by Frank James
Now that the U.S. military surge in Iraq has succeeded in significantly reducing violence there, Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign appears to have changed its website to catch up with the facts on the ground.
The Daily News reports that Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign revised its website to remove criticism of the U.S. military surge.
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's campaign scrubbed his presidential Web site over the weekend to remove criticism of the U.S. troop "surge" in Iraq, the Daily News has learned.
The presumed Democratic nominee replaced his Iraq issue Web page, which had described the surge as a "problem" that had barely reduced violence.
"The surge is not working," Obama's old plan stated, citing a lack of Iraqi political cooperation but crediting Sunni sheiks - not U.S. military muscle - for quelling violence in Anbar Province.
The News reported Sunday that insurgent attacks have fallen to the fewest since March 2004.
Obama's campaign posted a new Iraq plan Sunday night, which cites an "improved security situation" paid for with the blood of U.S. troops since the surge began in February 2007.
The short Daily News story includes the following paragraph which may demonstrate a required ability for campaign aides to tell reporters that up is down with a straight face:
Campaign aide Wendy Morigi said Obama is "not softening his criticism of the surge. We regularly update the Web site to reflect changes in current events."
Actually, Obama has softened his criticism. While campaigning in July 2007 in New Hampshire, he said:
"Here's what we know. The surge has not worked. And they said today, 'Well, even in September, we're going to need more time.' So we're going to kick this can all the way down to the next president, under the president's plan."
But that was then.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
The trouble with this assertion is that it assumes that the campaign is trying to hide something.
Here's what I think: Obama is set to do two things: he's going to make a major speech today, and later he's going to Iraq to talk to people there.
So what might happen, besides backing off the surge? Well, you might see new material, based on this current speech, based on stuff he sees and hears on his tour.
Calling this flip-flopping or scrubbing presupposes changes that may not show up. It's not very good reporting.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty | July 15, 2008 11:38 AM
Obama has used his good judgment and softened his position on the affects of the surge based on conditions on the ground. We can't have a president who shifts his position when conditions warrant it! Begin attacking him as a flip-flopper IMMEDIATELY!!
Posted by: Quippy | July 15, 2008 11:51 AM
The surge is working = Mission Accomplished
Posted by: bill "Hussein" r. | July 15, 2008 12:00 PM
The same good judgement that said that the surge would never work.
The same good judgement that said Iran was not a threat.
The same good judgement that said affiliations with known criminals like Rezko are "ok"
The more I get to know Mr. Obama, the more I realize how dangerous his naiveté is.
Posted by: Pedro | July 15, 2008 12:12 PM
Obama has used his good judgment and softened his position on the affects of the surge based on conditions on the ground. We can't have a president who shifts his position when conditions warrant it! Begin attacking him as a flip-flopper IMMEDIATELY!!
Posted by: Quippy | July 15, 2008 11:51 AM
He isn't using good judgement- he is positioning his messgae now against his message then..
From a Rich Lowry column ( National Review ONline)
"...Obama said in early 2007 that nothing in the surge plan would “make a significant dent in the sectarian violence,” and the new strategy would “not prove to be one that changes the dynamics significantly.” He referred to the surge derisively as “baby-sit(ting) a civil war.”..."
So was he wrong then or now?
More importantly- to your point about his judgement- he is still recommending and standing behind his 16 months and out stratgey. A strategy that military experts/leaders say is not only dangerous but logistically impossible.
So if he is "softening" his position- why is he not using his judgement toand changing his his long term plans?
Posted by: heartburn | July 15, 2008 12:13 PM
Poor Obama. The poor man is so confused.
Posted by: brigitte | July 15, 2008 1:30 PM
heartburn,
Sectarian violence is down because neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed. Was ethnic cleansing part of the surge strategy?
Posted by: justaskin | July 15, 2008 1:57 PM
The real confused people are the ones who think that the purpose of the surge was just to reduce violence.
The sad thing is, the insurgents got what they wanted. That's part of the reason violence is down.
People who were killing Americans last year are now accepting bribes from us this year in a friendship that will last as long as the dollars keep rolling in. People who intended to balkanize the neighborhoods of Baghdad succeeded. Politicians who were supposed to unite Iraq, to give up the power their personal armies and fiefdoms created, did not. Iraq remains a failed state.
It's public relations BS to insist that lowered violence was the consequence of the surge. The spike in troop and civilian deaths during that fit Al-Sadr had proves it. The fact that Maliki had to ask our help also proves that the surge failed. If he really had gained the necessary power during those months, our help would be unnecessary. His troops would have "stood up" to the challenge.
The reality is, McCain and the Republican's claims that the Surge worked are BS, and Obama's speech spared them little on that count. The reality is, if you look at his speech today, his position has really changed little.
This is flip-flopping as imagined by the small-minded hobgoblins of consistency, those who can't see the forest of Obama's position for the trees of a few outdated arguments
His position hasn't softened. He's sticking to getting us out, to insisting that the surge has failed. The only people whose positions have truly softened are the Republicans, because they have gone from boasting that they would create an American Style Democracy in mesopotamia to dressing the corpse of a failed state in body count numbers. Their strategy has had its brains rotted out, and nothing has replaced it.
Posted by: Stephen Daugherty | July 15, 2008 2:09 PM
heartburn,
Sectarian violence is down because neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed. Was ethnic cleansing part of the surge strategy?
Posted by: justaskin | July 15, 2008 1:57 PM
Yes... if you consider Al Queda and foreign fighters in Iraq an ethnic group-?
Posted by: heartburn | July 15, 2008 2:48 PM
Impossible to redeploy the troops in Iraq in a 16-month time frame?
Sez who? You really should have more faith in the troops. Given the opportunity I'm sure that our guys could pack everything up and move it out in that time.
Of course Halliburton and Black Water will be dismayed that the money machine has been dismantled!
Posted by: Quippy | July 15, 2008 2:49 PM
Stephen, if he stands by the statements he previously made why is it necessary to remove them from his website? Unless he has something to hide? He can expect to be grilled about his divergent positions in the debates. He's doing nothing but setting up the questions for the few still objective reporters (like Charlie Gibson) in the Washington press corps. They will slam-dunk Obama for his campaign's Trotsky-ite behavior.
Posted by: Jeff | July 15, 2008 2:54 PM
heartburn,
That is not how the neighborhoods were ethnically cleansed and you know it. Whole families were forced to relocate to monolithic enclaves for their own protection. This was not part of the surge. It had nothing to do with US soldiers going after terrorists. I feel sorry for you that you have to pretend to not understand my question.
Posted by: justsayin | July 15, 2008 4:27 PM
Ooooh... they updated their... website.. with new new... facts! How dare they?
They have to be stubborn like Bush and other republicans, thats the only way MSM can cover them. They can't acknowledge new facts as they happen...
Posted by: Abhinav | July 15, 2008 5:03 PM
Errror in fact, Abhinav, he didn't just update his web site with the new facts about how we have Al Qaeda in Iraq on the run, he also removed his previous statements about how the surge wasn't working. Not just an update, an update with editing!
Posted by: Jeff | July 15, 2008 5:26 PM
THIS JUST IN: OBAMA CAMPAIGN UPDATES WEBSITE!
I know the Republican presidential candidate isn't exactly up on the technology of the internets, but seriously...what do they expect...a bunch of strikethroughs showing all of their updates?
Posted by: slag | July 15, 2008 6:02 PM
Hey, his is not the only campaign changing their website. Con't forget, McCain's campaign took down Cindy McCain's recipes!!!
Posted by: ElliotNC | July 16, 2008 9:10 AM
You kool-aid drinking obama-ites are hilarious. I feel like I am actually in OZ… you know the “pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” thing. Is he too proud to admit he was wrong? My opinion is yes his is too proud. And funny this is the same topic a lot of the leftists were trying to crucify GW for. Now I am not a Bush supporter on many issues, however I would vote for his third term over these two dumb donkeys. How ever since I have to choose between the lesser of the two evils… it sucks. But I digress… Obama is a puppet that is run by someone you can’t see. Don’t know if it is Soros or the Kennedy’s. Either way it isn’t good. He has no experience (154 days in the senate before running for pres. and being absent pretty much since) and before that he was a community organizer… what ever the hell that is. In CHICAGO which happens to be the most single corrupt political organization in the country. Now is that the change we should count on?
Posted by: mr.smith | July 16, 2008 9:54 AM