Obama’s position
By Margaret Hollow, 428 Washington Drive - 08/06/08
I had a brief conversation with a man last week who noticed my Obama button and said, “I just can’t decide.” So I asked him what was bothering him and he answered me with “Obama was waffling on Iraq.”
Then I gave a quick metaphorical thought to my hydrangea bush. Could I promise a friend a bouquet in the fall? No! There were conditions along the way over which I had no control: 1) A deer might eat the buds; 2) Hail storms might break the thin stems which held such large blossoms; 3) An unexpected frost could kill them. My answer would have to be, “no!" I had no control over these possible conditions.
That is what I told him. No person had control of the time between now and Nov. 3, but, in thinking of “waffling,” going up and down and seeking out the deepest holes in the waffle is analogous to investigating all the pitfalls of ending a war. Perhaps I should insert a new word, “pancaking.” “Pancaking” would be having a flat, round, no-end-in-sight, set position no matter what the realities or circumstances. I prefer the “waffling.”
Then I gave a quick metaphorical thought to my hydrangea bush. Could I promise a friend a bouquet in the fall? No! There were conditions along the way over which I had no control: 1) A deer might eat the buds; 2) Hail storms might break the thin stems which held such large blossoms; 3) An unexpected frost could kill them. My answer would have to be, “no!" I had no control over these possible conditions.
That is what I told him. No person had control of the time between now and Nov. 3, but, in thinking of “waffling,” going up and down and seeking out the deepest holes in the waffle is analogous to investigating all the pitfalls of ending a war. Perhaps I should insert a new word, “pancaking.” “Pancaking” would be having a flat, round, no-end-in-sight, set position no matter what the realities or circumstances. I prefer the “waffling.”
Current rating: 2 with 89 ratings.
Click here to register
Reader Comments:
gutshot_again wrote on Aug 6, 2008 1:36 PM:
" The problem with Obama's waffling isn't that he waffles. It's that he waffles depending on what the crowd wants to hear.
In MT he says people have a right to firearms, in CA he says we're bitter and hanging on to firearms because of it. He says in the morning we should allow more oil drilling, in the afternoon he's against it in front of a different crowd.
I can understand waffling if there is a valid reason, but his only reason seems to be to get elected. "
In MT he says people have a right to firearms, in CA he says we're bitter and hanging on to firearms because of it. He says in the morning we should allow more oil drilling, in the afternoon he's against it in front of a different crowd.
I can understand waffling if there is a valid reason, but his only reason seems to be to get elected. "
gw wrote on Aug 6, 2008 10:07 AM:
" purple - do the concepts in this letter make more sense in the light of day rather than at 3:35 am? Or are you just too repubtarded to get it? "
skooter wrote on Aug 6, 2008 9:29 AM:
" Just to make it clear: Obama is for ending the war and getting troops home. He's a realist and promised-if elected- to listen to the troops and their commanders on how best to do that...and be cognizant of the political situation in Iraq to make sure further harm isn't done to our country, iraq or service-people. That's not waffling, that's just not making promises before being elected JUST to sound like one isn't 'waffling' (such a stupid buzzword anyway).
Make no mistake: McCain has said he can see us having troops in iraq for 100 years...There is a pretty clear delineation between those two positions. "
Make no mistake: McCain has said he can see us having troops in iraq for 100 years...There is a pretty clear delineation between those two positions. "
4061111 wrote on Aug 6, 2008 7:38 AM:
" While it is true, no candidate has control over what happens between now & when they take the reins; that doesn't excuse them from having a sound idea and then standing behind the execution of such an idea. Yes, they can admit that parts of such reform may be difficult or take longer than prefered due to logistics. But it still comes down to truly having identified a feasible idea and standing behind it. Not having an idea, or changing his mind on his stances is different than that, it isn't a defined idea at all. The decision for president is a lot more important than deciding if you should have ice tea or lemonade with your hot dog. "
wonkerbean wrote on Aug 6, 2008 6:47 AM:
" The Itaq war is the most difficult issue in the context of this election. When we invaded under false pretenses we committed our most precious resource to an endeavor that is morally corrupt. Iraq isn't worth one dead GI, let alone over 4,000 dead and some 30,000 severly wounded and possibly million traumatized. When this election is decided and whomever takes over the Whitehouse, we are going to find out what really happened and what we can do to avoid the imperial presidency in the future. Its too bad we have to wait so long to get our troops out of harms way. "
Share Article
purple wrote on Aug 18, 2008 1:35 AM:
Oh-bum-uh is listening to the troops and their commanders?
How so? When he was on his overseas jaunt, he talked to the commanders and came home and stated that he had not changed his position. I'm sure that the commanders on the ground, the ones who know more about what is going on there, briefed him on the need for a continued U.S. military presence in Iraq and that pre-mature withdrawal would eventually lead to worse bloodshed.
Seems to me, the democrat controlled congress was advised about the pending bloodshed before they cut off funding to south Vietnam. How many millions of asians died after they cut off military aid?
You have your freedom, so to hell with someone who doesn't, right? "