Progressives Must Guard Against Helping to Promote Republican Narrative That Alleges Obama "Flip Flops"

The Republican spin machine is locked and loaded to promote the notion that Barack Obama is a "flip flopper." Four years ago it was their principal line of attack against Kerry and it worked like a charm.

In 2004, the goal of this narrative was to convince swing voters that Kerry had no core values -- that his positions and commitments were blown by the winds of public opinion just as he was blown right and left in the notorious campaign ad of Kerry wind-surfing.

Not long after the 2004 election, I was in a New Jersey taxicab. The driver was a typical male New Jersey cabbie. "So what do you think of Corzine?" I asked. "Oh, Corzine, tough guy. Like him," he replied about the then-Senator.

"What do you think of Bush?" I asked. "Like him too. Tough guy. Stands up for what he believes," came the answer.

"What about Kerry?" I asked. "Kerry? Can't stand him. Flip-flopper."

People want leaders who are firmly committed to their values. The key thing that affected the New Jersey cabbie's view wasn't the positions or views of the candidates. It was whether they stood up for what they believed. There are many independent voters just like him.

I believe that John Kerry has very clear values, but he left himself open to be defined to swing voters as if he didn't.

Barack Obama is firmly committed to progressive values that contrast sharply with the values implicit in necon foreign policy and dog-eat-dog, survival-of-the-fittest Bush-McCain economic policies.

Obama is much less likely than Kerry was to allow himself to be characterized as a flip-flopper without core values, because his entire campaign is rooted in the discussion of values. It has drawn very sharp distinctions with Republicans on the critical symbolic questions of Iraq, the economy and health care. But that won't keep Republicans from doing everything they can to try to make Obama look like he is a "typical politician" without a moral core the same way they did with Kerry.

Last week's near-frenzy in the media over Obama's alleged "move to the center" on Iraq had no substance whatsoever. It was fed, virtually entirely, by the Republican National Committee and the McCain campaign that simply asserted that his statements on Iraq represented a "change " from earlier positions. That narrative was picked up and parroted by various media pundits as if it were true.

Unfortunately, some Progressives fell prey to the media wave and actually gave credence to this non-story, when the fact is that Obama has consistently supported ending the war in Iraq and withdrawing all combat troops within 16 months, at a pace that is responsive to the situation on the ground.

Progressives have to remember that the Republicans don't care about the nuances of these issues. Their goal is simple: make Obama look like he is changing his position.

All Progressives don't agree with every position Barack Obama has taken, but the fact is that very few of his positions have changed since the campaign began.

Progressives who disagree with Barack Obama but at the same time don't want to help Republicans usher in a third Bush term need to remember three things:

1). Go right ahead and disagree with an Obama position or statement -- but disagree on the substance. Don't impute some venal motive. Remember that even when you disagree with him on an issue or policy, Obama shares our progressive values.

2). Don't reinforce the Republican narrative that Obama is a "flip flopper." Disagreeing with an Obama position is very different from arguing that he agreed with you once, but now has changed positions just to win favor with the voters. First, that is generally wrong. Second, if Obama emphasizes one aspect of a position instead of another in order to attract a particular group of voters, that does not mean he "changed" his position. Third, remember that the Republicans are desperate to get Progressives to confirm their narrative and convince guys like my New Jersey taxi driver to elect John McCain.

3). Remember that there is a huge gulf between the values of Obama and McCain. Obama stands clearly in the progressive tradition of giving every human being equal opportunity to fulfill their potential. McCain stands squarely on the side of ultra-conservative values that protect the power and prerogatives of the wealthiest among us.

Obama stands firmly against the neocon foreign policies of preemptive war and unilateral action that lay at the root of the worst American foreign policy disaster in a generation. McCain stands just as firmly for the neocon vision and the Bush approach to the rest of the world.

Obama believes that economic growth happens from the bottom up and doesn't trickle down on the rest of us. He supports the rights of workers to organize to defend their standard of living, and a world where we're all in this together, not all in this alone. McCain intends to continue Bush's economic policies that have assured that all of the economic growth in the last seven years has gone to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.

Obama understands that our world faces the greatest environmental crisis in history as we seek to prevent human beings from altering our climate. First and foremost, John McCain's loyalties lie with the oil industry.

We need to remember that John McCain's campaign is managed by lobbyists from the biggest special interests in America, while Barack Obama understands the need to mobilize tens of millions of Americans to change Washington from the ground up.

Progressives should go right ahead and question Obama's positions on issues -- and they should continue to hold him accountable when he is elected president. But remember that the Republicans are desperate to convince independent voters that Obama is "just another politician" whose values flow from the latest poll instead of his own commitment to principle. Don't help them. If you do you will be wrong, and you will also help the Republicans fulfill their unthinkable fantasy of a third Bush term.

Robert Creamer is a long time political organizer and strategist, and author of the recent book "Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win," available on Amazon.com.

Comments

[Bonobo]

We do not want a Republican running the country again, but neither do we want a Republican-lite again like we had during the Clinton years. The damage done by Bill Clinton's appeasement policies persisted through the Bush years in the form of a spineless Democrat Congress that can't stand up to the least popular President ever even when they have a majority. Even if Obama is taking positions that he will renege on once President, he damages respect for his party. It probably won't even help him. Just because there is a left wing position on issues, and a right-wing position, it doesn't mean everyone else has a middle position. These folks don't vote on issues, but on character traits, such as, say, trustworthiness. Besides, if we wanted moral opportunism, Hillary would have been a much better choice.

[mjc]

Oh, you are so right Bonobo. How did we ever survive 8 years of relative peace and prosperity, AND a balanced budget to boot? We had to live through housing booms, dot.com booms, European respect for our foreign policy, and even talked to the North Koreans. What a tragedy!!

[Bonobo]

I give Clinton credit for budget discipline. However, a big part of that was conservative welfare "reform" and the Cold War peace dividend. I'm from Silicon Valley. Clinton had less to do with the dot.com boom than Senator Al Gore. It also started collapsing before he was out of office. His foreign policy included Rwandan genocide, slow boil in Iraq and Afghanistan (a couple of cruise missiles do not a policy make), Russian regression, Chinese trade deficits, and utter failure in European (and American) agricultural subsidy reform. North Korea almost worked. After 8 years. His single success, Bosnia, was something the Europeans had to be dragged into kicking and screaming, so I don't have a lot of respect for European respect. Just to address your points. I got more.

[malachhamovess]

In a real world, if your friend is full of crap, you tell him so. Obama has to be held to the same standard as any other candidate.

That being said, McCain has had far more opportunities to flip-flop; he's never shied away from exploiting such opportunities to fit his position to his audience.

[mjc]

It is perfectly legitimate to call Obama a "flip-flopper". I don't have to read either of his books either. Obama made statements in 17 months of the primary season that will stand as his positions he DID have but not the ones he has now. Statements: I will talk with foreign leaders who happen to be our enemies DIRECTLY. Now, no recognition of HAMAS and no talking with Raul Castro unless the exiles have a seat at the table. NAFTA: That's the first serious clue we had that he wasn't really going to fix that treaty or return to free trade. Public financing: First candidate since the it was enacted who now chooses NOT to abide by it. FISA: It is supposed to be voted on today. Obama has made noises.... he's happy with the "compromise". He made umpteen statements about how such an agreement violated the Constitution. Abortion Rights: He has been backtracking on allowing a woman and her doctor to terminate a pregnancy because of "mental distress". So you are going crazy; you must have the child. Iraq: Yes,he was going to bring the troops home....in 16 months. Now....., well, I bring the commanders on the ground to the table and we'll examine where things are going and we might need more troops left and that could be as many as 80,000 and ...... Where is he going to stop being the candidate of the same-old and be one whose changes we can believe in?

[democrattotheend]

He maintained throughout the primary season that he would not meet with Hamas. How is that a flip-flop?

The mental distress thing is a phony issue...most doctors would not perform a late term abortion for that reason.

[unionave]

When a Repub is in trouble they circle the wagons and almost all of them wind up on the media stations defending members of their gang . Not so with the Dems . The Dems remain silent mostly while some Dems even help the Repubs gang up on a troubled Dem . An eerie bunch .

[ched]

I, too, have got a list of things Obama can do in order to not feed into the Republikan narrative that he's a flip flopper. It goes like this:

1. Stop Flip-flopping.

If your whole schtick is that you're a new kind of politician, one with the integrity to speak truth to power, it's probably not the best idea to spend your first week as the sole presumptive nominee waffling on long held positions, especially on core values like the 4th amendment. Doesn't look good for the Con Law professor. Nothing will deflate the energy (read: donations) of a campaign like betraying your base and showing yourself to be just another oily politician in the process. Sure, he's better than the other guy, but "not as bad as McCain" isn't exactly an inspiring campaign slogan.

[Sixtwo]

Could someone, any body, PLEASE define "flip-flopping". It is obvious that most folks, particularly the pundints and Repugs do not know what flip-flopping means or looks like. I believe it has to do with CHANGING, TURNING AROUND, GOING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. I do not see this characteristic in Obama's stated positions on issues of importance to the American people, including the Iraq war.

[cheforacle]

Mr. Creamer I have agreed with every post you have written on this site as I have been a huge supporter of Senator Obama as are you. I generally agree with your premise while I don't always think flip-flopping is bad. However, Obama has flip-flopped on FISA and if he does not oppose that compromise bill in the Senate this week then we have a duty to not only point out that he has flip-flopped but to reconsider the level of what was once robust support for him. That he would even consider supporting this legislation indicates a lack of principles that I find shocking. And while I disagree with him on other issues, I don't have a problem with him on those issues: (lack of mandate for health insurance, faith-based initatives, etc.). His positions are reasonable and deserving of respect.

By contrast should he support this compromise legislation then it will be clear that his "change we can believe in" slogan is not a call for genuine change but an empty slogan peddled by just another politician who will do anything he believes to achieve political power regardless of whether it damages the constiutional framework underpinning our government.

[tbone99]

I was likewise prepared to accept less than stellar commitments to healthcare, Iraq schedule etc.However for a Constitutional lawyer to compromise on the Constitution is the one thing I was not prepared for.

[cheforacle]

I have been a huge supporter for months but if he supports that legislation, I will cease to be involved with the campaign and recognize that I was duped.

[curioustorquemada]

To win the election Obama and McCain must move toward the center. However, both candidates started campaigning from the left of their respective parties. Consequently Obama has much more flip flopping to do than McCain.
I guarantee before November Obama will tell some gathering somewhere that he has always considered himself "pro life".

[truthynesslover]

Pretty funny! But many prochoice people have had reservations about late term abortions especially ones not deemed medically necessary so how is that a flip flop?Its a non issue for democrats because the BIG prize is who gets to have control of the supreme court for the next few decades and John Mccain wil certainly put in justices who will overturn roe and then we will have lost that right completely in many states.

[globalcitizenlinda]

The recent nonsense claiming that Obama is flip-floping demonstrates that the media and many on the extreme left have not been listening to what Barack was saying in the primary. One just needs to look up previous speeches, many of which are available on the official campaign website to see the consistence.

It is amazing to see some on the left promote a non-story that is meant to undermine the candidate they profess to support

[joodzia]

"The recent nonsense claiming that Obama is flip-floping demonstrates that the media and many on the extreme left have not been listening to what Barack was saying in the primary. One just needs to look up previous speeches, many of which are available on the official campaign website to see the consistence."

Yeah, no flipping during the primary--but just go and read his books. You wouldn't even think it's the same guy.

[joebhed]

linda, is that you?

say, you're kind of right.

A lot of the flip-flop talk is off target.

I did read his positions - they left me empty.

He almost got my primary vote for his votes on the Supremes.

But, I went with Edwards.

Glad I did.

If I'm going to waste my vote, I ain't gonna waste it on Obama.

[PumaJ]

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

I have become somewhat convinced over the past week that there have been "agents provocateurs" at play on various blogs, stirring up that "flip-flop" BS against Obama. The "outrage" about his stance on the FISA bill has been of particular vehemence. To me seeming almost overboard.

So it has crossed my mind that there are some from the right moving in to use the divide and conquer method of deflating Obama's previously powerful campaign.

We absolutely cannot afford to let him fail. We must guard his back.

[harriscrl3]

Progressives ALWAYS shoot themselves in the foot. They want the PERFECT LEFT CANDIDATE or a Republican and since there is no such thing as the former they end up getting the latter and then groan and moan for the tenure of the repubican President. Maybe they self-consciously do this so they can groan and moan for 4 more years. The only difference is I actually think that this year there may be a candidate that can win inspite of them. Its this all or nothing mentality that gives us 8 years of environmental degredation, growing poverty and inequality. You want to know who is to blame for the state of this country WE ARE. Life isnt perfect we dont get the perfect candidate we get a candidate thats 80% OK and its not good enough so we might just end up with the one thats 10% OK as in the case of McCain. Who has no ecomomic plan, has a dismal enviromental record inspite of being some kind of maverick and tells there will be more wars in our future.

Carol

[truthynesslover]

As woody allen said"intellectuals only eat their own!"

[Hanuman]

Some of you so-called progressives with often larger-than-life egos (I have been reading your back-and-forth posts on three websites/blogs for almost a year now) seem to be intent on screwing your selves, your country, and the world with your pettiness and gotcha-mentality.
Enjoy the ride and remember what you helped bequeath our mutual descent to everyones' grandchildren.

[TomSut]

Thank you for this perspective... very sound advice.

[GaryWolf]

Well said! I've been getting sick and tired of all the Obama bashing from the left. Sometimes it seems that they WANT to lose the election, rather than compromise on a die-hard liberal agenda. Despite his flaws, Obama will still be the best President we've had in a long time.

[Reveille]

The greatest danger to Obama is not McCain nor the RNC nor even the slimy far right lie machine; it is his fellow Democrats. Too many yell that any deviation by the candidate from their pet positions means that he is flip flopping, that he has sacrificed his credentials, that Obama is the next incarnation of W, etc. Will Rogers was only too correct when he said that he did not belong to an organized political party, he was a Democrat. The party has too many members who have forgotten 2000 and how the self proclaimed "Leftists of Greatest Purity" turned from the Liberal who could be elected to one one who lived in a time warp. The result has been the obvious disaster that is our country today. From those Die Hards For Hillary to those who explode at the least perceived shift by Obama, the Democatic Party is plagued by "members" who would rather see the party and the country sink 500 miles into hellfire than act maturely and elect a man who may be our last hope for a return to sanity. The 3% or 4% of Democrats that constitute the farthest Left need to to realize that ideology isn't worth a pitcher of warm spit if you don't win! Stop being wanna-be Republicans and back The Man!

[druidlady42]

Hear, hear!!! Way to go, Reveille!

It's time we Dems learn to do what the Repubs have done so successfully: If you want to "git 'er done" you have to stick TOGETHER and "back The Man"!

[truthynesslover]

As democrats we MUST look at the big picture.Who will control the supreme court?Who will do the most to fight global warming?Who will best give us a healthcare plan?Who can best re-invigorate the economy?Who will get us out of Iraq?None of the answers are John Mccain!

[joebhed]

The Supremes go via their Senate confirmations.

No more ultra-rightists.

Unless, of course, the Dems pave the way.

[bitchslappin]

Pet Positions?

Since when is Doing What You Have Sworn To Do and Defending The Constitution and the Rule of Law a PET POSITION? Since when is handing lawbreakers a Get Out Of Jail Free Card a PET POSITION?

[erichitchmo]

So...if you support Obama you shouldn't question his actions? Sorry, but that's exactly what happened with Bushies. I want a president who will be held accountable for his actions.

[sushi27]

Obama has NOT changed any positions - if you go back and read his stand back in the fall, he has not changed. The Big Business owned Media is using this to back McCain - anyone who believes this flip-flop bull deserves to languish under Bush/McCain dynasty. You didn't really think big business was going to let go of their firm grasp of the presidency without a dirty fight did you? Wake up America, before we lose our country and constitution to the Republican Big Business (Cheney, Bush and Rove are laughing all the way to the bank).

PBS is the only one not beholdig to Corporate America.

[TomSut]

I think you can question and disagree with positions, but you need to look at the whole package and evaluate on his words and rationale, not what the spin machines are telling you. I'll take a man who weighs his battles and decides when its smart to fight another day.

[KQuarksSuperKollider]

It's not about questioning his actions it's about putting them in perspective. Yes FISA was a true flip flop, but the way all these progressives bought into the right wing attack machine to join the attack on Obama was ignorant. There were able to show 4 separate times in debates and interviews on MSNBC when Obama took the same position on the Iraq war, but all these progressives ate up the Rethuglican narrative that it was a flip flop, not even giving Obama the benefit of the doubt. That's what Mr. Creamer is talking about. His backing but significant changes in faith based initiatives was the same thing, he had said he was man of faith and would keep some of the Bush programs before the so called flip flop. Just like he said he supported the death penalty in the worse criminal cases and a man with two young daughters child rape would be one of the worse crimes he could imagine. The standards progressives hold Obama to are just unrealistic.

[joebhed]

I don't know if I should just apologize for being here, or not.

Let's take his position on Iraq.
He'll maybe get us out in 16 months.
Maybe not.
Depends on what bush's generals say.
Sounds like - hey, four-thousand American soldiers died over here, and a million Iraqis, so we better not get out without "security" for our "interests".

Forget that we invaded a sovereign country for no good reason, and we have no right to be there.
Forget that the insurgents are a bunch of Shia and Sunni nationalists who love Iraq and will not lay down their arms while Americans occupy their country.

No, we need to "secure" our interests.

This is the definition of the "war until we own the oil" policy of the Bushies.

I didn't vote for Obama in the primaries.
I thought I might in the general.

But, VERY, VERY unlikely.
A lot of middle-of-the-road politicos think that progressives are sh*t.

I think I'm voting Nader again.