Obama Seeks War-Funding Compromise With Bush

[wyldwolf]

I'm starting to like his foreign policy a bit more...


Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., could support a war-funding bill that includes benchmarks but lacks a timetable for withdrawal, the 2008 Democratic presidential candidate told ABC News' George Stephanopoulos in an exclusive "This Week" interview.

But Obama made clear he opposes giving the president a "blank check" for the war in Iraq.

"There's got to be something that signals the president is changing course, and that there are consequences to the Iraqi government failing to meet some of the benchmarks that we're talking about," Obama said.

And while, like the rest of the Democratic field for president, Obama has emphasized his support for withdrawing American troops from Iraq, he left the door open to returning to the country if the situation continues to deteriorate, especially if withdrawal were to incite a Shiite genocide of the Sunnis.

"I think we have some moral and humanitarian responsibilities to the Iraqi people," said Obama. "And that has to be factored in. I can't anticipate what Iraq will look like a year from now, because so much depends on how we carry out this phased redeployment and how effective we are when it comes to diplomacy."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3169520&page=1

[MethuenProgressive]

1. "we have some moral and humanitarian responsibilities to the Iraqi people,"

That's an honest, and dangerous, thing to say. I credit him for it.

[wyldwolf]

2. Like you said - it is honest and it is admirable...

...but it won't play well with the "get out now and stay out" crowd.

[primative1]

5. I dont see the problem ....

I dont know of anyone who will hold someone to task for fixing a problem that they didnt make. The problem is for the makers of the problem or the ones who arent actualy trying to fix it.

[Clark2008]

9. I don't think it's so much moral as dictated by the Geneva Conventions.

But, we rarely talk about that on this board because that would mean we can't leave "NOW!!"

I don't think we can legally leave now even if the powers-that-be wanted us to.

[primative1]

10. Did the Geneva Convention Delve Into Topics Like this ...

Must have been a very useful document. Can hardly imagine why we would ignore it.

[MessiahRp]

3. This is assuming Bush gives a fuck about other people

Since it seems to me him and his creed only give a fuck about the oil profits they are set to rake in. Human lives are expendable when it comes to making cash.

Rp

[LizW]

4. It sounds very reasonable

If vague.

I'm listening, though. What are the "benchmarks"? Are they objective and measurable? And what are the "consequences" for failing to meet them?

And if Bush can be presuaded to agree to this, what can be put in place to ensure that he doesn't just lie and keep the troops there no matter what happens?

Or (my cynical self asks) is this just an exercise in putting forth a very reasoned, humane, "presidential" plan that everyone knows will never happen because Bush is too intransigent?

[Tellurian]

6. Sounds like alot of hooey to me..

the inclusion of one word- "benchmarks" is supposed to be a progressive negotiation 5 yrs out in an illegal war?

"There's got to be something that signals the president is changing course, and that there are consequences to the Iraqi government failing to meet some of the benchmarks that we're talking about," Obama said.

Why is Obama advocating for Bush? Bush isn't changing course; he's buying more time.
The last Iraqi benchmark that was mentioned was the Iraq government is going on vacation for the summer months..lovely!

[The Magistrate]

28. Sen. Obama, Sir, Is Not Advocating For Bush

He is stating here the general outlines of the Democratic Congressional leadership's position. Are you maintaining anyone who does this is in league with Bush?

[wyldwolf]

7. Obama moving to the right?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: I’m not an ideologue, never have been. Even during my younger days when I was tempted by, you know, sort of more radical or left-wing politics, there was a part of me that always was a little bit conservative in that sense, that believes that you make progress by sitting down, listening to people, recognizing everybody’s concerns, seeing other people’s points of views.

WOW! That sure flies in the face of the KOS-led "progressive" revolution.

[Tellurian]

11. Perhaps, his "new" advisors are influencing his thinking..

when did patting Bush on the head get us anywhere?

[CTLawGuy]

19. oh, look two clinton supporters crowing at each other

YAWNNNNNNNNN!

[wyldwolf]

21. Yawn? Isn't that what Obama supporters are doing at his speeches?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6Z2MuFWm84

[CTLawGuy]

24. wow, that's the best you have?

lame...

[wyldwolf]

25. It's a hell of a lot better than "oh, look two clinton supporters crowing at each other.. yawn."

No substance whatsoever.

[CTLawGuy]

27. no its not

at least what I said communicates that I don't care what two obviously biased people say to each other about my candidate.

your response is a questionable attack on the interestingness of Obama, which is contradicted by the huge crowds he gets wherever he goes.

[The Magistrate]

29. As A Matter Of Curiousity, Sir

Does that attitude hold when two people biased in favor of your candidate exchange comments in praise of him?

[CTLawGuy]

31. hey

I'm just expressing my opinion. I doubt people who like a candidate are going to distort statements etc. in his favor as much as two people AGAINST that candidate would distort statements etc. against him.

[wyldwolf]

33. where was the distortion?

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wyldwolf]

39. this compromise with Bush is certainly triangulation

Speaking of DailyKOS people, I believe the word Markos used in reference to Obama and this story is "patsy."

[CTLawGuy]

40. compromise is not per se triangulation

triangulation is a cyncial tool created by Dick Morris whereby a candidate mechanically places himself between two extreme sides without regard to the rightness or wrongness of that position.

Compromise is a vehicle by which two sides can get the most of what they both want as opposed to getting nothing.

[wyldwolf]

44. but Obama's "plan" is. He is clearly taking a "third way" in his approach.

triangulation is a cyncial tool created by Dick Morris whereby a candidate mechanically places himself between two extreme sides without regard to the rightness or wrongness of that position.

Triangulation was first used to great effect by FDR, then by JFK. It is a process of finding a middle road between to extreme positions.

[CTLawGuy]

47. Im fairly sure that triangulation was started by Dick Morris

I read about this in George Stephanopolous' book "All Too Human". It's meant to portray the politician as "in the center" on the theory that he will maximize his support from valuable independents. It's a political not a governing tool.

When Clinton used it, he began to steal Republican issues like welfare reform and implement them in his own way. What it is not is implementing what Democrats believe in, which could be done through compromise, even though the Dems wouldn't get everything they want.

[wyldwolf]

50. you're incorrect. Morris created the term, not the practice.

The logic behind it, is that it not only takes good ideas away from your opponent, but that it insulates you from attacks on that particular issue.

FDR used it to great effect when he borrowed some socialist ideas from Robert LaFollette, Upton Sinclair, and other socialist leaders of the time. FDR used it in dealing with labor disputes.

It would probably be real easy to find other instances of it.

When Clinton used it, he began to steal Republican issues like welfare reform and implement them in his own way.

Welfare reform was also an idea of FDR, JFK, LBJ, and RFK.

FDR's famous SOTU speech when he said the US government must end the business of relief. JFK/LBJ's "welfare to work" ideas, RFK's "welfare should be a hand up, not a hand out."

[CTLawGuy]

52. Were they taking those positions to seem "centrist" or did they really believe those ideas?

Remember Bill Clinton campaigned on universal health care and gay rights in the military.

[wyldwolf]

54. I'm confident if was because they believe in those ideals.

Southern Democrats (like Clinton) have traditionally been for welfare reform and tough on crime legislation. And what makes a centrist a centrist is the ability to take the best ideas from both sides.

People ARE centrist, it isn't a suit they can just put on every morning before work.

[The Magistrate]

36. Of Course Persons Who Support A Candidate Engage In Distortion In His Or Her favor, Sir

They highlight what seems convenient to their view and suppress what seems inconvient to it. It is routine as the rising of the sun....

[CTLawGuy]

38. well SOMETHING about the candidate has to appeal to the people

that is real. It is still clearly more common for people who hate a candidate to distort things to smear that candidate.

So do you agree with Wyldwolf, since you are magnanamously defending him, that Obama is moving to the right by not calling himself an "ideologue"?

[wyldwolf]

42. he went further than not calling himself an "idealogue."

he said he was a little more conservative than the leftwing of the party, and he is doing the evil triangulation on war funding, to which Markos at KOS referred to him as possibly Bush's patsy.

[CTLawGuy]

43. most democrats are like that

we don't all support Kucinich and his Dept. of Peace. Again, compromise is not triangulation.

[wyldwolf]

45. why, yes they are, to the shagrin of the netroots, who are clearly alarmed at Obama's triangulation

[CTLawGuy]

49. the netroots has split

among all three of the big three. For example, I know of former Dean people involved with all three campaigns. But the fact that some of the netroots don't prefer Obama doesn't mean he is triangulating.

This is Obama's commentary about triangulation.

Pg. 38-9 of "Audacity of Hope"

"Instead, we Democrats are just, well, confused. . . . Others pursue a more "centrist" approach, figuring that so long as they split the difference with the conservative leadership, they must be acting reasonably--and failing to notice that with each passing year they are giving up more and more ground." (emphasis added)

[wyldwolf]

51. so proclaims darboy!

Did Obama use the term "triangulation?"

And if he is so against the practice he describes, why is he doing it right now in terms of Iraq?

[CTLawGuy]

53. he's not, he's trying to get something done

compromise is not triangulation. Compromise is a governing tool whereby two sides get some of what they want as opposed to nothing. Triangulation is a political tool where one grabs the positions of the other side to seem "centrist" and appeal to independents.

[wyldwolf]

56. yes he is. If Hillary had done this, you'd be screaming "sell out."

[CTLawGuy]

57. wrong

What I don't want is a "compromise" that is essentially empty and gives Bush essentially everything he wants. I call it a Lieberman compromise--agree with everything the republicans want and call it a compromise. If she supports a compromise that is actually real, then I'd applaud her.

For the past 6 years we've gotten these empty compromises. The IWR is a great example. The Dems basically support a blank check resolution that gives Bush everything he wants. That's NOT compromise. If you get nothing you want, it's not compromise. No suprise, because Bush wouldn't compromise when he had a republican rubber stamp House and a Senate run by a guy more worried about the midterm elections than the lives of our troops.

[wyldwolf]

61. no, that is a very correct assessment. "Progressives" have two standards when it comes to Clinton.

[The Magistrate]

55. If You Look Higher In the Thread, Sir

You will find me defending Sen. Obama against attack that strikes me as quite unwarranted.

Sen. Obama's position concerning Iraq is roughly that espoused by the Democratic leadership in Congress, and largely indistinguishable from that of Sen. Clinton. No particular element of it is objectionable to me.

Perhaps the genesis of the problem lies in the tendency of some to exaggerate differences, and proclaim Sen. Obama to be greatly to the left in the first place, while denouncing others as creatures of the right, when in fact, neither of these things ever was the case.

[CTLawGuy]

58. I saw your defense

Obama has come under vicious attack recently and I am just trying to correct it the best i can.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CTLawGuy]

34. you're the only one stomping your feet pal

I'm not the one smearing a candidate.

[wyldwolf]

35. where is the smear, "pal?"

[CTLawGuy]

41. Obama says he's not an ideologue therefore he is "moving to the right."

NT

[wyldwolf]

46. he went further than not calling himself an "idealogue."

he said he was a little more conservative than the leftwing of the party, and he is doing the evil triangulation on war funding, to which Markos at KOS referred to him as possibly Bush's patsy.

[SoxFan]

65. Grow up, Wyldwolf

That's a childish cheap shot, and I know you're better than that!

[Forkboy]

68. He only possesses two pics he can post...and this was the other one.

[wyldwolf]

69. butt out, BlueDogDemocratNH

If someone's going to post something as without substance as "yawn" and make an issue out of two people agreeing with each other, they deserve whatever they get back.

[CTLawGuy]

71. maybe if you were talking about how nice the weather is...

then ok. But i'm not going to let you slander Obama by insinuating he's "going to the right."

[wyldwolf]

74. too late!

[madrchsod]

8. a realist view is refreshing

we are not leaving iraq for years. we do have a moral and humanitarian obligation to iraq and the surrounding nations to have a balanced policy that respects every nation not just a chosen few. we need a president that the rest of the world will respect for her or his deeds.

[slipslidingaway]

12. I just do not understand why our party is supporting this???

See below posts for more detail.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3263152&mesg_id=3263308

"So, what's left in the bill that Bush doesn't like? Benchmarks!

But there are two problems with this. Bush DOES like them."



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3263152&mesg_id=3263316

If it's bad law why is Edwards not speaking out on this issue?

The same benchmark was in the first bill that he wanted sent back to Bush again and again. Also the unions are against the oil law as currently drafted, their offices have been raided, yet he seems to want the Iraq oil law enacted? Does he oppose the unions in Iraq?

I think the candidates and the Dem leadership need to be asked these questions, so far most have successfully dodged them.

[Ethelk2044]

13. Common Sense

Congress will not pass both, but we will not give bush a blank check. Therefore we need benchmarks. Unless the Hillarites want to give bush a blank check and do nothing. It seems that is what they want when they complain about getting one or the other. He knows we do not have the 16 votes to override the veto. Therefore he is willing to negotiate to get benchmarks and then move forward towards time table. Oh I forgot. He should just do nothing and support bush in everything the way you want him to WRONG!

[slipslidingaway]

14. This is what I am questioning, most candidates and members

of congress are supporting this by not speaking out on the oil law benchmark.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3263152&mesg_id=3263152

"Dear Democratic Colleague:

An issue of critical importance, the Iraqi "Hydrocarbon Law", was again broached yesterday for the third time in the Democratic Caucus and I want to provide you the facts and evidence to support the concerns I have expressed.

As you know, the Administration set several benchmarks for the Iraqi government, including passage of the "Hydrocarbon Law" by the Iraqi Parliament. The Administration misled Congress by emphasizing only a small part of this law, the "fair" distribution of oil revenues. Consider the fact that the Iraqi "Hydrocarbon Law" contains a mere three sentences that generally discusses the "fair" distribution of oil.

Except for three scant lines, the entire 33 page "Hydrocarbon Law," is about creating a complex legal structure to facilitate the privatization of Iraqi oil. As such, it in imperative that all of us carefully read the Iraqi Parliament's bill because the Democratic FY07 Iraq Supplemental puts Democrats on the record in promoting oil privatization."

[jsamuel]

15. This is why Obama is weak on Iraq. I understand why people may support this, but I don't.

I can't believe that Obama still thinks that he can "compromise" with these people. They won't have it. They will compromise with us until 2040 and we would still be in there.

[Tellurian]

16. Really, Obama could take the opportunity to make a name for himself

and take a hard line with Bush..

something like a message to the president. "Sir, there is great negativity with the people about this War. You need to formulate a deadline to get our troops out of Iraq. Otherwise, the din of your's and VP Cheney's Impeachment will be a headline in tomorrows NYT!"

[Ethelk2044]

17. Obama Speaks out

Not like Hillary. She takes both sides and says nothing. She can not even admit when she was wrong.

[Tellurian]

20. Why should Hillary admit she was wrong, when she wasn't?

It's all coming out now that the Intelligence Committee didn't share the same Intelligence reports with the Senate Democrats.

Did you miss that here in the Edwards thread?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3261770

Hillary is completely absolved of necessitating an apology. Edwards had the "real" Intelligence Reports. He subsequently apologized.

[Ethelk2044]

23. She was wrong and

She will pay the price for being wrong. We currently have one president who is too sturbborn to acknowledge he is wrong. We do not need another one.

[Tellurian]

26. We will pay the price if she is not elected...

and thank you for supporting another Republican President!

[Ethelk2044]

62. If Obama is elected

We will all benefit.

[JeffR]

66. Tellurian, when these arguments start, I usually just stay out of them

I'm glad you're behind your candidate. I wish you the best, really. But don't you realize how silly comments like this one sound?

[Tellurian]

73. The only thing thats foolish is you interjecting nothing of substance!

[TwilightGardener]

18. He's not weak, he's realistic--we DO owe it to the Iraqis to keep some

troops in to help out even after our combat ops end. I don't think Hillary or Edwards would do anything different.

[pberq]

22. To those who say "we can't leave now"

We can pull the troops out AND at the same time work to stabilize the country. In fact, pulling U.S. troops out is the single most effective step that will put an end to the insurgency. Take a look at Dennis Kucinich's plan:

http://kucinich.us/node/1776

Kucinich unveils comprehensive exit plan to bring troops home, stabilize Iraq
Submitted by Press Secretary on Mon, 2007-01-08 16:10. Iraq | Reports from Washington

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Monday, January 8, 2007 NEW YORK CITY -- Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, declaring that the U.S. Congress has a co-equal role and responsibility in ending the war in Iraq, today laid out a comprehensive 12-point plan to withdraw American forces and contractors, establish a U.N. peacekeeping force, convene a regional conference to assist in stabilization, and provide funding for reconstruction, jobs, and reparations.

Noting that the Bush Administration is planning to send thousands of additional troops as part of a so-called "surge strategy," Kucinich said any decision about a new direction in Iraq "is not President Bush’s alone to make."

"Congress does not dispense with its obligation to the American people simply by opposing a troop surge in Iraq," he argued. The Democratic-controlled Congress should, instead, notify the Administration that it will not approve a supplemental appropriation of up to $160 billion being sought by the President. "Continuing to fund the war is not a plan," Kucinich said. "It would represent the continuation of disaster."

Kucinich also noted that in November "the American people moved decisively to reject Republican rule, principally because of the conduct of the war. Democratic leaders well understand we regained control of the Congress because of the situation in Iraq. However, two months later, the Congress is still searching for a plan."

(more at link . . .)

[The Magistrate]

30. No one, Sir, Is Going to Send In forces To 'Stabilize' Iraq Once We Depart

Several countries may send in money and munitions and trainers and other operatives in hopes of securing the victory of the faction they prefer to be victorious in the country's civil war, but that is hardly the same thing....

[Bullet1987]

48. Not being an idealogue is GOOD...

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: I’m not an ideologue, never have been. Even during my younger days when I was tempted by, you know, sort of more radical or left-wing politics, there was a part of me that always was a little bit conservative in that sense, that believes that you make progress by sitting down, listening to people, recognizing everybody’s concerns, seeing other people’s points of views.

WOW! That sure flies in the face of the KOS-led "progressive" revolution.
Any complimentary statement about any presidential candidate does not equate to an endorsement

Stop trying to twist his words. He's talking about how when he was younger, people tried to get him to join the Black Panther Party...read his first book.

[The Magistrate]

60. Perhaps You Will forgive Me For Asking, Sir

What on earth that has to do with my comments on an impractical aspect of Rep. Kucinich's proposal...?

"Is this a private fight, or kin any man jine in?"

[CTLawGuy]

59. This is a good compromising philosophy

be open and flexible, but have certain aspects, "no blank check" and require the iraqis to make certain progress, that you won't give up.

[tammywammy]

67. I agree

It's good that the dems made a stand, but no it's time to understand that compromise is the key if you want to get anything done. I like when common sense prevails.

[Colobo]

63. Obama will be a great president

We need intelligence back in the WH.

[Egnever]

64. The more I hear from this guy the more I like him

This is a very level headed aproach. We could keep playing the veto game. I dont think that wil get us where we want to be any faster though. The sooner we can get some sort of benchmarks established the faster we can judge if we are or arent meeting them.

[Honeycombe8]

72. I was thinking the exact same thing.

I keep waiting for really stupid things to come from his
mouth, but the more I hear, the more I'm impressed.  Whether I
agree with him or not, he is an individual unto himself.  He
seems honest, forthright, a thinking man.  Someone who sees
others' point of view.  Someone who may get things done.

Hmmmmm.

[calteacherguy]

70. Sounds very Presidential to me. Good Job, Mr. Obama. nt