Powered by WebAds

Sunday, June 08, 2008

Obama's four foreign policy flip-flops are all connected to Israel

From Powerline comes a link to a new Republican website called MeetBarackObama.com. One of the items on the web site is four foreign policy flip-flops by Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Hussein Obama. All four of them are connected to Israel.
FLIP-FLOP #1: In His Remarks To The Annual AIPAC Policy Conference, Obama Said That Jerusalem Should Be The Undivided Capital Of Israel, But Later Said The City's Future Should Be Negotiated By Israel And The Palestinians.


FLIP-FLOP #2: Obama Now Claims That He Will Only Meet With Foreign Leaders At A Time Of His Choosing If It Will Advance U.S. Interests, But Previously Said He Would Meet With Rogue Leaders His First Year In Office Without Preconditions.


FLIP-FLOP #3: Obama Has Pivoted In His Opposition To Legislation Labeling Iran's Revolutionary Guard A Terrorist Organization.


FLIP-FLOP #4: Obama Now Claims That He Opposed Palestinian Elections In 2006, But He Supported Them At That Time.
Is it a coincidence that they're all connected to Israel? Based on the company he keeps, I doubt it.

Read the whole thing.


At 10:46 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

They see "flip-flops", I see no flip-flops, only GOP false accusations. (And I'm a Republican, but if they keep this up I won't be!)

At 11:38 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

Obama just wants to get elected and in America, the core left isn't enough to get a Democrat elected President. Hence the policy flip flops in the general election season now that the primaries are over.

At 4:28 PM, Blogger Red Tulips said...


Where are the false accusations? I would like to know.

At 4:59 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

red tulips, the false accusations are in describing each of the examples as a "flip-flop," since flip-flop means a reversal of position, and Obama just has not done that. If one labels someone a reverser of opinion and he is not, then that is a false accusation, simple.

They would have been a tad more honest, though sleazier, if they had labeled each example "flip-flop?", putting a question mark after the label, thus sticking with the insinuation, even though some of the assertions themselves are such mischaracterizations (in addition to being very deceptive) that they too push being false accusations, though not quite the blatant lie of the use of the term flip-flop.

At 6:44 PM, Blogger Red Tulips said...


And how exactly has Obama not "changed his position" with regards to those four points??? You are saying his positions are arguably consistent. How, exactly?


Post a Comment

<< Home