A recent article at Real Clear Politics lays out Obama’s “pivots” on a huge number of issues.  I think the thought here is that now that Obama has won the Democratic nomiation, it is essential to politically move towards the center if he is to seem somewhat credible in the general election.

No far-left candidate has ever won the election and the Obama campaign knows this.  At this point, it’s all about political expediency and Obama has no problem shifting positions on pretty much any issue.

During his eight years in the Illinois state senate, Barack Obama voted “present” 130 times. That’s an astounding 12-13 times a year in which he said, in effect, “I’m here, but I’m not going to take a stand on this issue.”

Given that record of bold leadership, I’m surprised Sen. Obama acted as he did on the legislation Congress passed July 9 to renew the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Sen. Obama had pledged to filibuster FISA if it contained a provision to provide retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies which cooperated with the government, and then reneged on that promise.

I’m surprised Sen. Obama wasn’t somewhere else giving a speech on hope and change on the day of the FISA vote. If there were ever a vote for him to duck, it was this one. The FISA flip flop is all the more perplexing in view of the er, ah, “pivots” Sen. Obama has made recently on campaign finance, NAFTA, gun control, the death penalty, and abortion, and the Mother-of-all-pivots he is about to make on the Iraq war. His moonbat base is a

lready upset enough with him. Why give them additional reason for concern?

When Sen. Obama returns from his visit to Iraq, he is all but certain to backtrack on the pledge he made to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq within 16 months of assuming office. He’s already said he’ll “refine” his policy after input from the commanders on the ground, and, thanks to Martha Raddatz of ABC News, we’ve got a good idea of what that input will be.

“Seve

ral commanders who looked at the Obama plan told ABC News, on background, that there was ‘no way’ it could work logistically,” Ms. Raddatz said in a broadcast July 11. U.S. troops would have to leave most of their equipment behind, which would be very, very stupid.

So Sen. Obama will alter his position on withdrawal from Iraq because it is untenable. The 16 month figure was something he plucked from his buttocks at a time when it appeared the war was being lost. Now the war is all but won, and the only way it could be lost is by a precipitous U.S. withdrawal.

Read the Rest