Making Senator Kerry Look Principled and Downright Knightly By Comparison

Kerry hadn’t lost the Election of 2004 yet, and he still looked close to victory in August of 2004. He was, however, engaged in an effort to distance himself from the Howard Dean Wing of his party. He had the following to say about his vote to authorize military action in Iraq.

“Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it was the right authority for a president to have.” Speaking to reporters at the edge of the Grand Canyon, he added: “[Although] I would have done this very differently from the way President Bush has.” –John F. Kerry (9 Aug 04)

This was the same guy who had previously uttered the phrase. “I actually did vote for the $87 billion (in supplemental military appropriations) before I voted against it.”

This, it turned out later, was a malapropism. He had meant to say he had voted for a version of the OIF/OEF supplemental that would have funded it by rolling back several of George W. Bush’s tax cuts. When this version failed; he voted against the supplemental in the absence of offsetting increases in Federal Revenue.

This showed a certain indecisiveness and willingness to pander. It totally belied his slogan “A Stronger America”, by creating the appearance that Senator Kerry was unable to stand on principal. He must now regret not having Barack Obama on the national campaign scene to make him look like a veritable Rock of Gibraltar when it came to staking out a philosophical position and holding it to the last Swift Boatman.

Since dispatching Hillary Clinton to the land of forlorn failed Presidential candidates, Barack Obama has divested himself of his primary positions with the dispassionate alacrity of a growing reptile shedding a skin. His website has been through more updates than the City of New Orleans flood evacuation plans after Hurricane Katrina. He has run out of room for all the discarded lies in his memory hole and is rumored to be seeking to acquire a garbage barge.

Dick Morris lays out eight separate “features” that have been added to Barack Obama; Version 2.0. These features include the following “adjusted” positions…

After vowing to eschew private fundraising and take public financing, he has now refused public money.

Once he threatened to filibuster a bill to protect telephone companies from liability for their cooperation with national security wiretaps; now he has voted for the legislation.

Turning his back on a lifetime of support for gun control, he now recognizes a Second Amendment right to bear arms in the wake of the Supreme Court decision.

Formerly, he told the Israeli lobby that he favored an undivided Jerusalem. Now he says he didn’t mean it.

From a 100 percent pro-choice position, he now has migrated to expressing doubts about allowing partial-birth abortions.

For the first time, he now speaks highly of using church-based institutions to deliver public services to the poor.

Having based his entire campaign on withdrawal from Iraq, he now pledges to consult with the military first.

During the primary, he backed merit pay for teachers — but before the union a few weeks ago, he opposed it.

After specifically saying in the primaries that he disagreed with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) proposal to impose Social Security taxes on income over $200,000 and wanted to tax all income, he has now adopted the Clinton position.

Perhaps the Harvard University Mathematics Department can attempt to derive the Sine-Wave function that models Barack Obama’s political vacillations. Or maybe an aspiring OR analyst can use Winter’s Method to forecast the seasonality of Barack Obama’s deeply held principles.

Perhaps none of these arcane academic forays is necessary. Simply wait for the Barack Obama Position Switch Oscillation Indicators (BOPSOIs).

— If he says that “___________ from my campaign staff is not the individual I thought I knew all these years”, prepare for the unemployment rate to increase somewhat.

—If he says “I’ve never said such-and-such a thing,” you know what his position was on the issue in question five minutes ago. If you get to his website quickly enough, they may not be through erasing it yet.

—If he ever describes anything as being as near and dear to his heart as his white grandmother, check the local Goodwill Store, and you’ll probably find that item on the shelf.

Suffice it to say that Senator Obama has never kept a principle that he found inconvenient. If a belief holds back his ambition, it gets chucked like a cantaloupe rind after desert. He believes that he can avoid controversial positions by not holding any. It just behooves you to be the last interest group to get in his face before he makes a major decision, instead of just voting “present” and ducking for cover beneath the furniture.

This may even get him elected. As a betting man, when I divorce myself from my right-wing personal biases, I tend to think he has close to a fifty-fifty shot. His problems begin after November, win or lose.

If he loses, he is done at the early age of forty-seven. Liars are despised and can only get what they want by having enough power to badly hurt those who don’t fork it over. As a loser, Barack would be an ignored Senate back-bencher who would only exist to wallow in the corrupt pork-barrel.

As a President, his life would get even worse. There is no voting “Present” as The Commander-In-Chief. A decision to duck is tantamount to a decision to abdicate the power to govern as Chief Executive. However, Mr. President always gets to keep the responsibility.

Win or lose, Barack Obama’s days as a flim-flam artist and charlatan are coming to an end. I hope a majority of the country will vote for John McCain and spare us the tragedy of having to suffer Barack Obama’s downfall in synonymy. His would be a remarkably tragic and unsuccessful Presidency as he reaped the bitter crop that hubris often sows. At least if he lost, he would attend to that harvest alone.