Flip-flopping politicians?

Yes. This is yet another blog entry out on the web that is curiously questioning what is going on inside the mind of Barack Obama.

According to MSNBC news, over the past few weeks Obama has made a few moves that are getting him labeled as a flip-flopper. (As well, so that people don't accuse MSNBC of being a conservative media perspective, here is Bob Herbert of the New York Times questioning Obama's politics!) For example, do you recall the heat he and Sen. Hilary Clinton got into when Hillary talked about a need to get out of Iraq, but Obama said that she landed way to far into the conservative political perspective on that point? He was all about making it a priority to get out of Iraq. The devil in the details, he more recently revealed a plan / recommendation that got us out of Iraq in 16 months (so 1.33 years after he would theoretically get into office.) Now, he saying that he doesn't want to undervalue the progress that is being made in Iraq, the "gains" that we are working hard to establish, so he is ready to be more flexible on when we leave in hopes that even more progress is made toward stability. Wait? He claimed we shouldn't be there to begin with? And he has been screaming "get out" for more than a year now. I know people who are ready to vote for Obama almost completely on this issue alone! Suddenly progress is happening, so he jumps on board and getting the troops home is less of a priority? At best, this leaves people wondering what his priorities and motivation really are here. Apparently, knowing his rhetoric isn't nearly enough. He was raging against a "stay the course" conservative proposal, and now suddenly he seems to support it.

In addition to that, he recently supported an augmented surveillance intelligence bill. This was a bit of a shocker to most, in that he is suddenly running against the majority opinion of his party.

As well, Barack had a fairly firm position about thoughts on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has suddenly softened and at the same time he publicly supported the Supreme Courts ruling in favor of upholding citizen gun owning laws (this was about the Supreme Court overturning a hand gun ban in DC) as well as landing in a more conservative perspective on the death penalty. Wow! Who is this guy? (Actually, the issue of being OK with the death penalty in the case of intense issues like "child rape" is a known issue that Obama somewhat supported before. It was only recently that is has become a political opportunity to re-brand him as a more politically moderate candidate. That doesn't stop press folks like Bob Herbert from calling his support of the death penalty in any form "barbaric.")

Now, a naive person might (only might) think that "this is the true perspective" of Obama finally coming through. Or they might ask the question, "Wouldn't this mean that He is a candidate that more people can get behind?" but really I think it begs another question altogether.

I think the question is, if these more recent political moves reflect a side to Obama we are only now being exposed to (he never voted like this in his previous years of politics -- he always voted the party line, nearly 100% of the time), then is his short run in federal politics significant enough to really throw our weight behind in an election? Said another way, if these decisions blur our political view and understanding of him (and the experts say it raises reasonable questions) then how do we back him, if we are not honestly sure how he truly stands on these issues? I would grant enough grace to the general population in that I don't think people could have imagined that he would be doing and saying some of the stuff he is siding with these days, so they could reasonably question this whole "change" rhetoric and at this point not be accused of flip-flopping themselves.

Personally, I think we can see with more certainty the positions of McCain and Clinton. It has me wondering if the Democratic party might want to reconsider the candidate they are backing. Or in reality, they likely will not reconsider. Why? Because Washington already knows he is a politician like all of them. The best we could hope for is a good guess on how they will truly act and react as president. In the case of Obama, he can motivate you and make you feel you are on the team, but the question is, where is this team going, really.

In conclusion, I think that this significantly raises into question what sort of "change" Obama has been imagining, if he is now siding with stuff that we imagined he previously wanted to change. Or are these recent political decisions reducing his "change" speeches into hype-rhetoric to get people excited (i.e. "Hey, I want change and he wants change. We must want the same change!? Go Obama, go!"). Maybe what we are seeing is a man who wants votes so he is compromising his values to gain more middle-ground? Who knows, and that is the problem. As Markos Moutlisas writes in his blog entry on July 8th, Obama is "now acting like every other politician. For those who thought he was something 'new' and 'different', fact is, he's behaving like every other politician before him."

I would love to hear peoples thoughts on this. If anyone wants to blog their own explanations of what this is really all about, write about it on your blog and add a link to the blog entry in my comments on my blog here!