Does this make me a racist?

Why Flip Flop At All?
TalkLeft

Sure, the flip flop attack probably won’t cost Obama the election. But why not ask yourself this, why feed the line of attack in the first place? Maybe Obama is not really hurt by the flip flopper line, but please …

On July 8th, 2008 at 2:33 pm, alamedaman said:

wasn’t George Bush against nation-building when he ran for the presidency in 2000, yet now we’re rebuilding two nations? Did he give the spatula to Kerry first?

As my law school professors used to say in reply to weak student arguments in class, “That’s a distinction, but is it distinguishing?”

In 2000, it was one thing to be chary about “nation-building” in places like Kosovo, Bosnia, Sudan, Rwanda, etc. Those were places that had nothing whatsoever to do with American national interest.

It’s another thing to have to reshape two countries that had become so dysfunctional that one of them gladly harbored al Qaeda’s leadership before and after 9/11, and the other was widely seen (and not just by the Bush administration) as a festering threat that had already sparked two regional wars and was definitely rooting for the terrorists (e.g., on 9/12 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, every nation’s flag flew at half-mast but one – you get one guess as to which country that was).

You can rehash the futile arguments about whether we should have taken down the Saddam Hussein regime in 2003 — futile because there’s no way to go back in time to do things differently — or you can recognize that by our military intervention there we have incurred the concomitant obligation not to walk away and leave chaos in our footsteps.

A president can change his position on issues for serious or frivolous reasons. For example, Woodrow Wilson was “Too proud to fight” when Europe was going up in flames in World War I, and won re-election in 1916 on the slogan, “He kept us out of the war!” But when he found out about the Zimmerman Note, off to war he went.

Or how about 1940: Franklin Roosevelt said “We will not go to war over any damn Ding Dong” when the Japanese occupied French Indochina; but he completely changed his tune about confronting Japanese aggression on December 7, 1941.

Likewise, George Bush was against “nation-building” before 9/11, but the radically changed circumstances on that date led to a radical and necessary departure from that earlier reluctance.

Now contrast how Senators “War Hero” and Hopenchange did 180s on multiple issues simply because they thought that by doing so they’d gain some tactical electoral advantage.

See? That’s not just a difference. It’s distinguishing… at least to anyone capable of thinking in terms other than cliches.

“I have also consistently said that once we were in, we had to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in.”

Sounds to me like he wants to be careless with his exit strategy. Sounds just like cut and run. Can this guy say anything more stupid. As careful as we were careless. So if you weren’t careful getting in we shouldn’t be careful getting out. I just can’t stop laughing.

On July 8th, 2008 at 12:14 pm, On-my-soap-box said:
Wanna bet Obummer gives Mumia Abu Jamal a pardon?

Fortunately he can’t. The ‘other’ magic negro was convicted in state court. Bush II tried that in Texas with the illegal alien death case and lost. No, the ObamaMessiah will have to pardon muslims to meet his quota of Dumb Liberal Stunts.
Speaking of change I guess it is time to take down the Christmas lights.