The Same Obama You've Always Known

[babylonsister]

http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_same_obama_youve_always_known

The Same Obama You've Always Known

Barack Obama has never been anti-war, and he has the record to show it.
Jamelle Bouie | March 30, 2011 | web only


(Flickr/The White House)

snip//

Reread his much-praised 2002 speech against the Iraq War. It doesn't begin with a condemnation of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, or even the war itself. It begins with this: "Although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances." And after listing the circumstances where war was justified -- in his signature cadence -- he clarifies, "I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war."

Dumb wars, according to the then-state senator, were "based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics." For the last decade, Obama has held to that view. In his 2006 book, The Audacity of Hope, for example, he articulates a doctrine for the use of military force that would sound "smart" to his 2002 self: "No other nation on earth has a greater capacity to shape that global system, or build consensus around a new set of international rules that expand the zones of freedom, personal safety, and economic well-being. If we want to make American more secure, we are going to have to help make the world more secure."


snip//



In his 2009 acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize, Obama tried to balance the honor of the distinction with his position as commander in chief of the most powerful military to ever exist: "I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace." Given the blood and treasure we've wasted in other dysfunctional Middle Eastern countries, liberal anger over the intervention in Libya is completely justified. But Obama hasn't betrayed his supporters, and this war fits comfortably with decades' worth of rhetoric from the president.

In a sense, the proper target for progressive anger on Libya is less Obama and more the presidency itself. Thanks to a generation of neglect from a succession of uninterested or complacent lawmakers, the presidency has become effectively unbound in its conduct of foreign policy. For those eager to end the trend of foreign interventionism (humanitarian or otherwise), the first target should be Congress.

[Ozymanithrax]

1. People heard what they wanted to hear...

not what was said.

Buyer Beware

[PurityOfEssence]

9. And that's the way he likes it.

"I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views."
(from the preface to "The Audacity of Hope")

If I felt that way, I'd be embarrassed to admit it, and I wouldn't be PROUD of it.

Many of us saw this early on and didn't like it then. The idea that we can't complain because he was obvious about it all along doesn't count for those of us who saw it and commented on it then.

More importantly, the idea that he didn't simultaneously try to seem to be the peace candidate is horrendous bullshit.

[Ozymanithrax]

11. All things considered, I supported Hillary...

I wasn't a Puma, but I prefer her. I felt that I knew what we were getting.

[bvar22]

19. YEAH! LIke this:

Campaign Obama vs President Obama

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah

and this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMNVIQqatyU

[Tarheel_Dem]

2. I don't think any president's words have been twisted & distorted more than this one.

Sadly, it's not only the right who's distorting.

[jenmito]

3. Yup. It bugs me so much whenever I see posters say that "this is not the man I voted for" because

"he hasn't ended the wars yet." He's doing exactly what he SAID he'd do and his intervention in Libya is consistent with his Nobel Peace Prize speech and his Cairo speech, too.

[CakeGrrl]

7. Willful ignorance? Selective hearing?

I'm not disappointed because I paid attention during the campaign.

[jenmito]

16. Yes. Yes.

Same here.

[Keith Bee]

8. K&R for that comment alone

I'm sick of hearing that, too.

[jenmito]

17. Thanks...

and the people who say those things claim RWers are ignorant.

[AtomicKitten]

4. Right. Well I paid attention during the election.

[frylock]

5. i'm so damn proud of our war president

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Maven]

10. "Barack Obama has never been anti-war" - Why is this something to be proud of???

God, the crusade to rationalize everything he does has become so utterly perverse. Do you even step back and question what has happened to you, to your beliefs, just to defend this one politician at every turn? It's frightening, really.

And why do you keep pushing this irrelevant point that Obama has "always" been this way. That does not translate to "you can't criticize what he does now." Sorry, it doesn't. What is this, the "no backsies" theory of politics? Get real.

:thumbsdown:

[PurityOfEssence]

12. How many times can you lose your virginity?

How many trains do ya get to pull before you're at least a bit of a slut?

How much killing do you get to do and still be wise, kind and above the fray?

Your point is the salient one we have to endure with the acolytes who hold our futures ransom: how much do we have to respect the fragile egos of those who must NEVER have their fantasy called to account? The shrieking defensiveness rages forth when mere mention of a man's real actions sully the glory of the future presumptions undeniable greatness. He's awarded an august prize for the great works that are yet to come. He's lauded for staving off a disaster that's treated as fact, when it's pure speculation that such a thing ever would have happened. It's not a reality-based world.

Once again, it's like the celestial mechanics used to "prove" the earth-centric universe: planets had to stop and reverse course to justify that which was by definition true. It's not reasonable assessment, it's creation theory writ crazy.

Meanwhile we violate the sovereignty of a country with an illegal war, to be fought in a moderate and easy way.

[polichick]

18. It's not something to be proud of - if you're a Democrat.

[GeorgeGist]

13. Rest assured ...

I won't be fooled again.

[Safetykitten]

14. Pretty soon I will see evidence he really is on the fence about being a Democrat.

[polichick]

15. We always knew he was corporatist too - doesn't make it a good thing.