Visits To Iraq and Afghanistan Deliver Strong Boost to Obama's Image
Iraq's prime minister effectively endorses Obama's plan, unsettling the McCain campaign
Barack Obama's unfolding foreign trip has been a public relations bonanza for him so far.
He has demonstrated steadiness and composure, and, most surprising, gotten the better of GOP candidate John McCain and the Republicans back home, at least temporarily, on the sensitive issue of what to do next in Iraq.
The biggest news of Obama's journey has been the endorsement by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of a timeframe for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq that closely resembles what Obama has been proposing. Their terminology is different, but what it amounts to is this: Both Obama and Maliki support withdrawal of U.S. combat forces according to similar schedules—by the end of 2010, in Maliki's formulation, or within 16 months of Obama taking office, in the Democratic candidate's formulation.
In other words, they are talking about essentially the same timeframe, give or take a few months. After Obama met with Maliki in Baghdad Monday, all of this was reconfirmed by an Iraqi government spokesman.
Such agreement enhances Obama's credibility as a serious potential commander in chief, and this has unsettled McCain and President Bush.
At the White House, the consternation is palpable. "We don't think that talking about specific negotiating tactics or your negotiating position in the press is the best way to negotiate a deal," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "However, we understand that they're a sovereign country and they'll be able to do that. We're just not going to do it on our end."
For many months, both Bush and McCain have opposed a withdrawal timetable of any kind, but last Friday, as Obama's trip was beginning, White House officials said the president was willing to accept a "time horizon" for drawdowns, which sounds very similar to a timetable, although the language is more fuzzy. All this could isolate McCain, who still opposes a timetable.
Obama still has substantial vulnerabilities on Iraq as a campaign issue. From the start, he has strongly opposed President Bush's "surge" of U.S. troops into the war zone. But now, it seems clear that the surge has helped to quell much of the violence in Iraq over the past several months—results that Obama said would never materialize.
McCain told reporters Monday that if Obama's view had prevailed and the surge had never been launched, Iraq would be near chaos, withdrawals would be impossible, and there would be "greater problems in Afghanistan." (McCain, however, didn't help himself when, during a television interview this week, he made reference to problems along "the Iraq/Pakistan border." Those two countries do not share a border, and it appeared McCain had meant to refer to the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.)
Obama had another objective on his trip—to get attention for his view that the Iraq war is diverting needed troops and money from the more important conflict in Afghanistan, where allied forces have been suffering setbacks in recent months. He has made that case, but the Maliki embrace has crowded it out of the news coverage.
So far, however, Obama has avoided any gaffe that would damage perceptions that he could be an effective commander in chief. His most effective bit of stagecraft has been to surround himself at every opportunity with delighted soldiers in uniform, a gambit designed to reassure voters that he is popular with the troops—and his news coverage has been very positive.
Obama's eight-country tour is at its midpoint. He has visited Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq so far, and is scheduled to make other stops in Jordan, Israel, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom.
Reader Comments
Fact is, Mr. Obama is not where my hope comes from. But the notion that he is "The One" who can deliver hope or "change we can believe in" that's what's got well-meaning people duped here about this guy...to the point of mass manipulation.
-----------------------------------------------------
Let's just pretend for a moment that most people that vote for Obama ARE using their brains, realizing that McCain will not improve accessibility to healthcare, will not ensure that women can be trusted to make their own health care decisions, and will continue Bush's failed policies. I keep my faith in the Creator and not government, but when I see an opportunity present itself (that is, a new direction -- and if you want to continue in the downwards direction that this country is going, go ahead), I will take it.
Insulting all who vote for Barack does not make your voice sound any more reasonable. I, as many conservative voters do, vote my conscience. My conscience is with Barack.
The Audacity of Hope IN Obama
Last night, Boston Herald writer Margery Eagan said in her column of the media's affliction with Obama-mania: "People want to believe in hope."
I find this an ultimately sad commentary on our mindset as a people. Yes, we want to believe that our candidates possess attributes of character, including hope. But I refuse to look for hope *in* Barack as she would suggest.
Even the Israelites did not place their hope in Moses as he led them through a 40-year hike through the desert. Rather, their hope was placed upon their superhuman Creator.
Fact is, Mr. Obama is not where my hope comes from. But the notion that he is "The One" who can deliver hope or "change we can believe in" that's what's got well-meaning people duped here about this guy...to the point of mass manipulation.
The American people, a good number of them anyway, aren't stupid. We see the more than subliminal rip-offs of JFK, RFK and Dr. King day in and day out. I've had it with the copycat "retro" photo, rolled-up-white-shirt-wearing, pseudo-profound, grimace-making, "Ooh look, I'm a "statesman" speech-making, "Change"...his mind...again talking, flip my jacket over my shoulder just-like-Bobby walkin', believe-my-own-press, special-interest seeking, non-voting junior statesman.
No. My hope doesn't come from Mr. Obama. It comes from a place much more genuine, with more transparency, and unshakably unchangeable.
I encourage everyone to consider that the better attributes n a President are selflessness, humility, transparency, a servant-like nature, someone who is without affectation, and whose work and record speaks louder than all the best speech-making in the world.
I don't need someone to convince me. I need evidence that has been wrought in solitary and even lonesome toil...without a camera having been in sight.
The true measure of a man or woman who seeks the highest office in our nation is one who is at ease in being the most plainspoken, honest, and unglamorous. A true leader is in fact one who has learned the wisdom of valuing how to follow and leads, not by charisma and in plenty, but leads with integrity under pressure and by example.
This is not the time for remedial character building. Our beloved country cannot afford to be the guinea pig for Mr. Obama's political aspirations. He just very well may be a great leader someday. Until there's a burning bush to alert us otherwise, we are better off to wait...and watch.
No, Mr. Obama is not where I place my hope. It's too precious for that.
Add your thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.advertisement
