Nothing wrong with Obama coming to the middle

I'm a Libra. I like balance (though I don't believe in astrology, I'll unashamedly use it to make a point).

So I think it's great that Obama is moving more toward the middle of the political spectrum, now that he's secured the Democratic presidential nomination.

A few days ago I read a great column in the Portland Oregonian by some woman whose name I can't remember. I'd be quoting it like crazy, but my wife took our newspapers to the recycling center today, screwing up my blog post research.

Regardless, I'll unashamedly use the columnist's ideas as if they were mine (this must be a shame free evening for me).

Here's the deal: Obama has been saying all along that this shouldn't be a nation of red states and blue states, of Republicans and Democrats, of rich and poor, of whites and blacks – all those dualities that separate us from each other.

People love that.

So where are we going to come together? In the left wing of the American house? No. It's going to be in the center, by and large.

Columnist Clarence Page (who I was able to locate online) talks about "Barack Obama and his surge to the middle."

In recent weeks the likely Democratic presidential nominee has taken that risky road. He has softened or abandoned his earlier positions on a parade of issues, including wiretaps, abortion, trade with Mexico and Canada, gun control and public funding of his own campaign.

Liberal bloggers, like Arianna Huffington of The Huffington Post, have howled that Obama's selling out the left. But, viewed another way, he's buying into the middle. He's reaching for what former Secretary of State Colin Powell has called the "sensible center," that big, broad place in the political middle where most American voters live.

Good for him. When I listen to Air America, the progressive talk show network, it drives me nuts to hear so much airtime being devoted to whether Obama is acting exactly the way lefties want him to.

He caved in on FISA! He's willing to modify his Iraq withdrawal plan! He called for more faith based initiatives! He said there's an individual right to own guns!

So what? I happen to agree with him on most, if not all, of these issues. And I'm a good example of a long-time unaffiliated voter who recently turned into a Democrat just to vote for Obama in the Oregon primary.

Even when I disagree with Obama about some issue, I keep telling myself: "He's not perfect, but he's so much better than McCain." Unless all those aggrieved lefties plan to vote for McCain, they should shelve their criticism of Obama.

Jonathan Freedland has another nice take on Obama in his "Obama's shuffle to the right suggests this man is ruthless enough to win."

In this light, Obama's U-turns look different. They suggest that he is determined not to be just another principled loser - and the Democrats have had plenty of those. The clearest illustration came in Obama's most blatant reverse. He had promised to stay within the system of taxpayer-funded campaign finance, which would have obliged him to stick to an $85m spending limit. Once it became clear he could raise, and spend, many times that amount, he broke his pledge. Sure, it was unprincipled. But it suggested a man bent on winning and ruthless enough to make sure he does. That's the standard operating procedure for Republicans. For Democrats it takes some getting used to.

Oh, yeah, give me ruthless. Give me triangulation. Give me moving to the middle. Just don't give me four more years of a Republican president.

Comments

[Jack Bog]

The people on the left who are acting as though they might actually withhold their vote for Obama are behaving so immaturely.

Although there's much more at stake, you need go no further than this: If John McCain becomes President, he will screw up the Supreme Court even worse than the Bushes have -- and that is saying a lot. It will likely be the death of the Court, already much diminished, and with it the demise of the balance of power that makes this country great. For that reason alone, one is compelled to vote for Obama, regardless of disagreements about the issues you've outlined.

[Harry Vanderpool]

My reading of the situation is that the polls are way off.
When asked, folks answer with the trendy and PC correct, and the expected, "Obama!".
In reality however, in the pivacy of the voting booth; they will not flush our grandchildrens future down the toilet.

[Rain]

The Bush administration has already flushed our grandchildren's future by spending for a war this generation wasn't willing to fund, by ignoring climate change and so many other issues if they didn't make money. The deficit will be a burden on our great grandchildren with the selfishness of this generation who are unwilling to pay for any of the things they claim to want but don't mind accruing debt like crazy from China and who knows where. No administration could do more damage to the future than we have seen.

As for Obama, he has always been in the middle and it's why he appealed to people like me who are also in the middle. If you read his early opinions, Huffington can moan all she wants but he was never an extreme leftie. She wants to control him now but she should not. There has to be compromise if we want to get ahead and that's something Bush didn't bother with because the people supporting him didn't want it. They wanted their way, their profits and to heck with the rest of the people.

Obama will not please us all if he gets in (right or left) but unless all that you care about are two hot button issues (like abortion and gays) nobody will. It's picking the best of the lot and for me, that's Obama.

Of course, I am also a libra; so naturally I'd think this way also :)

[Roger]

I'm a Sagitarius. Could someone tell me the proper and natural way I need to politically think. Thanks for your help.

[Dave]

============================================
Here’s Obama on the Iranian threat in Billings, Montana:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm-VduN-FVc

And here’s Obama in Portland. The same day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ew5qP2oPdtQ

Please stop before you give us whiplash and turn what’s left of your campaign into a laughingstock.You may have attention deficit disorder

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/20/negotiating-with-terrorists-knowledge-of-foreign-policyhistory/#more-2618
============================================
Obama’s Cousin Won’t Let Us Go After Terrorists

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/24/obamas-cousin-wont-let-us-go-after-terrorists/

============================================

http://obamawtf.blogspot.com/2008_03_09_archive.html

============================================

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/05/21/barack-obama-gaffe-machine/
============================================
http://clintondems.com/2008/07/is-obama-eligible-by-birth-to-be-president-of-the-united-states/

============================================
http://www.rense.com/general82/notex.htm
============================================
Obama: "I Don't Care How Poor You Are"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGxzqwRJUzM&feature=email
============================================
This isn't the half of it!Obama will say one thing and then say another in another states or country.You may not stay on top of this race but-Obama is danerous! He knows not much of our country as you may know he thinks and said The Great Lakes are in Oregon.And also said he will have a bill and become law by 2025 for Oregon- green house gases and renewal.Oregon has did it themselve 2007 cause bush would not.Obama cut and past this and to say he didn't know where the Great lAkes really were. I think people should really take a closer look and hear this flip floper of all!He uses all the people

[artsasinic]

While I shan't withhold my vote from Obama, I will certainly be looking to use my meager financial support to back whomever I feel is most likely to keep him in check once he has all the power.

[condor]

Obama's rallying cry has been change and hope...hope for a change from the old ways of doing things. The fact that he has shifted his position on many issues shows that he is just more of the same.. a typical politician that will do and say whatever it takes to win and get in office.

[Right Democrat]

I agree. Barack Obama has no choice but to move to the middle. There are simply not enough across-the-board progressives to win a national election much less gain the kind of mandate needed to effectively govern.

Obama seems to be sincere in trying the narrow the red-blue divide that has kept our nation from solving a lot of urgent problems like running out of energy. Despite all of the polarization among activist types, the center is the still the swing vote.

[Sylvia Kirkwood]

Thanks! you have a way of saying it just right. I think Obama definitely needs to come to the middle -- that's been his message, the reaching across the aisle, working together and I'm really disappointed by those who slam him for it. He'll never please everyone, but he's the best I've seen in many, many years.

Sylvia

[condor]

10 Reasons why Obama is WRONG for America

The 2008 Presidential election may go down in history as one of the most confusing elections in many years. The Republican race took off with candidates that would make us proud to be Americans, and Republicans, but they lost momentum and dropped out too early. The Republican candidate who was behind early on came out on top in the long haul. And, the Democratic ticket started out as mass confusion and has only gotten worse. We near the Democratic Convention and the Democrats apparently are only now deciding whom they want as their candidate. Their choices were difficult. A feminist attorney with a shady past and a scary future as our nations President, and an even worse choice, a candidate whose motto of “change” could lead to changes that would harm the very future and security of our nation and our people.

I asked a fellow political analyst and good friend of mine, who wishes to remain unknown, to assist me in the analysis as to the credibility, or lack thereof, of Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is a candidate whose oratory skills outweigh his substance, and his rhetoric substitute for his obvious lack of experience. Of any candidate presented by any party for President, Obama represents the choice that most endangers the stability and future of our great nation. But ours is not an analysis based upon theory, race, or prejudice of any kind. It is based on a factual analysis of the candidate, of his message, and of his credentials to become the leader of the greatest nation on Earth.

Below is the analysis of my friend. I can add nothing to what he has here, but to applaud his efforts to effectively expose the most dangerous candidate in the race, Barack Obama.

Much has been made recently about the rise of Barack Obama in the nation’s consciousness as a political figure, and more importantly, as the next potential President of the United States of America. Aside from all of the political left’s fawning over Obama as the “he-is-us” aspects of his background, his so-called Kennedy-esque persona, his politically correct lineage as the child of a racially mixed marriage, and his “soaring” rhetoric, the question remains of just how much we really know about this person who could very well become the next leader of the most powerful nation on the face of the earth. It is amazing how quickly some in America would cast their vote for someone that they know so little about, someone who could so easily affect every aspect of their lives, and blindly trust that their lives will improve. If any of these left-leaning voters were to be put into a situation where the lives of their children were left in the hands of an unknown stranger, they would possibly make different choices before putting their children at risk. Since we are now dealing with the prospect of a virtually unknown stranger becoming the “daddy” of the nation, we should all collectively take a second look and a reevaluation of this man who would be President of the United States of America.

1. Obama’s Unspecific Platform – One of the first places people go to find information these days is to a website. It is a quick and easy method, but not always reliable. For a political candidate, it is fair to say that the candidate himself (or herself) would be fully aware of their own website’s content and would fully endorse what their website says, or more importantly, does not say. A good reading of Barack Obama’s official website shows that he treats issues in a way that he “defines” an issue, states that he will solve the issue, but gives no real details of what his solution entails. Many of his so-called solutions are utopian, how things “should be” rhetoric that conveniently ignores or dismisses real-world obstacles that he would invariably face if put in the Oval Office.

2. Obama is a Democrat – This may seem like a simplistic reason to decide against voting for a candidate, but it is worth contemplating. The Democratic Party’s approach toward governance is an increased intrusion into the personal lives of those governed. The Democrats now control both houses of the legislature, and should they win the Executive branch of the government, the left wing legislative agenda will be turned loose with a willing bill-signing president, and there will be no checks-and-balances on the passage of legislation that will most certainly unreasonably intrude upon our personal lives. Consider the areas of taxation, education, sex education, religious freedom, and welfare, among many others, and consider how much less you as a citizen will have a voice in these areas, and how much more the federal government will infuse itself into these areas.

3. Obama and “Change” – Barack Obama has skillfully used wordplay throughout his campaign, in his speeches, interviews, and literature. The word that he uses the most is “Change”, and when he makes a speech it appears on the podium he speaks from and on the signs posted behind him. Much of the oratory that he is lauded for is laced with the word “Change”, and he very skillfully couples it with the word “Courage”, implying that anyone who is not willing to “Change” is a coward. Personally, I believe there are things that have brought this country to its greatness, and much of that involved persistence and tenacity of a bed rock standard or ideal, not a wavering willingness to “change” things by taking the easy way out in the face of difficulty. There are many great things about this nation and our laws that Obama will “Change” just for the sake of “Change”, and more importantly, to use “Change” as a way to put a left-leaning spin on legislation. It is important to remember that not all things need to be changed. This country runs the risk of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

4. Obama Folds Under Pressure – Barack Obama wins high marks for his aura as a politician. The media has praised him for the way that he transforms a crowd into a idol-worshipping gushing hysteria of applause and adoration. He seems to be well rehearsed and slick in his performance as long as he controls the script and the venue. There are, however, several cracks in his veneer as of late, as has been seen in the debates with Hillary Clinton, pointed questions from interviewers, and explanations he has been obligated to give regarding his association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and former terrorist William Ayers. When confronted in these situations, you will see Obama’s slick communication skills degenerate into a halting speech pattern, use of bad analogies, and a tendency to endorse both sides of an issue. If we are to assume that a person generally “walks the talk”, then we can safely assume that Obama will most certainly fold under the pressure he will find in the presidential office when dealing with our sworn enemies, potential military conflicts, and national disasters that pit one needy group against another.

5. Obama’s Upbringing and Influences – It is impossible for any person to not be influenced by their parents, the people with whom they associate or affiliate themselves with, their education, and their political influences. No matter how palatable Obama may appear as a person, it is important to remember that he was raised by a far-left mother, influenced by a Marxist African father, educated in an Islamic educational secondary school system, received his degrees from left-leaning universities, associated with radical figures such as Wright and Ayers, and has been influenced and endorsed by the likes of Teddy Kennedy. No one can have such a background and not be fully immersed in leftist and radical un-American ideology. To believe otherwise is to dismiss all evidence of a person’s history and its likelihood to influence their future decisions and performance. Although many people have overcome bad upbringing and have clearly stated their recognition of working to overcome bad influences in their lives, Barack Obama clearly does not denounce his past influences, but rather embraces them. We can be assured that he will lean upon those influences in the future and that they will be integral to the way that he deals with any decision he will make as president.

6. Obama is not patriotic – Much can be observed about a person from the outward display of their behavior and demeanor. Although it is easy to give someone a “pass” on outward appearance, in Obama’s case it is very telling of what he truly believes regarding patriotism toward America. For example, one of the first pictures early in the campaign that shows all of the Democratic candidates during the Pledge of Allegiance, Obama is standing with his hands folded in front on him and he is not stating the Pledge along with the rest of the candidates and the audience. Likewise, many have observed that Obama does not like to wear a pin of the American flag on his lapel as do all other American political candidates. Obama’s wife has characterized America as a “mean” country and one in which she was not proud of until just recently, and only because there is now for the first time a black candidate put forward for consideration. We can almost certainly conclude that Obama himself holds the same beliefs. If we see someone who willingly allows themselves to be viewed as unwilling to show deference to the country for which they aspire to lead, in what manner they will run the very same country? It is about like asking the garbage collector to pledge allegiance to the local land-fill. Do you want a president who will treat you like a garbage collector?

7. Obama’s Inefficient High Priced Programs – Obama is committed to introducing a long list of new government programs that will most certainly become permanent fixtures of our society in the future. Examples of this include universal health care, give-away education programs, liberal immigration policies, an oppressive energy policy, and many others. It is obvious from history that any program that has been run solely by the government has become too costly, very inefficient, and largely unsuccessful in its operation. Yet these programs have been here to stay for decades and an albatross over successive generations of Americans. For example, the Social Security system of our country was fully funded at one time, but as it’s coffers grew, the Democrats saw a pile of cash that could be utilized toward other programs for which they were unwilling to raise taxes to fund. Over time, add in a host of other additional undeserving recipients of Social Security benefits, and soon you have a national program which is now unfunded (pay-as-you-go), close to insolvency, highly inefficient in its operations, and a huge burden upon future generations of Americans. The programs that Obama wishes to introduce to the U.S. mindset will create a mentality of the “nanny state” that Great Britain fought for years to rid itself of, and remains saddled with to this day. That sort of national mindset reduced Great Britain from its once formidable international status to that of second-tier power status. The United States of America would do well to take a lesson from the history of our good friends in England.

8. Obama Will Raise Taxes – We are assured by Barack Obama that he will raise taxes on the American public and American corporations. Without getting into the scheme for who is taxed at what rate, which pre-assumes that raising taxes is a good idea to begin with, let us first consider the feasibility of tax increases from a macro-economic standpoint. The United States is currently in a recession and will be for the next two years. Likewise, the U.S. currency has devalued against other major currencies by almost half over just the past year. These two factors alone make life much harder and unaffordable for the average American taxpayer because prices are higher and jobs are not as plentiful because employers are watching their expenses. Any economist worth their salt would tell you that it is not wise to reduce the supply of money in the market under such circumstances, yet the Democrats with Obama at the helm will most certainly do that very thing. The result will be slow business growth, a long period of high unemployment and high energy and food prices, which will push job seekers to look for higher paying jobs and induce employers to raise wages to stay competitive with their workforce. All of these results are inflationary and will create an upward spiral of wage and price increases over the next decade. In a free market economy, the very worst thing that can be done is to introduce unwise controls on the economy. Increased taxes are a form of economic controls because taxes reduce the supply of money in the marketplace, and at a time when the exact opposite is needed. One of the things that Obama wishes to “change” is who spends your money, and it will not be you, but rather the U.S. government with Obama holding the purse strings.

9. Obama, The Environment, and Energy – Democrats love to harp on the twin “evils” of fossil fuels and non-green environmental practices. There has been a lot of attention placed upon the need to secure biofuels such as ethanol as a way to reduce petroleum consumption, air pollution, and “global warming” caused from burning fossil fuel products in our cars and power plants. Obama believes that biofuels are the path to energy independence and his platform has this as something he will vigorously pursue as president. However, we are beginning to see and hear increasingly more scientists, energy experts, economists, and agriculturalists send up red flags about the dangers of converting to a biofuel dependency. For example, purely from an economic standpoint, it is obvious that the supply of grain worldwide is finite and has competing consumers for fuel production, human food supply, and animal feed-grain users. It has become apparent that grain prices have increased dramatically as grain has been diverted to the use for fuel production. Land which was once used to feed people and animals is now being used to produce grain for fuel, and farmers are being pressured to increase grain yields by over-fertilization techniques and woodland-to-farmland conversion. The result is that the average American pays higher prices for food at the grocery store, the environment is degraded by introducing hyper-production of farm production techniques, and countless dollars are funneled toward creating a fuel technology dependency which is extremely vulnerable and more expensive than other forms of energy. Obama is dead set upon pursuing this course despite all of the warning signs that have surfaced recently. We could count on this energy program being another flawed attempt at governmental involvement in something that the government has no expertise in governing.

10. Obama is Inexperienced – As a final consideration, despite the positions that Obama may take on various issues, it is plain to see that he is simply inexperienced as a leader. Obama has never run a business or held an executive political office. When Obama supporters are polled at debates on what types of significant accomplishments that Obama can point to in his history as a legislator, they clearly cannot point to any one Obama accomplishment at all. He has a history of voting in a very liberal manner, but he has introduced no legislation of his own, nor has he transformed any of his own ideas into legislation for consideration by his legislative peers. Likewise, he has sat on numerous committees and subcommittees, yet has largely been either absent or uninvolved with them due to his presidential election campaigning activities. So what we have here is a person who has held political office but has not fully engaged in the work of that office, and has merely used it as a stepping stone toward his real goal of being President of the United States. This is the case of a job applicant with a fairly decent looking resume, but no underlying content to back it up. The job of President of the United States is one that we all should look for the very best candidate to fill, one with a history of real accomplishments, and not one who merely has a well written resume.

There are plenty of emotionally-based reasons that one might choose to vote for or not to vote for Barack Obama. Those types of reasons, while valid for the individual who holds them, are not the types of reasons that have hard cold logic to back them up. America needs to wake up and begin to use the unadulterated pragmatism that has made this country great in the past. We cannot afford to place our future in the hands of someone who is merely a good orator, or one who we believe “his time has come” as a minority candidate, or one who is the leading candidate of the opposition party simply because it is currently an anti-Republican political climate. We as voters must practice the pragmatic thought process of selecting our next leader based upon what makes good sense, and not what sounds good or feels good.

[Rain]

Condor, you are not very well informed and your friend is evidently a pretty poor analyst. Reading your reasons for not voting for him, it's obvious most of your info comes from the right wing and you don't explore anything beyond just out of curiosity. Obama was not disrespecting the Pledge of Allegiance in that photo. The info is out there for anyone looking. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp It's obvious you are not looking.

You want an excuse to vote for a man who does not understand who our real enemies are, can't keep track of the changes in nations (Czechoslovakia is no longer one nation and the name has changed). \

Vote for 4 more years of Bush if you so wish, but don't continue to put down people who support Obama. We are not stupid. We do check facts and we have chosen a candidate based on what we believe he will do. We might be wrong. Maybe a lot who voted for Bush had no clue that he'd blow our whole wad on a war in Iraq. Presidents often rise to the office or they don't. I find it hard to believe McCain will be a good president based on everything he says, his total lack of understanding of the issues given he's been a Senator all those years, but I won't bother putting up that long string of reasons because you don't care.

By the way, when choosing a president, there is nothing wrong with feeling an inspirational speaker is one plus. People still are inspired by the Gettysburg Address.

[condor]

Rain wrote: "..but don't continue to put down people who support Obama. We are not stupid."

**I will continue to say what I wish about whoever I want to say it about.

Besides, nothing said was a "put down" of Obama supporters like yourself. It was simply a critique of Obama's politics and qualifications. If you take it personally, that is your problem, and that indeed would be stupid.