Obama Undercuts His Brand

Sen. Barack Obama is risking his brand as a political reformer, according to reports today in the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post. In recent weeks, he has moderated or changed positions on a number of politically-charged issues, leading to criticism from demoralized Democratic activists and charges of "flip-flopping" from conservatives.

The Times reports:

In recent weeks, he toughened his stance on Iran and backed an expansion of the government's wiretapping powers. On Wednesday, he said states should be allowed to execute child rapists. When the Supreme Court the next day struck down the District of Columbia's ban on handguns, he did not complain...

..."I've been struck by the speed and decisiveness of his move to the center," said Will Marshall, president of the centrist Progressive Policy Institute...

...And Obama endorsed a compromise wiretapping bill despite stiff opposition from liberal activists. MoveOn.org, the liberal online activist group, asked its members to flood Obama's campaign office with phone calls and e-mails urging him to support a filibuster of the bill.

The changes carry some risk that Obama will diminish the image he has sought to build as a new type of leader who will change how Washington conducts business. McCain and other Republicans have used his recent policy statements to argue that Obama is a traditional politician, unwilling to take clear stands on tough issues and abandoning his principles when he finds it advantageous.

The Post reports that those who should be his strongest supporters are taking this as a wake-up call:

The switch is not without precedent. On a variety of issues, including gun control and campaign finance regulation, the presumptive Democratic nominee has shown himself willing to settle for incremental changes in the face of political reality rather than to hold out for the sweeping and uncompromising positions he initially stakes out.

But even some who should be his core constituents -- in the Democratic Party's progressive wing and the liberal blogosphere -- have taken his recent maneuvers as a wake-up call. They are warning the senator that in his quest to reach voters in the middle of the political spectrum, he risks depressing the enthusiasm of the voters who clinched the nomination for him.

"American voters tend to reward politicians who take clear stands," said David Sirota, a former Democratic aide on Capitol Hill and author of the new populist-themed book "The Uprising." "When Obama takes these mushy positions, it could speak to a character issue. Voters that don't pay a lot of attention look at one thing: 'Does the guy believe in something?' They may be saying the guy is afraid of his own shadow."

Comments

[Marlyn]

"in the Democratic Party's progressive wing and the liberal blogosphere" ???

Are these two different groups or two different names for the same group?

[Mike4Obama]

So, everyone just see the Olberman piece? Interesting how ACLU found the loophole that his FICA bill only restricts civil suits, but not criminal. We'll see how this plays out and if Obama was either keeping the loophole silent and planning to play this card at a later date, or will out right vote for the removal of the immunity portion.

[Robin1962]

4-Star General Wesley Clark was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University, where he earned a Masters Degree in Politics, Philosophy and Economics. During his 34 years of service in the United States Army, Wesley Clark rose to the rank of FOUR-STAR General as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander, Europe.

In his final military command, General Clark commanded Operation Allied Force, NATO's first major combat action, which saved 1.5 million Albanians from ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, and he was responsible for the peacekeeping operation in Bosnia.

In previous duty, General Clark was the Commander-in-Chief, US Southern Command, where he was responsible for all US military activities in Latin America and the Caribbean. And from April 1994 through June 1996, he was the Director of Strategic Plans and Policy, J-5, in the Joint Staff, where he helped negotiate the end to the war in Bosnia. His previous assignments include a wide variety of command and staff positions, including Command of the 1st Cavalry Division.

General Clark's awards and honors include the Presidential Medal of Freedom, The State Department Distinguished Service Award; the US Department of Defense Distinguished Service Medal;(five awards), The US Army Distinguished Service Medal(two awards), The Silver Star, the Bronze Star (two awards), the Purple Heart, and Honorary Knighthoods from the British and Dutch governments.

[qwr]

Obama has always had a moderate position on gun control (as I do). The fact that he didn't protest the SC's ruling wasn't surprising. Even changing his mind on the FISA bill had some justification. But there are a couple things that trouble me: the first is his speeches in front of AIPAC, and handing Jerusalem to Israel, when Jerusalem is sacred to Muslims (a joint ruling council is the best solution IMHO) and the second is the idea of giving the death penalty to child rapists (not children who are rapists--you know what I mean). Both are positions he took to win Brownie points. If I wanted such a politician, I would have voted for Clinton. She is much better at this sort of thing.

[watchTVgetSTUPID]

That is her Forte ... and I agree with you, I was not voting for the next "Good Cop" of the last 20 years of "Good Cop Bad Cop" routine. I am voting for real change I can believe in.

If Obama picks someone like General Clark for his Veep, then I will know he is serious about change. Anyone the propaganda machine tries to defame like they did to General Clark today is someone who truely represents change. They are afraid of him.

[BrattyOz]

Who knows what he really believes in. He voted Present over 100 times rather than take a position! It's no surprise now that he isn't standing firm. It's just same old, same old.

[kaygee]

Like Kerry!

[lskloven]

Unfortunately, what we all thought his promised and what he said that he stood for prove false. Those of us who fostered the overwhelming support for him as the Democratic nominee are very much chagrined.

[qwr]

You really discredit yourself by using the "present'' argument. For the umpteenth time: bills get passed in the Illinois Senate based on a requisite number of "aye" votes. Therefore, a "present" vote serves the same function as a "nay" vote. "Present" is used to send a message. But as far as the legislation is concerned, it does take a stand. Please copy my message on a sticky every time you are tempted to use the "present" argument.

[repearwo]

It is just the end of June, and you have already lost the election.

There is the personal world where you get to have your idea and convictions and then there is the real world where everybody has their ideas and convictions. Two different worlds and you have to live in them both. So does the President of the United States.

Dennis Kucinich is a man of principle that never changes. What will also never change is that he will never be President.

[Raef53]

I have been a Dennis Kucinich fan since the last election. It is sad that the main stream media seems so afraid of his ethics. They know that he would fix the corporately controlled media and cut the military budget. Our military budget is breaking this country in every way. Letting our military run this country since....well, since they shot Kennedy has been a disaster I've watched my whole life. Our country had such potential fifty years ago. During my life I've watched it turn into a world corporate bully who uses its intelligence agencies as fixers to generate war and strife from Central America to Iran.... Bases all over the world while our bridges at home collapse. Meanwhile the media gives us Paris Hilton and better special effects. Dennis would have been the first real change....and, like you said, he'll never be President of THIS country.

[Insightful]

So now you are starting to see the real Obama!! Talks big and then changes his mind. He is a weak kneed waffler and you all jumped on the Clinton's as if they were the enemy. What a plan on the part of Ted Kennedy,Bill Richardson and all the rest of the turncoats. They were not concerned with the best leader for our country, all they wanted was a puppet they could control.

You haven't seen anything yet about this guy. Where did he come from anyway? 3 years in the Senate, most of it campaigning for the presidency that he wasn't fit to be elected to,

What a mess of a plan!!

[MichaelGeneSullivan]

It is our job as citizens to be vigilant while hiring our employees, aka elected officials. Is Senator Obama simply making the best political choices now, tacking to the Right, to get elected so he can make real change once elected, or was his liberalism the best tactical choice during the primaries to get the nomination before showing his true colors? That is the question: is he fooling them now, or was he fooling us before? Or does he represent a political pragmatism that will get things done, but will anger everyone equally? Whatever the case we cannot give blind faith to anyone - especially someone who exchanges important positions for votes. I want to guy to win, but I also expect my Progressive allies to hold his feet to the fire if he starts to weasel on our issues. Otherwise what good are we?

[Redhead]

Obama can't win from the far left, or Progressive, position that worked for him in the primaries. He has to go to the center in the general election. He is a politician after all and he is playing the politics that will get him into the White House. Don't lose heart Democrats, he is still one of us.

[AlisonChaynz]

You are making the same mistake that Obama is making (politically). The idea that backing warrantless eavesdropping (spying) on the American people and putting the president and big corporations above the law is NOT the center! It is a right-wing position!

Just because the MSM and the Republicans tell you that the FISA legislation is at "the center"... doesn't mean it's true. Obama is blowing this - big time. I can tell you, as an independent voter (with lots of politically like-minded friends) he is alienating an awful lot of us in the "center".

[tbone99]

Good point .The Right is not the center , except in facism,

[Indubio]

I agree that Obama can't win from the far left but he was never "liberal" and it's foolish for anyone to be disappointed by his recent red meat statements. In virtually every instance, Obama's domestic programs are to the right of Dick Nixon (anyone care to bet whether Obama would initiate wage and price controls?). What many fail to comprehend is how far right the GOP pushed politics...so far right that a freaking centrist is called a leftist. Obama is a centrist and anyone paying attention to his words not the media would realize this but in today's political world a centrist is someone with a right of center ideology. The man has no intention of running on the left and quite honestly, at this point, I seriously doubt that anyone far left or right would be able to develop an effective agenda and govern because the country has yet to coalesce around a leader or program. I'm progressive and pretty far to the left yet I will continue to support Obama because I believe that when he lands in the Oval Office he will discover a domestic and economic situation much worse than anyone at this point can reasonably comprehend. What we're going to need is a leader who can do whatever is necessary to (1) mitigate a lot of short term human suffering while (2) trying to salvage what's left of our future: McCain is incapable to doing either.

[gjoh]

This is all spin and "crap" from the Washington Post and the LA Times. Obama is not changing his brand or anything else. They have spouted this far right drivel for so long they have no real sense of "Center", which is where Obama has been from the start.
I'm a progressive and believe me, Obama was never the flaming liberal the MSM and conservatives are trying to paint him to be.
This is just more distraction over substance. Don't try to tell me or the American public what we should care about or what's important in this election. We'll decide that. What the Post and the Times should do is just try to get the facts.

[Redhead]

You need only to look at Obama's work history, things he cares strongly about and his voting record, to come to the conclusion that he is very liberal. That isn't a negative for most Democrats. Congress can be more to the center and still get things done with a liberal as President. More than vote for Obama, Democrats need to put Democrats in Congress for a coalition to accomplish our goals.

[heather11483]

Thank you. Exactly.

[rollingdivision]

Would someone please repost his accomplishments talking points?

[JohnTalbutt]

Won the Democratic Primary
Therefore hated by right wing nut jobs.

[wheresthebeef]

And Clintonistas like Deaninphilly.

[Deaninphilly]

He's voted present over 100 times.
He gets his minions to do his talking for him
He makes speeches about something with no real stance or solution
He shows up for debates, that's about it
He's somehow won the primary, but August is still a ways off

[bogues]

I have seen many posts that say they were and are supporters of Obama but they are withholding funds until they feel better about him. For goodness sake you either support someone or you don't. This is a great big country filled with people from all walks with all kinds of needs. Sen. Obama thinks in terms of meeting the needs and addressing the concerns of the most people he can. If his plan does not follow your idea exactly then you somehow come to the conclusion that he is a flip-flopper or he is "just another polititan" We need to stop being so self oriented and start thinking about the bigger picture, like Sen. Obama is. Many of these reports are designed to do just what they are doing, they are manipulating your thoughts and you are falling for it.

[AlisonChaynz]

"Either you support someone or you don't." Hmmmm.... that sounds very familiar... le'me think..... Oh yeah... "You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists."

Leave it to someone defending Obama's assault on the 4th Amendment to adopt Bushian absolutism.

Oh, and standing up for the Constutional protection of the rights of ALL citizens is being "self-oriented"?

In the words of one Barrack Obama:

"A grassroots movement of Americans has pushed this issue to the forefront. You have come together across this country. You have called upon our leaders to adhere to the Constitution. You have sent a message to the halls of power that the American people will not permit the abuse of power – and demanded that we reclaim our core values by restoring the rule of law.

It's time for Washington to hear your voices, and to act. I share your commitment to this cause, and will stand with you in the fights to come. And when I am President, the American people will once again be able to trust that their government will stand for justice, and will defend the liberties that we hold so dear as vigorously as we defend our security."

Where'd THAT Obama go?

[rollingdivision]

Those who support a candidate no matter what or where he is on the issues on any given day are rightfully castigated as members of a personality cult and not a political movement.

[dayala]

THANK YOU !
my sentiments exactly!

[dora rice]

Obama never was a reformer, the only thing he wants is to reform himself
into the White House. Any way he can. If it takes any promise he can't keep.
More and More it is evedent that he is moving toward center, actually he is taking Hillary's place
and preaches her policies. A wolf in sheeps clothing

[qwr]

I read the rest of your post about Hillary. Another uninformed Hillary supporter. Forget my other post. No point arguing with you. Wasted words.

[Deaninphilly]

As are all your 4 posts. Much ado about nothing.

[qwr]

This is untrue. He helped pass reform on the state and national levels. Strangely, Edwards, who claimed to be a reformed, never lifted a single finger for reform when he was in office.

[qwr]

that's "reformer," not "reformed"

[Dane1911]

Everytime Obama does something people do not agree with, they want him to do a speech to explain. THey dont ask McCain to make a speech on all of his major Flip Flops on real issues.

[rollingdivision]

McCain major flip flops?

[BlackWidowPilot]

Naw, McCain is a consistent *hypocrite,* hence his D-minus rating from veterans groups, his opposition to the recent GI Bill, his addiction to K Street lobbyists and their 'campaign contributions," his continued partisan loyalty to the self-proclaimed "party of Christian family values:"

http://www.armchairsubversive.org

Hypocrisy, thy name be GOP and John "Hundred Years War" McCain.

Leland R. Erickson

Citizen

[heather11483]

Bingo.

[tbone99]

we expect nothing from McCain!

[beaves35]

I appreciate everyone's honesty here, but I can't keep from saying we told you so. This is exactly what those of us who weren't so enthusiastic about Mr. Obama were saying...who is he? I must say that I think he ran a brilliant primary. He is likely to run a very good general, but at the end of the day, he is just a politician (a pretty good one).
I think that he knew just as well as many of us that he wasn't just going to waltz into Washington and change it. Even if he changes his behavior, he isn't going to change the behavoir of thousands of politicians used to the status quo overnight. The change needs to be slow and methodical. He still may believe in change and he still may be able to do it if you all will quit your bitchin' and get behind him. As a former Clinton supporter I say, this guy's our nominee, he's got a lot to learn, he shouldn't have to pander to the hater's to get the job done.
Suck it up and support him as enthusiastically as you did when he was beating up on someone you loved to hate.

[AlisonChaynz]

One man with extraordinary political skills and popular support can make big changes relatively quickly - look at Reagan. If Obama stands strong for what (I think) he believes in, he could have that kind of impact, but if he's just another weak-kneed Democrat who jumps out of his socks when neo-cons say "BOO", then he won't change much at all.

[heather11483]

"Suck it up and support him as enthusiastically as you did when he was beating up on someone you loved to hate."

Oh, I will. And I do.

(though he never beat up on anyone.)

[JohnTalbutt]

I think it is the L.A. Times and the Washington Post whose "brand" is in the toilet from their shilling for Bush by printing all the lies about Iraq in attempt to sell the illegal invasion.

Obama "backed an expansion of the government's wiretapping powers" they say. I suppose we are just supposed to accept that along with Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and was linked to 9/11.

[heather11483]

Grow up, yeah? Obama wants to win and is doing what he needs to do. Speaking as a lifelong liberal, I've got to say I'm tired of fellow Democrats being such a bunch of wimpy losers. If he doesn't WIN, he can't effect ANY of the changes in the way we need him to. I've got faith that he is a shrewd enough politician not to let himself be painted as another 'wussy liberal', while still pushing our agenda when he is in office. Pick your battles, people.

The more important thing is getting Obama ELECTED. He needs us for that. Everyone just chill out.

*donates another $15*

[allheart72]

Well said Heather!! Exactly what I was thinking

[rollingdivision]

But winning by misrepresenting your principles and positions on the issues, it confirms one thing, everyone, including those who do, know the public doesn't support liberalism. A license to lie?

[heather11483]

I don't see where he is misrepresenting anything. He's never BEEN as liberal as he's been painted to be. That's clear if you read his books.

His brand is inclusiveness and reaching out to everyone and he's been nothing but consistent with that message, even when he doesn't tow the far-left line. Don't get me wrong, I consider myself way more liberal than he is, but we were never going to get a guy who agrees with us on everything.