Obama In '02!

Senator Obama hopes to become President in 2002, if his exchange with McCain on Iraq is a guide:

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., continued to attack Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., today for suggesting during a Democratic debate that after withdrawing combat troops from Iraq, Obama, as commander in chief, would be willing to send U.S. troops back into Iraq "if al Qaeda is forming a base" there [see Dem debate transcript].

"The fact is, al Qaeda is in Iraq," McCain said. "Al Qaeda is in Iraq today. If we left Iraq there's no doubt that al Qaeda would then gain control in Iraq and pose a threat to the United States of America. Ask anyone who knows about the situation on the ground in Iraq. I look forward to continuing this debate."

Obama seems to be campaigning on the hope of a national do-over in Iraq:

Obama responded to McCain's comments today at a rally in Columbus, Ohio.

"Well, first of all, I do know that al Qaeda is in Iraq. That's why I've said we should continue to strike al Qaeda targets," he said. "But I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq.

"I've been paying attention, John McCain," he said. "That's the news. So John McCain may like to say he wants to follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but so far all he's done is follow George Bush into a misguided war in Iraq that's cost us thousands of lives and billions of dollars.

"I intend to bring [it] to an end so that we can actually start going after al Qaeda in Afghanistan and in the hills of Pakistan like we should have been doing in the first place.That's the news, John McCain," Obama said.

McCain delivered the obvious rejoinder:

In his back-and-forth with Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., over Iraq, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Thursday morning sought to portray the Democratic front-runner as representing the Iraq politics of the past by focusing on the decision to invade in 2003 rather than what to do now.

"That's history, that's the past," McCain told attendees at a town hall meeting at Rice University. "That's talking about what happened before. What we should be talking about is what we're going to do now. And what we're going to do now is continue this strategy which is succeeding in Iraq and we are carrying out the goals of the surge, the Iraqi military are taking over more and more of the responsibilities."

Interesting that the old codger is looking forward while the youthful dynamist is looking back.  But is it surprising?  Arianna Huffington writes on "Microtrends and Macrotrends" to explain why Obama is winning but I think she misses an obvious point - Obama is successfully riding the Democratic Party's ongoing 60's flashback in a way that, for example, Mr. Reporting For Duty did not.

Would Obama be a credible candidate if he were white?  Please - he would be the articulate, visionary, son of a mill worker, John Edwards. 

Would Obama be a credible candidate if he had not opposed the Iraq war in 2002?  Of course not.

Obama brings together the most revered people and causes of the Democratic fantasy - he is John Kennedy and Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, and supporting him enlists his supporters in both the civil rights movement and the anti-war movement.  Heady stuff, especially for the youngsters who missed it the first time around, and we can see why his campaign much prefers to have people looking backwards.

Comments

[PeterUK]

"after withdrawing combat troops from Iraq, Obama, as commander in chief, would be willing to send U.S. troops back into Iraq "if al Qaeda is forming a base" there "

"Well, first of all, I do know that al Qaeda is in Iraq. That's why I've said we should continue to strike al Qaeda targets,"

Presumably from Okinawa or some such,The H is for "halfwit".

[Rick Ballard]

Farrakhan Sticks With His Man

You have to admire that kind of loyalty. The affinity must be so strong that nothing can separate them.

[bgates]

he is John Kennedy and Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy
He is socialist and anti-Communist, rich and redistributionist, wiretapping and wiretapped, white and black, Alpha and Omega, amen.

[bgates]

Could I get a ruling from AM on whether it's offensively anti-Muslim to identify Sen Dunham with Jesus Christ?

[GMax]

He wants to strike Al Qaeda while immediately pulling our troops out this "failed war"?

To paraphase a great American and Democrat, "With what - spitballs?"

[Rick Ballard]

Bgates,

You're showing a fine flare for unified diversity newspeak - perhaps you could favor us with a proposed composite speech utilizing a JFK/MLK motif. Something that Calypso Louie and David Duke could both enjoy listening to.

[Syl]

"With what - spitballs?"

Heh. I miss him. Wonder how he's doing.

Obama plans to go back to the pre-surge policy of hit-and-run.

al Qaeda takes over an area by intimidating the residents, imposing a Taliban-like moral code, cutting off hands of smokers (oops, Left would love that), murdering suspected collaborators, and beheading children.

Surge policy moves troops into the area and KEEPS them there until all vestiges of the enemy is gone, then helps the residents to build up their infrastructure, train their police, and keep al Qaeda from returning.

Obama is so frightened of the hits he's taking (and today from Bush re talking to enemy leaders) that he's sent Susan Rice around to 'explain' things. Heh. She's just digging the hole deeper.

[PeterUK]

Remember,every time you say bad things about OH Obama a polar bear cub drowns.

[MayBee]

Yeah, Syl, I just saw Susan Rice on Tucker.

She certainly hopes people understand Obama will keep people in Iraq that can fight alQaeda.

[Pofarmer]

"I intend to bring [it] to an end so that we can actually start going after al Qaeda in Afghanistan and in the hills of Pakistan like we should have been doing in the first place.That's the news, John McCain,"

Barak Hussein really needs to study the history of the 80's. That's not a particularly easy place for large organizations to fight. He ought to know some communists he could ask about it.

[Syl]

Barack doesn't want change, he wants to go back to the pre-surge policies. Way to look forward, buster.

He says the country wants change! Wants to change Washington!

Well, Barack, the country wanted change after 9/11 too---a change in the muslim world!

Barack doesn't want to defeat the enemy (he doesn't even know where they are), he wants to defeat Bush! Wrong election, mate.

[Cecil Turner]

"Well, first of all, I do know that al Qaeda is in Iraq. That's why I've said we should continue to strike al Qaeda targets . . ."

Then what the hell did that earlier remark mean? Are we going to withdraw and then go right back in? Or pretend there's not a base? Or is it an excuse for when he decides to change his mind about withdrawal? Or what? IraqPundit says he's incoherent. Convincingly.

"I intend to bring [it] to an end so that we can actually start going after al Qaeda in Afghanistan and in the hills of Pakistan . . .

Good grief. Is he talking invading Pakistan again? And if not, what is he saying?

[clarice]

JimMiller has an even better take down by the WSJ's Taranto.
It is some fancy stepping double talk that can only inspire ridicule in the light of day,

[PeterUK]

"Is he talking invading Pakistan again? And if not, what is he saying?"

He is saying you will send the troops from Iraq to a landlocked country and supply them by air,he is setting up another Dien Bien Phu.

[Rick Ballard]

"what is he saying?

He's saying what you want to hear, Cecil. The Mirror of Erised cannot lie - just listen very carefully and then use your imagination to its fullest extent. Be very positive when you listen and focus on unified diversity and tolerance - Si, se puede!

RW would be much tougher - go BHO!

[Bill in AZ]

Well, he does understand landlocked, and how it can do good things for you somehow. The how is a bit fuzzy.

[JM Hanes]

He's saying he knows al Qaeda is in Iraq and that's why he wants to go to Pakistan. If they followed us into Iraq, they'll follow us back to Pakistan where it will be so much easier and less expensive to fight them. It makes perfect Democratic sense.

[hit and run]

Well, I think Obama should rework his line...

"But I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq.
...
So John McCain may like to say he wants to follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of hell, but he's got it backwards. Because al Qaeda follows us wherever we go -- I plan to take America to hell in a handbasket and then trap them there."

[PeterUK]

Obama is to some extent right,al Qaeda were not "in" Iraq,they were in Afghanistan and taking flying lessons in America.

[JM Hanes]

"Because al Qaeda follows us wherever we go -- I plan to take America to hell in a handbasket and then trap them there."

Too funny, hit. There's got to be a bumpersticker in that somewhere.

[Sara]

I have one word for Senator Barack HUSSEIN Obama - ZARQAWI. Perhpas he should look him up.

[Foo Bar]

Obama seems to be campaigning on the hope of a national do-over in Iraq

Well, I guess McCain is running to be President in early '07, since he's often emphasized that his support for the surge has been vindicated by the downturn in violence since the fall. I wish he'd stop living in the past.

Presidential candidates need to be evaluated on their judgment, and one reasonable way to do that is to observe whether their past decisions turned out to be good ones after subsequent events unfolded. If you want a president who will make wise decisions in the future, it's probably prudent to pick someone who has displayed good judgment in the past. Most here will dispute the premise that Obama was correct to oppose the war. If you stipulate the correctness of the decision, though, it makes perfect sense to make it one of the points of emphasis of his campaign.

[Sara]

But, but, Foobar, Barack Hussein Obama has no past decisions. He is a man of no substance at all.

[GMax]

Well his advisers started explaining the landlocked nature of afghanistan and he got the big smile on his face and said " Is someone going to give me another $500K piece of land to use for free?" It was at that point that the adviser was a bit less than hopeful and changed the subject.

[Syl]

Foo Bar

Obama didn't make a wise decision, he made lucky one.

What if we'd found WMD in Iraq?

Nobody but Saddam knew for sure there weren't any.

[PaulL]

Obama is already not doing well against a Republican opponent, and it's barely started. He's on the defensive and not putting out a convincing argument.

And, gosh! What happened to all that talk about bringing America together. Now it's half the people in the country (Republicans) are stupid and wrong.

[Sara]

Obama will not be able to bleat his leftist blather once the primaries are over and get any kind of friendly response. I think he is in for a rude awakening, should he get the nomination.

[Sara]

PaulL, there are two Americas, haven't you heard? Those who love America, and those who don't.

[PeterUK]

Interesting that Obama wore a Somali costume in Kenya out of respect,but could not bring himself to put his hand over his heart out respect for the country of which he wishes to be president.

[JM Hanes]

FooBar:

The Democras have been making rearview mirror arguments for years now, and I don't think those themes are really making much of an impression any more. It appears the public is more inclined to look forward these days, and if the opinions reflected in the recent Pew Poll hold up (via Instapundit), Obama's moment of clarity will look increasingly less prescient. Even if you think the numbers are consistently high, the trend and the differential between Feb '07 and Feb '08 is pretty remarkable. Regardless of how they feel about the original decision, 53% of Americans now say the "U.S. effort in Iraq" will succeed vs. 39% who think it will fail. That's a substantive shift.

[Jane]

Presidential candidates need to be evaluated on their judgment, and one reasonable way to do that is to observe whether their past decisions turned out to be good ones after subsequent events unfolded.

Oh dear, if you actually mean that you are about to be sorely disappointed. But I'm sure you will bounce back!

[MayBee]

Presidential candidates need to be evaluated on their judgment, and one reasonable way to do that is to observe whether their past decisions turned out to be good ones after subsequent events unfolded.

Just remember this about the path not taken:
The opposite of what did happen is not necessarily what you wanted to happen.

[Ranger]

Foo Bar,

An interesting take, comparing stances and outcomes, so let's take a more recent example. McCain backed the Surge and it has turned out well. Where as Obama opposed the Surge. Sounds like Obama is the one with the bad judgement on this one. And it looks like 53% of Americans now agree with McCain on this one.

[GMax]

Ranger make that 53 to 39 back. The rest dont pay enough attention and thus arent likely to vote either. Almost 58% of folks who had an opinion think just like big Mac. And the results in Irag continue a very favorable report, and there is a lag in public perception so good news today shows up 30 to 90 days in these polls. Soon it will be 2 - 1 in favor. You know what they call 2 -1 in politics? A BLOWOUT. Reaganesque.

[jeff]

Could be the long con of Obama is coming to a close ... after all its very difficult to fake being smart or being moderate for this long ...

Neither he nor his wife would be anything significant were it not for their skin color ... lets face it they have done nothing exceptional their entire lives ...

no real work experience, no new ideas ...

[Sean]

The beauty of it all, aside from Obama looking every bit the novice here, is that the discussion is on national security.

As long as the Democratic contest goes on, Obama is going to keep saying stupid things to try to out-left Hillary.

And when Obama says something plum crazy like the AQI bit, on a topic where McCain knows Obama is weaker, the old man can lash take swipes at him.

It allows McCain to choose the topic, and control the debate.

It's beautiful.

[The Fop]

I'm just wondering if it's okay for people to mention the fact that Obama's mother's first name was Stanley......and that she was an atheist.

[Salamantis]

Barak Hussein Obama:
Pass Iraq from Hussein to Osama!

Chant it at all his campaign stops.

[M. Simon]

Heady stuff, especially for the youngsters who missed it the first time around,

The sex was better.

[Bill]

The comments here are a hoot!

I especially like the "H stands for halfwit".

There is definitely an air of sophomore-debater caught-in-a-gaffe sarcasm to BHO's retort. (Don't tell me what I know I know because I already know it so there.)

If, as B.H. Obama says, he knows Al Quaeda is in Iraq then why would he want to broadcast to them in advance that he intends to withdraw? Who is giving this twerp military advice?

Conversation in a Mosul (somewhat) safe house

Abdul: This surge of Bush! Surely it is killing us. Allah Akbar.

Hussein: Fear not. The election is in November... Peace be upon him...

[elixelx]

"But I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq." B.Hussein Obama.

This is a blatant half-truth! It wasn't only Bush and McCain; it was Bush and McCain and the Congress and 80 Senators, and nary a NAY.

And speaking of halves; the H stands for "Halfrican"!

[halfacarafe]

I remember the runup to the 1988 elections when all the media types were having the discussions to determine if Dan Quayle had enough experience to be VICE PRESIDENT and there wasn't even a war going on then. BHO has nothing, he appeals the the leftist fringe of the aging '60s radicals and the no minds of the current generation who think that crying "change" is a political position. Anarchy is change, total destruction of America is change. Communism is change. Changing the greatest country and most dynamic economy in the world to a 3rd world nation is stupidity. BTW elixelx "Halfrican" is the perfect middle name for BHO if all we are doing is electing a empty suit, no position, feel-good candidate because dammit it's their turn. It's all about identity politics.