Obama in April: I don’t want a timetable for withdrawal; Update: April 2004
posted at 4:55 pm on June 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Barack Obama gave an interview in April to a Chicago television station and talked about his policy on Iraq. Take a look at the confused look on the interviewer’s face when Obama tries to explain that he has never called for a withdrawal of troops from Iraq, but wants to complete the mission there:
Q: But you’ve said troops should be withdrawn (from Iraq).
A: No, no, I’ve never said troops should be withdrawn.
Really? This is what his website offers for his Iraq policy:
Bringing Our Troops Home
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.
And from the same page, Obama notes that he introduced legislation in January 2007 (the start of the surge) that would have removed all of our troops by March 2008. He spent most of the primaries arguing with Hillary Clinton about which of them would actually produce a complete withdrawal. MoveOn and Code Pink support Obama specifically because he would commit to a fast withdrawal of American troops from Iraq — except for an embassy guard — and Hillary had a more nuanced position regarding precipitous withdrawal.
Instead, in this interview, he does his best to emulate John McCain. In Chicago, on April 5th of this year, he suddenly wants to complete the rebuilding, establish security, and then lower troop levels to a point where all of the gains remain in place.
Does Obama read his own website? Or does he just make it up as he goes along?
Update (AP): Readers are pointing out that the sidebar description on the YouTube page says this is from April 2004, not 2008. Sorry for the slip-up.
Update (Ed): My apologies for the error. The April 2004 date makes this somewhat interesting in a different way. Clearly, when things seemed to be going well at that time, Obama didn’t see a need to withdraw from Iraq. He could very well make the argument that he changed his mind as things got worse, which would be reasonable, if not correct in retrospect. However, Obama has claimed that he always opposed the Iraq war, while this shows that to be not quite the case.
Again, my apologies for the original error, and my thanks to my outstanding co-blogger Allahpundit for correcting it so quickly.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
He was tired.
Had too many waffles for breakfast.
Had waffles on the brain.
natesnake on June 11, 2008 at 4:57 PM
He doesn’t want one Ed, he just wants to make sure John McCain has one.
originalpechanga on June 11, 2008 at 4:58 PM
Racist.
natesnake on June 11, 2008 at 4:58 PM
Is that a trick question?
redshirt on June 11, 2008 at 4:59 PM
It’s like we’re living in a parallel universe with this guy.
JamesLee on June 11, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Holy crap! He’s worse than Jon Cary! And half the country wants this guy to be president???
Tony737 on June 11, 2008 at 5:01 PM
I guess its a case of now that I have the nomination secure, I can change my position, and screw everyone else and what they think!
ToddonCapeCod on June 11, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Captain Ed, this is just another one of those instances where Obama’s staff made an error when they posted something to his website. It appears that any time his website is out of sync with his latest comments, his staff is to blame…..
SouthernRoots on June 11, 2008 at 5:02 PM
Worst candidate EVAH!
rockmom on June 11, 2008 at 5:03 PM
With the progress in Iraq, Obama’s stance on the current status of the war is only becoming more incoherent. Expect him to revert to the “Judgement” rationale, which basically states that since he was againt the war from the start, that he’s more wualified to be Commander in Cheif. There’s an opening here for McCain, though, due to the fact that Obama did not, as an Illinois State Senator, have the same access to intelligence that McCain did. McCain should revisit the issue and recap the intelligence that he saw when formulating his intitial support for the invasion, and contrast it with what Obama likely knew when he formulated his initital opposition to it. The case can be made that Obama would back down even in the face of a major threat, regardless of whether the intelligence turned out to be right or wrong.
Big S on June 11, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Okay, so we know that, what about the rest of the world? Do they care?
right2bright on June 11, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Someone else on another thread asked how in the world are we going to lose to this guy in November??
Obama doesn’t know his head from his a**hole.
pullingmyhairout on June 11, 2008 at 5:04 PM
From 2004. I guess he hasn’t been calling for the end of the war since the beginning.
amerpundit on June 11, 2008 at 5:05 PM
He’s a lying-ass lying liar. Not to mention dishonest. Of course the MSM will completely ignore it.
Guardian on June 11, 2008 at 5:05 PM
To quote Mugatu: “Am I taking crazy pills?!?!”
EduardoOTI on June 11, 2008 at 5:05 PM
The YouTube sidebar:
Barack Obama on April 5, 2004
amerpundit on June 11, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Wow. He’s aged so poorly since April. He looks haggard and drawn now.
JiangxiDad on June 11, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Good catch, amerpundit.
EduardoOTI on June 11, 2008 at 5:08 PM
That’s so easy. One word - McCain.
MB4 on June 11, 2008 at 5:08 PM
If this makes news at all, which it won’t, phrases like “distraction from the real issues” or “this kind of ‘gotcha politics’ has to stop. The American people are tired of it” are sure to follow.
Add a complicit press, and….Voila! Handled.
/Kreskin
Matticus Finch on June 11, 2008 at 5:08 PM
One word “schizophrenic“.
Senator Barack Obama has no knowledge of the things said by Barry Obama, the Dali-Bama or the Community Organizer and Chief. In this way, Obama is able to have more policy positions than Sybil and everyone is happy.
moxie_neanderthal on June 11, 2008 at 5:09 PM
The one thing Barry doesn’t like is being laughed at.
He’s approaching a laughingstock. It aint gonna be pretty when he cracks.
JiangxiDad on June 11, 2008 at 5:12 PM
This dude will say anything to get elected. It’s shameless.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 11, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Is this the Obamination’s version of “I didn’t inhale?”
jukin on June 11, 2008 at 5:12 PM
When he does crack, I predict a lot of F-bombs and railing against “whitey”.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on June 11, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Democrats have been hiding who they are and lying about what they plan to do for so long that the truth of particular statements no longer matter.
They know that whatever he is saying right now is meaningless. The assume that he’ll follow through with the platform and the base once he’s in office.
It’s going to be fascinating watching his first 100 days. It’s likely to be a train wreck of epic proportions. Who’s left crushed under the train remains to be seen.
Asher on June 11, 2008 at 5:13 PM
If someone doesn’t, I will eventually…eventually…
Dig through the archives of HA and put together a single video that demonstrates all of Obama’s flip-flops.
ynot4tony2 on June 11, 2008 at 5:14 PM
On that Youtube video page, it says the comments were made on April 5, 2004.
gumble on June 11, 2008 at 5:15 PM
Another day. Another flip flop.
SoulGlo on June 11, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Asher on June 11, 2008 at 5:13 PM
I think for the next 150 days we’ll watching the slo’ mo’ train wreck that is O!08
mred on June 11, 2008 at 5:16 PM
Oh
Snap!
jharada on June 11, 2008 at 5:17 PM
April? Why is this only surfacing now? This should have been huge news, Hillary would have trumpeted this to the rafters. I can’t believe the MSM is actually that good at burying something. Is this for real? Something’s not right…
Enrique on June 11, 2008 at 5:19 PM
Oh, absolutely. Obama’s position was based on kneejerk ideology, not available facts, because they weren’t available to him. Seems a golden opportunity for McCain.
a capella on June 11, 2008 at 5:19 PM
See my last comment.
amerpundit on June 11, 2008 at 5:20 PM
Ah, yes, I should have read that.
Well, this post is sort of pointless then…
Enrique on June 11, 2008 at 5:21 PM
That doesn’t look like Obama in April. The youtube page says April 2004.
Still, a mighty good find.
MayBee on June 11, 2008 at 5:22 PM
MB4 need a new hat?
I’d hate to have you not in full uniform for his concession speech in Nioveber to the masses of A$$es that supported him. Just looking after you!
http://commieobama.com/
old trooper on June 11, 2008 at 5:22 PM
So, does that make it a double flip flop? I’m not sure what his present policy is as of today,…but then it’s only Wednesday.
a capella on June 11, 2008 at 5:25 PM
Comrade Obama can’t read the script without the Teleprompter. Comrade sure is not very trustworthy and has really poor judgement. You wonder how the bus can move with all the bodies under it.
tarpon on June 11, 2008 at 5:35 PM
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/03/the_evolving_barack_obama.asp
All those reasons Obama listed for staying in Iraq in 2004 are still applicable today. Some reporter should question him about his past comments and reasoning for staying in Iraq and why as of today he is willing to abandon Iraq and face those consequences he listed before.
And can’t the McCain or Republican camp get an audio version of those comments from Obama? Would sound pretty nice in a national ad against Obama.
gumble on June 11, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Against timetables before he was for them.
ThePrez on June 11, 2008 at 5:44 PM
Even if this was in 2004, it just shows that his position on Iraq has not been consistent as he’s claimed. He was against withdrawal before he was for it.
Rick on June 11, 2008 at 5:44 PM
I like to dream about the time to come, and the look on his face, when Obama decides to throw the military under the bus and finally realizes who actually has all the tanks, guns and bombs.
Yoop on June 11, 2008 at 5:47 PM
Obama has lived in a world (like much of liberal acadamia) without ever being challenged.
Everyone around him has been liberal, so he only need answer as a liberal.
But welcome to the real world, even in new reporting, there are some that will ask the tough question, some will remind him of past statements, and his world will begin to unravel.
He can say whatever he wants to a liberal supporter, they will nod in agreement like a bobble head on a dashboard.
But not everyone is a bobblehead (sorry Chris Mattews), and real reporters will tug at those loose strings, and his liberal garment will unravel.
right2bright on June 11, 2008 at 5:52 PM
Does anyone else get the feeling that this guy is running not as The Second Coming of the Messiah but as The Second Coming of Obi Wan Kenobi?
Every time he speaks of how one of his many contradictions is not a contradiction all I hear is him saying, “These are not the droids you’re looking for.”
Typhoon on June 11, 2008 at 5:55 PM
You know a candidate is in trouble when a gaffe comes out and you can’t think of any jokes about it that you haven’t already told two dozen times.
Merovign on June 11, 2008 at 6:01 PM
A few months back when Bill Clinton was being lambasted by the MSM for characterizing Obama’s supposedly consistent opposition to the Iraq war as a “fairytale,” somebody posted a compilation of Obama’s public statements on the war. He was all over the place. This isn’t his first waffle on Iraq, not by a long shot.
AZCoyote on June 11, 2008 at 6:20 PM
Remember the context. At this time in 2004, Obama was adjusting his rhetoric to back up Kerry, who voted for the invasion. Now, being against it from the start is having the Judgement To Lead.
Karl on June 11, 2008 at 6:34 PM
Not counting McCain? ;)
ctmom on June 11, 2008 at 6:42 PM
Say whatever you want B. Hussein, it doesnt matter anymore as the MSM will allow you to do as you wish, and your surrogates will tell us what you meant tomorrow anyway.
2004 or 2008, it just doesn’t matter what this loon says.
.
If he takes both sides to all issues he can’t go wrong.
shooter on June 11, 2008 at 6:45 PM
This is not the Obama I know.
Buy Danish on June 11, 2008 at 7:54 PM
This man changes his mind every 5 minutes - just to fit in with whatever argument is flying around. Jerusalem must remain but then again, it’s status is up to the people there undivided…I would talk to dictators without conditions….but I wouldn’t talk to dictators without specifying conditions etc. etc.
He’s a political Zelig and nobody picks him up on it.
uptight on June 11, 2008 at 8:25 PM
“But you opposed the war?”
“No, I just never voted for it. I never said I opposed the war”
“So you support the war?”
“No I oppose the war - remember I never voted for it”
“You said the troops should be removed immediately?”
“No - I never said that”
“We have it on tape”
“I meant they should be removed immediately after they’ve finished the job”
“So the troops should stay?”
“No - they should be withdrawn”
“Withdrawn?”
“Well…maybe not withdrawn…maybe just sensitive and introverted”
“Barack?”
“Yes?”
“Shut up”
uptight on June 11, 2008 at 8:33 PM
Big difference!
(I couldn’t resist)
OneGyT on June 11, 2008 at 8:49 PM
Ancient economics/statistics conundrum: Is it better to be consistent or accurate?
No matter what History finally decides upon the Bush Presidency, the one adjective that will be applied is “Consistent”.
Exit stupid pithy quote: John Maynard Keynes “When the facts change, I change my mind – what do you do, sir?”
Kudos to the Cap’n for admitting an understandable error.
New_Jersey_Buckeye on June 11, 2008 at 11:39 PM
Where was Hillary on this? Why is this the first time I have seen this? She spent her money on hillarycopters and digging up dirt and ignored Obama’s own hypocrisy. It might not have made a difference in a race defined by identity and DNA instead of issues but she could have at least tried.
Dollayo on June 12, 2008 at 12:16 AM
This tape is stunning. It’s the tape of the election!
Travis1 on June 12, 2008 at 3:18 AM
In fact, if you read his book, you’ll see that he was initially afraid right after the invasion that he had been wrong in describing his opposition to the war - because it had gone so quickly and well.
Then things took a turn for the worse, and Obama could breathe a sigh of relief. However messed up that sounds, that what he actually writes in his book. No joke.
Seixon on June 12, 2008 at 3:41 AM