The IUSB Vision Weblog

The way to crush the middle class is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation. – Vladimir Lenin

HOTAIR.COM: Obama Still Doesn’t Get Youtube Does He?

Posted by iusbvision on June 27, 2008

I have lost count of how many times Senator Obama has flip-flopped and flipped again on various issues.

First it was we will withdrawal form Iraq immediately, then it was withdrawal conditional on the situation on the ground, recently it was the slow steady withdrawal ….

Iran isnt a serious threat than it is.

Renegotiate NAFTA than lets not – then deny that I said lets not – then admit it after you got caught.

Negotiate without prior condition with Iran, than reversal, reversal again and reversal again.

He says he doesn’t take money from big corporations and special interest – then he does in the millions.

He says he isn’t taking money from energy companies – too bad the FEC Reports prove otherwise.

He promises to abide by federal campaign spending limits – then reverses

the list goes on and on… well here is the lastest via hotair.com:

 

In days gone by, politicians could issue mutually-contradictory messages with near impunity as the mainstream media rarely would double-check the historical record.  Now, with video on line and millions of fact-checkers scrutinizing every statement, any obviously false statement will get exposed in short order.  Yesterday’s assertion by Barack Obama that he never said the DC gun ban overturned by the Supreme Court was constitutional or that he supported it became the latest in his flip-flops to be exposed by a simple review of the videotape record:

 

 

Obama is right to the extent that his statement didn’t come in November 2007 but more recently in February 2008, as he tried to sweep the primaries by running to Hillary Clinton’s left. He nods when asked about the constitutionality of the DC gun ban, and expresses his support for it by saying “Right” when the interviewer asks about it. Obama then goes into an extended explanation of how he sees the DC ban as part of a Constitutional effort at gun control.

Now the Constitutional law scholar wants us to believe that he always thought the DC ban was unconstitutional, and that his earlier comments were “inartful”. This video shows very clearly that the only artifice involved is in his new position. Obama has done a complete 180 on gun bans, attempting to paint himself as a moderate when the paltry record of Obama’s political stands shows just the opposite. http://hotair.com/archives/2008/06/27/obama-still-doesnt-get-youtube-does-he/

 

Kinda says all that needs to be said doesnt it.

The Washington Post called him on it while some other news outlets gave Obama a pass:

Barack Obama is under hostile fire for changing his position on the D.C. gun ban.

Oh, I’m sorry. He didn’t change his position, apparently. He reworded a clumsy statement.

That, at least, is what his campaign is saying. The same campaign that tried to spin his flip-flop in rejecting public financing as embracing the spirit of reform, if not the actual position he had once promised to embrace.

Is this becoming a pattern? Wouldn’t it be better for Obama to say he had thought more about such-and-such an issue and simply changed his mind? Is that verboten in American politics? Is it better to engage in linguistic pretzel-twisting in an effort to prove that you didn’t change your mind?

Regardless of what you think of the merits of yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling overturning the capital’s handgun law, it seems to me we’re entitled to a clear position by the presumed Democratic nominee. And I’m a bit confused about how the confusion came about.

Here’s how the Illinois senator handled the issue with the Chicago Tribune just last November:

“The campaign of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said that he ‘ . . . believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.’ ”

Kind of a flat statement.

And here’s what ABCreported yesterday: ” ‘That statement was obviously an inartful attempt to explain the Senator’s consistent position,’ Obama spokesman Bill Burton tells ABC News.”

Inartful indeed.

But even though the earlier Obama quote and the “inartful” comment have been bouncing around the Net for 24 hours, I’m not seeing any reference to them in the morning papers. Most do what the New York Timesdid: “Mr. Obama, who like Mr. McCain has been on record as supporting the individual-rights view, said the ruling would ‘provide much-needed guidance to local jurisdictions across the country.’ ”

Supporting the individual-rights view? Not in November.

Even the Tribune–the very paper that the Obama camp told he supported the gun ban–makes no reference to the November interview.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/27/AR2008062701118_pf.html

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: