I now understand where you are coming from.

The problem that Barak Obama has and will continue to have is that he is being CLAIMED by several groups. Far left. Antiwar. Moderates. Crossover Republicans. They all want him to be what they want him to be.

From Barak Obama supporters I hear different versions of what will be rather then what he has said. He has them or mabey they have themselves convinced that he will do what they personally wish for him to do once president.

I agree with you that he is not likely to bring the troops home in 16 months. HOWEVER. That is NOT what he has claimed. And the Antiwar/far left have latched on to Barak Obama because of his adamant stance about ending the war and bringing the troops home. Period.

I have opined in other places that Barak Obama is not only double crossing his initial base but that he is now in danger of losing his base of support among super delegates and they could very well get enough defections from this to lock up the convention and hand this to Hillary afterall. Remember she has not released her delegates.

This is scary stuff coming from the Senator. He is going to branded a flip flopper and you can make any case you want to but this case for NOT bringing the troops home as promised will see him ravaged by the far left smear machine of the antiwar to the detriment of the democratic party.

As for me. I am a libertarian. I was for Hillary but with very little enthuasim. I cannot vote for McCain because of fundamental differences. So I do not have a dog in the fight but I believe that Barak Obama is on dangerous ground right now. He is only the presumptive nominee. I can see this changing rather dramatically if he continues on this bizarre course of not only moving to the center but RUSHING pell mell towards the center and abandoning a large chunk of his primary supporters in the process.

Neocon — Throughout the campaign, candidates have made bold statements about what they’d do. And all along, that’s been BS, regardless of source. Because not only are none of them currently president, but these statements have been made in a temporal vacuum. I’ve maintained all along that as the situation in Iraq changed, it rendered everyone’s promises ever-more irrelevant.

I shocked someone in the comments the other day, for instance, by suggesting that McCain is also likely to begin moving troops out — sooner rather than later, and long before the overhyped “100 years”.

Even as I write this, the situation continues to evolve, as Bush is now talking about moving troops out of Iraq and into Afghanistan before the end of the year.

Have mercy. Where are you getting this notion from?

This is from Barak Obama’s own website.

* In 2003 and 2004, he spoke out against the war on the campaign trail;
* In 2005, he called for a phased withdrawal of our troops;
* In 2006, he called for a timetable to remove our troops, a political solution within Iraq, and aggressive diplomacy with all of Iraq’s neighbors;
* In January 2007, he introduced legislation in the Senate to remove all of our combat troops from Iraq by March 2008.
* In September 2007, he laid out a detailed plan for how he will end the war as president.

HAD Barak Obama had his way we would have removed ALL our troops by March of this year. No your flat wrong when you assert that he has not been telling us over and over that his judgement is to end the war. Im sure all those voting for Barak Obama for this one main reason will be happy to know that Barak Obama now does not plan to fulfill his 16 month pledge.

I’m now asking hard questions of those supporting Barak Obama to ask hard questions themselves. What I am getting from them is that they are just angry that anyone is daring to question their man.

Here we go again. Thats the same response the Bush supporters gave us.

The disturbing trend I see in the left/democrats this time around is that while vehemently opposed to being in Iraq they seem to have no problem hanging out in Afghanistan for years and years.

Neocon, this feels pretty circular. But I’ll take one more shot at all this before I retire for the night.

Since I’m neither a Democrat nor on the left, I can’t speak for anyone but myself — but I don’t know of anyone advocating to stay in Afghanistan “for years and years”. Myself, I’ve been pretty bugged by the lack of attention on Afghanistan. IMO, we took our eyes off the ball, and now — seven years after 9/11 — we’ve still not fully committed to the original confrontation.

Re: Iraq. Myself, I was LOUDLY against going in in the first place. But I ticked off (and lost) quite a few readers when I supported the surge. The last year+ have brought some results there. Finally. I expect Obama (who has not been nearly as hard and fast on this issue as you seem to think) to start preparing the left for the realities of a less than immediate exit. He’s been nuanced, but like you, the left hasn’t heard him.

Obama is not the hard left “progressive” the netroots wanted. (They actually wanted Edwards, anyway) But neither is he the bogeyman you portray him to be.

I’m sorry if that’s a disappointment.

I am not opposed to faith based religions taking money from the government with strings attached. I am opposed to them taking money from the government PERIOD.

Public service is a great idea. The left loves it. Their are 150million of them. Surely they can fill a few thousand slots. NO? Right they are trampling their far right counterparts at the exits.

Military. Bush did indeed fail with Iraq in that our military was too lean for the mission. However That is not a problem IF Obama is going to pull 200k of them out of Iraq. Unless the left is want to continue the war on terror with troops when all I have heard for years is that you dont fight terrorism with troops. Now the left seems willing to reconcile being in Afghanistan for an indefinite period.

Which is it? End the war and increase the military makes no sense to me in a time when this nation needs to balance the budget not increase the size of our already huge military force.

If Barak Obama’s plan is to continue the occupation of Afghanistan for years and years then I think we should know that. Proposing to increase the military by 100k with coyly worded language “Between Deployments” is more scary stuff for me and I have been seeking clarification as to where he plans to take us in the future but all I get is read my lips……..”Change Buddy”

TM — thank you for the thoughtful (and timely) response.