Barack Obama: Profile In Courage or Political Opportunist?

Barack Obama took potshots at Hillary Clinton for her "yea" vote on the warmongering Kyl-Lieberman bill -- a vote he ducked and said nothing about until it became clear that it was a political liability. Considering he was one of the co-sponsors of the equally bellicose anti-Iranian S.970 bill earlier in the year, his claim that he would have voted against it had he only bothered to show up becomes somewhat less than convincing.

But ducking votes and then engaging in historical revisionism seems to be a pattern with Obama. He likewise didn't show up for the MoveOn condemnation vote, which he later said was an attempt to score "cheap political points" -- even though he showed up and voted "yea" on the Barbara Boxer cheap political points bill that very morning. Now he wants us to think he's pro-choice because he ducked yet again, voting "present" on important abortion legislation in Illinois -- ostensibly to "give cover" to Democrats in vulnerable districts who couldn't afford to vote "yea" themselves.

Oh please. Would this pass muster if Obama had failed to support important civil rights legislation to give cover to Democrats who lived in districts with lots of bigots? Somehow I don't think so.

Jerome Armstrong:

Obama's rationale for voting 'present', lacking plausibility, is probably more simple:

Obama's friend Link offered another reason for the strategy: to protect those with plans for higher office. A "present" vote helped "if you have aspirations of doing something else in politics," Link said, "and I think [Obama] looked at it in that regard."

It's single-issue politics and not particularly helpful to a big tent strategy, but among democratic primary & caucus voters, particularly women, it seems like a pretty big opening for groups like NOW and Emily's List to go after Obama.

I seriously doubt it. Illinois Planned Parenthood is standing behind this stupid "present" strategy like it was some kind of brilliant tactical maneuver. But then again, Planned Parenthood national told their membership to thank Joe Lieberman for his Alito vote.

This smells a lot like NARAL endorsing the "fetal pain" torpedo that right-to-lifers were trying to launch into the abortion debate in order to give cover to Democrats who didn't want to take a side on a potentially divisive vote. It's a cravenly politically calculating move to give cover to people who don't want to take a stand, and the fact that pro-choice organizations engage in this kind of posterior-covering rather than defending the rights they're given big money by their membership to uphold is largely why people think their opinion on these things is worth little these days.

The institutional pro-choice groups may line up based on who is supporting who, but I don't expect any courageous stands on principle here.

Obama didn't want to do anything to jeopardize his political future. He openly rejects partisanship and wants everyone to join together in a message of hope, but that tactic seems to depend on ducking out on tough issues and letting others take the arrows one inevitably takes when standing on principle -- and then trying to re-write history when it becomes clear which way the wind has blown.

It's a strategy that is just not going to work for all of the people all of the time.

Jane Hamsher blogs at firedoglake.com.

Comments

[JDWPS]

Jane this it really disappoints me for you to write such a negative misinformed piece on Obama. I thought your were dedicated to getting facts straight and honest politics. I am adding my opinion to the others who have already pointed out your mistakes. I do not understand your motivation for writing this at all but it has destroyed my faith in you.

[plutorage]

Let's face it, many votes are scheduled in legislatures to put people in a fix. The so-called Iran vote, which Hilary voted for, was typical. What exactly has the Iran vote accomplished, Ms. Hamsher?? Can you tell us??


IF THE VOTE HASN'T ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING, WHAT, EXACTLY, DID OBAMA "DUCK" IN NOT VOTING????

[2Truthy]

Obama is not only an amazing orator but a shrewd, talented master of speech and debate and his timely ability to duck votes (among others things) allows him to live up to the much deserved reputation as being the "flip side" of the coin to Hillary. Both are corporate welfare queens.

Of the three Dem frontrunners, Edwards leads on the issues although, it be in the best interest of the majority if the media, much less a progressive blog here and there -- actually got behind Kucinich.

[midtown]

Jane, you need to do your homework: "a vote he ducked and said nothing about until it became clear that it was a political liability."

Harold Fineman reported on this; Newsweek checked it out and it was reported on Olbermann's show. Harry Reid changed the Senate vote time at the last minute to 10 AM on the day of the NH debate at the last minute. Obama was in NH and he had the flu.

[Tellmethetruth]

The more research that I do on this campaign - the more I find out that Joe Biden's career in the Senate is second to none - other than Ted Kennedy with 45 years. As a Senator Joe Biden has, in the history books, for real and not just an empty promise, changed the lives of every single person in America many times over. This is fact, not myth.

Too much of Obama is hype and fantasy. What critical votes he has not bothered to show up for, but then makes statements to the media afterwards as if he has a correct position - is how come no one is calling him on this? He didn't even bother to do his job as an elected Senator taking taxpayer money for his salary - so busy is he campaigning for President (2 years now and he's only been a Senator for 2 years).

Meanwhile - we have Iraq - the Joe Biden resolution to end the war (the only human being in America who has put to vote any plan including Bush to end this war), Biden got 75 votes in the Senate -but Obama didn't show up.

Then we have Iran - and Obama didn't show up for this now critical vote on the Leiberman-Kye vote - yet Cheney and Bush have and still have plans to attack Iran and pull the world into WWIII - this is headline news - Where was Obama???????

Now on the energy bill - still to come before the Senate - where is Obama?????

The list is longer - critical votes that affect the lives of everyone in America - Obama is AWOL - just like Bush who also was a good campaigner which is why is President. Bush also had no experience just like Obama.

Just like Obama's supporter can't allow any criticism of thier candidate based upon FACTS, for years now, the Bush supporters have also subjected Americans with thier one-sided attacks to silence any TRUTH about Bush. Obamas supporters do the same - because the reality that they have been following an image, myth, fantasy, or fraud it too hard to handle.

[meese]

The story about Obama's "missed" votes on abortion was already debunked almost 6 months ago:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/obama-abortion-.html

Planned Parenthood didn't "just" come out with this "excuse" - this was the truth, and the goal was clear - to evade hard-line Republican tactics when they were in power in the Illinois Senate.

About about Iran - you should read the details of the bill that Obama supported vs. Kyl-Lieberman. The latter included language that allowed us to effectively consider fighting Iran as part of the war in Iraq, which is why it was such a bad bill.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Leadership is not a weathervane.

In this regard, Obama and Hillary are similar, to the demerit of them both.

[ReasonIsMyReligion]

Voting "present" is to speak DOUBLETALK.

Vote yea, nay, or ABSTAIN.

If you DECLINE to take a position, accept responsibility from BOTH angles for not having taken a stand on the issue either way.

Congressional votes are not like general elections; it's not about percent of votes CAST. When it comes to passing a measure in House or Senate, a "present" is only as good as a "nay." Worse, it helps make a quorum which forces a vote with insufficient support to be voted -- and potentially rejected.

[avergejoe]

Ummm, you wouldnt be for hrc, would you?

[dubephnx]

Barack Obama listens and dissects information, before acting, which is one of the highest standards by which to lead groups of advocates, associates, etc.
The President does not address you and I, independently, on issues of National Importance. this is why I support Obama for President. He has shown the capacity for handling a Defense Department Heads of Military meeting on any situation; and then handling a National Economics Summit, a Global Climate/En­vironmenta­l Discussion Panel, a United Nations Security Meeting, and so on, better than the rest of the Presidential Candidates on both Tickets. His diversity can serve this Country well in both Foreign and Domestic Issues. When appointing key positions in his Cabinet and especially to the Supreme Court, his decisions on his choices will include something we've never had before, and that is Barack's background in Civil Liberties and Rights perspectives from his Attorney and Teaching Law at the University level experiences.
I'm voting Obama, the Change We Can Believe In Candidate!

[Saggitarius]

I cannot find Obama believable no matter how hard I try. He is amart but when I lisen closely he sems to sound as though he has Republican talking points. I have also read where he has much Republican backing.
As for Hillary, I don't agree with everything she says, but I find her a strong woman with strong convictions.
A lot of the Posts against her are from Republican Think Tanks and editors who have the resources to say anything that want to without revealing their Identity.
Any of the Democraic candidates would be better than any of the Rep candidates.

[Tulka2]

There's always this teeter-totter balance between wanting a leader who will follow the will of the people and one who will act on their deeply held convictions.

The last we already have in Bush. He has his own movie going and the rest of us are bit players... not quite real. He certainly lacks empathy which is the clinical diffinition of a sociopath.

I would be happy to go with Obama if he is someone who has normal convictions, empathy and cares what the people think, day to day. Is that a bad thing? I think not.

Don't misunderstand, i will vote for any damn Democrat. Wish i were in Iowa instead of Washington state. Some of us are more equal than others of us, that is for sure.

[dsigeorge]

Good observation Jane. I too wonder about Barack's willingness to threaten military actions with an emphasis on Iran and Pakistan. This bears watching and questioning.

[Twocentsworth245]

Ms. Hamsher, I get e-mails from Planned Parenthood, and I don't recall EVER having gotten one saying thanks for Lieberman's Alito vote. Are you kidding?!?!

I like Hillary because I want to see a woman president of this country in my lifetime, and, although I do have some reservations about her, I think she'd make a very good president. I would also like to see Bill back in the White House.

I like Obama because of his dynamism. He's saying things I can't recall ever having heard another presidential candidate say. I find him to be an appealing personality. But, I also think he needs more experience, though, so maybe in '12 for him.

John Edwards I like because he just plain has some good ideas, and, he's so right. There ARE "two Americas," there are the haves and the have nots, and the gap between them has grown into a gaping chasm.

I like a lot of what Dennis Kucinich has to say, and at one time, I felt he was a viable alternative to Hillary, Barack, Edwards, etc., but that was until I read he supports amnesty for illegal aliens. That took him off my list.

Bill Richardson has a lot of good things to say and has an excellent resume, and, although I thought that being Latino himself that that would make him lenient with illegals, that isn't the case. He has what I think is a very good solution to the situation. I think he'd be a good president. Maybe next time.

Chris Dodd would make an excellent president, but I'm selfish where he's concerned. You see, he's my senator and I wouldn't want to lose him to the White House. However, it would be for the greater good, and I would definitely take that into consideration.

BTW, Tmidge66, Barack Obama is NOT the first black man to run for "high office," (the presidency). Does the name Alan Keys (sp?) ring any bells with you?

Bottom line, I will support whichever candidate gets the Democratic nomination regardless of who it is.

[littleblackcat]

Jane Hamsher sounds like a die-hard supporter of Hillary Clinton, as if she is going to benefit from having a woman president and in the face of that is willing to knock anyone at any time for anything that in her eyes, detracts from that goal. Ms. Hamsher needs to remember that NOTHING Hillary Clinton does is not done with an eye toward how she can use it to her own advantage. She knew when she married Bill that he was charismatic, intelligent, strong-minded, and had a roving eye. She didn't divorce him after the Monica flap for the same reason she didn't divorce him for the dozens of earlier episodes - she knew he was a power to be reckoned with and she was going to hold onto that power. If Bill were not campaigning for her she wouldn't be anywhere near the point she is in any of the polls, and would be looked at askance for wanting to return to the scene of a great embarassment for most women. She knows which side her bread is buttered on and plans to keep that side up. She is pure D.C. "What's in it for me?" She is very smart, but the nation does not need her now. Maybe in 8 years.