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

[KMan1]

When are (some) liberals going to learn to identify republican bait and switch propaganda? Obama is not saying anything now that he hasn’t said at sometime or the other before. All the republicans have done is repackaged old news (while adding a little misinformation of course) and represent it as new news. For people who aren’t really aware of Obama’s views this may be a revelation. However, he has always said that his goal is to get out of Iraq. BUT he will "be more careful getting out as we were getting in" Isn’t this what we want our next president to do? Be mindful of ALL the information BEFORE making a decision? Didn’t we get into enough trouble rushing into things without heeding expert advice?

This nonsense reminds me of how (some)liberals treated Kerry. I remember asking liberal friends why they didn’t vote for Kerry. You know what the answer was? “Well he seems weak.” Well, what do you know, a republican talking point effectively shoved down their throats. CHECK MATE!

[Abysmal]

You can talk all you like about Obama being above catagorization or about change. For a while there I believed it too. But he's starting to look an aweful lot like Bill "read some polls and triangulate every position so that it appeals to everyone but does almost nothing" Clinton. I was under the impression that part of the "change" mantra was supposed to be NOT folding like a house of cards in an attempt to swing moderate voters. I thought the change part was supposed to be about changing things in favor of core democratic principles. I thought some of those democratic principles were anti-death penalty and pro gun restriction. I'm sure I must have read that somewhere. I thought the change mantra was supposed to involve NOT caving in to fears about what names the republicans were going to call him. I seem to recall him saying something like that in a speech. I must be insane.

[MaeScott]

Yes, you must be insane. No quarrel there.

[okayigive]

Please take your fingers out of your ears and blinders off your eyes. Mr. Creamer is Not telling anyone to Stop using Their voice in dissatisfaction. What he is saying is their is Constructive Critisism which is valid and rightfully your right to do, but you are doing the reps job and condoning MSM when you use Destructive Criticism. Ex.: I don't like the fact that you, Sen. Obama has chosen to allow FISA to stand as is without keeping your prior stance to have the immunity clause removed. I would prefer that you re-think your present standing on this matter. (Constructive Criticism)

Sen. Obama is just a flip-flopper on FISA, you can't trust him he changes his mind constantly and is only pandering to the center and becoming a centrist and forgetting his base. If he don't get his act together I'll vote for him because he's the lesser of two evils, but I'm not going to campaign for him or send anymore money. (Destructi­veCriticis­m)

Hopefully, this clarify the meaning of this article and you can see the difference in tone and substance of what you are saying. The art of communication is an amazing tool if used properly.

[DuPageDem]

Correct, Obama didn't flip-flop on FISA. He caved in. Those who actually care about this issue should say it plainly and loudly, before what little else of the Bill of Rights remains gets traded away in the name of 'political compromise­.'

Spin it any way you want. A pig is a pig, no matter how much perfume you pour on.

[MaeScott]

* McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15370.htm...

* McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off than they were before Bush took office.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/19/mccain-economy-bloo... /

* McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/06/mccain-earmark /

* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/21/hagee-flip-flop /

*McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting“irr­esponsibly­.”His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15176.htm...

* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/10/emtimeem-has-m...

* On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own legislation.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14447.htm...

[MaeScott]

McCain Flip flops
* McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15863.htm...

* McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/10/mccain-flips-o...

* McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15825.htm...

* He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion,he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15864.htm...

* McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.
http://www.americablog.com/2008/06/now-mccain-is-flip-f...

* McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite. Now where is he?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...


* McCain supported moving “towards normalization of relations” with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15617.htm...

[MaeScott]

McCain Flip/Flops

* McCain supported the drilling moratorium; now he’s against it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

* McCain strongly opposes a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/18/mccains-offsho...

* McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15781.htm...

[myrddin]

It is one thing to change your mind on an issue because of political expediancy and quite another to change your mind because of a changing situation which requires a different approach. Both are erroneously labeled as flip-flops but I for one would want a president who reevaluates the situation when things change. Obama has reevaluated his positions be not changed them drastically unlike McCain who has taken opposite stances on global warming and tax cuts.

[tbone99]

At one time Obama backed Feingold on FISA and wooed progressives with issues on their civil rights. , Now that he 's seduced them he's on to other conquests. I won't shut up so a unethical politician can get in office.Tha­ts what Bush supporters did for far too long!

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/334933

[MaeScott]

So,,you're voting for McSame, then?
Pitiful.

[j0em0mma]

Nice line of argument, we're supposed to either fully capitulate or we're McCain appeasers? Do you not see that this is exactly the same line of thinking that allowed the GOP, with tacit approval of the DNC, to destroy the country?

[tbone99]

I said I won't shut up- I have quite a while to consider dem or third party. But since I live in Texas my vote is virtually worthless anyway. Ah- democracy!

[THEhillbilly]

What a hilarious juxtaposition: "McSame...­" "Pitiful."

You (lamers collectively) are an amusing lot.

[j0em0mma]

He said he would support Feingold/Dodd on immunity, but says he won't stop the bill if that clause fails. This isn't progressives' fault, nor ironically, the GOP (we know where they stand on fundamental freedoms), this is BARACK OBAMA's FAULT. This IS a flip-flop, and a pretty unnecessary one that smacks of smoky back rooms with an excuse of electorate reach-out as a facade.

Change we can be embarrassed to argue with our more cynical friends about...

[nomobull]

where did he say that exactly.

[j0em0mma]

You shouldn't need a link if you feel informed enough to be compelled to comment, but here ya go:

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2007/10/obama_camp_says_it_hell_support_filibuster_of_any_bill_containing_telecom_immunity.php

[legalclubs]

Isn't the real problem is that Obama has committed some serious flip-flops that can't simply be explained away. Now let me start by saying that there is nothing wrong with changing your mind after you come into new information. For example, if Obama finds out inside information that FISA was and is instrumental in catching numerous bad guys and resulted in the prevention of terrorism then based on this new information he could conceivably change his mind. However, if he flip-flops on his war position, a position to get out under a time table (which I now really question his willingness to do this) then he is just a liar. Same thing with campaign finance and his complete 180 degree turn on his promise to only take public funds in the general election if the Rupublican nominee did the same. The whole point of having principles is that they don't change just because it's convenient or because you think it is to your advantage to do so.

[JustMyWords]

Um, "his complete 180 degree turn on his promise to only take public funds in the general election if the Rupublican nominee did the same"? When, pray tell, did he ever make such a promise? And if that is actually what he had said, how could it be a flip-flop to not be taking public funds?

[legalclubs]

Obama replied "yes" in September 2007 when asked if he would agree to public financing of the presidential election if his GOP opponent did the same. McCain has agreed to take the public financing and Obama last month stated that he intended to seek financing of his campaign though private funding. Keep in mind the whole point of public financing is you remove interest groups from financing your campaign which have often proven to have a corrupting influence.

Also, you need to read your post again. It's a flip-flop because he said he would agree to the public financing of his presidential bid in September of 2007 and in June of 2008 he changed his mind and will not take public financing which allows him to take private donations. By the way, if you want to see all his flip-flops you can go to the Washington Post's website
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/dem_flipflops.html
and check it out for yourself. Keep in mind that the Washington Post is the left leaning paper for D.C. (the Washington Times in the right leaning paper).

[MaeScott]

It's a big tent. We are going to need a coalition of all kinds of voters to win in November. We'll need those that are his base, those for whom the faith based intiatives resonate, those for whom want the nation to go in another direction and are disappointed in the current administration. WE'll need everyone.
The media is complicit in ensuring this does not happen. I wish someone would do an analysis on press treatment for the two candidates. Obama gets put down repeatedly while McCain waltzes.

All I hear is "what's wrong with Obama?"
" He needs to do this" and "He needs to do that". "Is he losing the Clinton voters? Is he reaching the hard working (white) voters?" The media appears to be the biggest Concern Troll I've seen yet.

[ibsteve2u]

"Remember that there is a huge gulf between the values of Obama and McCain."

Although I had already figured it out, it is pretty early in the campaign to rub the rest of America's nose into "the lesser of two evils" conundrum, isn't it?

[BillZBubb]

So, if the Dear Leader In Waiting flip-flops on core values, we, the good sheep, should pretend it didn't happen? Do you really think if progressives stick their head in the sand and rationalize or deny Obama's many changes to positions he took in the primaries the rest of the electorate will miss them? Sure, that will happen.

Your denial that Obama has flipped on several key issues is sad. We've got two flip-floppers running for president. A better strategy for Obama supporters is to point out that McCain has flip-flopped a lot more. Neutralize the flip flop issue instead of living in denial.

At least our flip-flopper is better than their flip-flopper.

[nomobull]

your name calling gives you a way.

[mike53]

Democrats want the unfairness doctrine brought back, Obama wants to "do something" about media conglomerates(Fox News) and now some democrats are telling even other dems to watch what they say. With dems in total control even the blogs won't be safe.

[Argente]

Yes, there are clear and important differences between the candidates; but how do we get them to articulate their positions and plans to the broader electorate? Mr. Obama states a position on FISA or elaborates on his Iraq thinking, and the knee-jerks on the left and the McCain campaign respond identically:

"OMG! Did you see that! He replaced a comma with a semicolon! Flip flop! Flip flop!"

Sounds like a high-school girl trying to break her way into the popular crowd by dissing her rival's hair-do.

You can be solidly behind a candidate with no intention whatsoever of changing your mind - that's fine. But if you encourage each candidate to rise up (without then trying to shoot his head off) and express his ideas, it will serve as the grist for your candidate to use to hone his focus on the various issues and become stronger as a result.

Are there any grown-ups out there; or are they just being lost in the din created by angry partisans? I remain optimisic that there are enough thinking voters to make a difference - especially among that relatively small segment that will decide this election.

[tbone99]

Its the grown-ups who are still fighting for the Constitutin and our cilvil liberties, hardly the equivalent of a semi-colon.