced you numb skulls to vote for him.[22] I do think that Obama has truly earned the name flip flop Obama. He just does not know which way to go on the issues. He is for one thing one day and the next day he has changed his mind.[8] Senator McCain, has huevos that you can only dream of. He could have pulled rank and gone home from that camp, he was offered early release because his father was an Admiral. He chose to let the men that had been there longer than him to go home in the appropriate order. Meanwhile he was being tortured and beaten. If you don't believe this I believe that there is a man by the name of Bud Day, that was in the POW camp with him, that is going to be speaking on his leadership in the camp, and how he took control when he got there. He lift the mens spirits and helped them through their ordeals, and even administered Physical Therapy on Bud Day, and helped him to regain the use of his hand. I think you need to show a little respect for a man that has done these things for our country.[8] Compared to Hillary, McCain is a lightweight. It's like beating up your senile crippled grandfather. I think the GOP needs to seriously look into replacing him if they want to have any chance at winning.[8]

I never voted for Bill Clinton either. He was a politician's politician and in the pockets of big business as far back as the Arkansas state house and so is Hillary. At least Obama is running a campaign funded by small donors and average citizens and doing a damn good job of it. [8] Democrats aren't terribly optimistic that Dingus can beat Craddick, in a heavily Republican five-county district. Dingus has name identification from seven years on the council, is a multi-millionaire who can self-finance his campaign if necessary, and may at least keep Craddick tied down somewhat and spending money and time in defending his seat at home rather than helping his minions in other districts around the state.[25] Four years ago, Republicans branded as a "flip-flop" even the slightest rhetorical or policy change by John Kerry and sent huge replicas of the casual sandals to bob around the Massachusetts Democrat's events, feeding an image of him as a wishy-washy panderer.[10]

The invasion of Iraq was unnecessary, and the Bush administration led the nation into a pre-emptive war based on "propaganda" and dishonesty, former White House. Virginia Republicans will convene in downtown Richmond this weekend to decide on two candidates who could help define the future of the party and the. [21] Which is a lot different from Bush's plan to get out of Iraq once it is secure. Bush thought that troop levels should be determined by the commanders on the ground, and that we needed to end this war in a responsible way.[18] Obama´s withdrawal plan did not set firm deadlines and would keep troops in Iraq if the Bush administration and the Iraqi government met a laundry list of benchmarks.[17]

I have always believed that our invasion of Iraq was a strategic blunder.''' He continued, '''The tactics of how we ensure our troops are safe as we pull out, how we execute the withdrawal. Those are things that are all based on facts and conditions, and you know I'm not somebody who, unlike George Bush, is willing to ignore facts on the basis of my preconceived notions.[8]

I can't imagine how the statement that he would "refine his Iraq policy" after consultation with the military brass in Iraq somehow morphed into a broken promise to remove troops from Iraq.[15]

Vets for Freedom is spending $1.5 million on television ads that will begin running in July, praising the troop buildup, said Pete Hegseth, the 25,000-member groups chairman, in a telephone interview Saturday. The ads will feature veterans talking about the accomplishments theyve seen since the buildup of U.S. troops in Iraq, which McCain has strongly supported, began in early 2007.[2] According to the latest CNN/Opinion Research poll, 30 percent of Americans favor, and 68 percent now oppose the war. Sixty-four percent believe U.S. troop numbers should be cut, compared to 33 percent who think they should remain the same.[6]

Some old fool that has NO plans at all and thinks that the Bush Tax CUTS for the Rich are good. Somebody that won't really run the country, because after a year or two he won't even be able to recognize his grandkids.[8] History clearly does tell us a party's presidential and congressional fortunes do not necessarily coincide. If control of both is the yardstick, more often than not, they do not coincide. Because these fates are not linked, it is unsurprising that candidates run their own races. This in turn further reinforces the disparate outcomes in the White House, Senate and House of Representatives. There is no reason to think this year's election will be any less susceptible to these disparate outcomes than were those of the past.[21]

For one thing, a willingness to hone policy, add nuance or even change one's mind -- especially when new information comes to light -- is not in itself a bad quality in a leader. For another, those partisans who supported a candidate in the primaries are not likely to switch parties and back the other candidate. Often the worst that can happen is they stay home on Election Day.[10] General elections require a broader appeal, particularly to the vast centre of the country's electorate. It's not uncommon as spring fades and November approaches to see candidates de-emphasize or even cast off some of their most extreme positions in favour of policy more palatable to the middle. They mostly do it quietly, or try to anyway.[32]

Obama has held the same position for over 2 years and the MSM only believes he has flip flopped because they don't do nuance very well. Actually, the DO nuance pretty well - they just can't SELL nuance. [15] On one side put down the reasons why you supported/support Obama. Then start crossing them off with bold magic marker as he changes and reverses his positions.[26] Hayden:'' "Obama's position, which always left a trail of unasked questions, now plants a seed of doubt, justifiably, among the peace bloc of American voters[5]

If the republicans are squawking about Obama 'refining a plan', then they've already lost this presidency. Let them continue to'sit' and squawk and bitch about petty little things. It makes the republicans look weak and stupid and their arguments against Obama pointless, even irrelevant.[8] You keep dreaming there buddy. I am sure "Axelrod" and the rest of Obama's team are practicing with him every chance they get right now. They will poke at that old fool and get that old senile fool so spun around he will just lose his temper in front of the whole country.[8] Most Americans do not know about certain pieces of history that are very important to be aware of right now, particularly with regard to how the founding fathers of the United States of America felt about religion. You see, they wanted not only to establish freedom of religion. They wanted to establish freedom from religious bigotry. They wanted not only to ensure that no religious sect or denomination could rule. They wanted to ensure that no religion could rule. Their values were universal, common to all religions, and based on the universal divine imperative that I discussed on the page titled Real Spiritual Values. That is especially important now because certain leaders of the so-called "Christian Right" have been and still are making false claims about the intent of the founding fathers, and they have succeeded to the extent that being a Christian has become a litmus test for being president.[22] I've come to believe the basic problem here is there are hundreds - maybe thousands - of people who make a living selling their comments, and having nothing to say is like a department store with nothing to sell. When there's nothing to say, they make something up. I wish, just one time, Americans would read and investigate for themselves and turn off CNN. They'd find there's no story there.[15]

Listen up, because a new day is dawning. I will not waste my time trying to dissuade either of you with sentiments as to why you should not be a racist in this country of the beautiful "melting pot" or in any other country for that matter, because you seem determined to hold on to your racist hatred like it is a badge of honor.[8] Rove/Schmidt story was all over the media the last few days. I just hope the media gets it right this time.[18]

Obama "puzzled" by Iraq comment frenzy

Obama Strives to Retain Some Flexibility on His Iraq Policy

Obama woos moderate voters with Iraq , abortion comments

Editorial: Iraq and foreign oil companies

Afghan Death Toll Up as Iraq ?s Falls

Iraq sparks scramble for lucrative oil contracts

Army's History of Iraq After Hussein Faults Pentagon

Congress Approves $162 Billion for Iraq , Afghanistan Wars

Bush Meets With Talabani, Cites Progress in Iraq

Iraq Through the Looking Glass(es)

Big Oil and the war in Iraq

Another Female Suicide Bomber Kills 15 in Iraq

Obama "puzzled" by Iraq comment frenzy