CBS' Schieffer left out part of Obama speech that undermined Schieffer's suggestion of a "different take" on Iraq policy
SUMMARY: On Face the Nation, Bob Schieffer stated that Sen. Barack Obama "seemed to have a slightly different take" on withdrawing troops from Iraq in July 3 remarks, as compared with a speech he made on March 19. But Schieffer omitted Obama's statement in the March 19 speech that he would set Iraq policy in consultation with military commanders.
During the July 6 edition of CBS' Face the Nation, host Bob Schieffer aired March 19 remarks by Sen. Barack Obama regarding a timeline for withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq and stated, "But last week, he seemed to have a slightly different take." Schieffer then aired video of Obama stating on July 3: "When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies." But Schieffer omitted Obama's statement in the same March 19 speech that he would set Iraq policy in consultation with military commanders:
OBAMA: Let me be clear: Ending this war is not going to be easy. There will be dangers involved -- just as there would be dangers involved with staying indefinitely. We will have to make tactical adjustments, listening to our commanders on the ground, to ensure that our interests in a stable Iraq are met and to make sure that our troops are secure.
Schieffer also falsely suggested that Obama's pledge to listen to commanders on the ground came only after Sen. John McCain "has been telling him he ought to do" it. But again, as Media Matters for America has noted, and as Schieffer ignored in the March 19 speech, Obama has spoken of the need to listen to commanders on the ground on numerous occasions since 2007.
From Obama's March 19 speech:
OBAMA: So when I am commander-in-chief, I will set a new goal on Day One: I will end this war. Not because politics compels it. Not because our troops cannot bear the burden -- as heavy as it is. But because it is the right thing to do for our national security, and it will ultimately make us safer.
In order to end this war responsibly, I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove one to two combat brigades each month. If we start with the number of brigades we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them in 16 months. After this redeployment, we will leave enough troops in Iraq to guard our embassy and our diplomats, and a counterterrorism force to strike Al Qaeda if it forms a base that the Iraqis cannot destroy. What I propose, and what I've been proposing for many months, is not and never has been a precipitous drawdown. It is instead a detailed and prudent plan that will end a war nearly seven years after it started.
My plan to end this war will finally put pressure on Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future. Because we've learned that when we tell Iraq's leaders that we'll stay as long as it takes, they take as long as they want. We need to send a different message. We will help Iraq reach a meaningful accord on national reconciliation. We will engage with every country in the region -- and the U.N. -- to support the stability and territorial integrity of Iraq. And we will launch a major humanitarian initiative to support Iraq's refugees and its people. But Iraqis must take responsibility for their country. It is precisely this kind of approach -- an approach that puts the onus on the Iraqis and that relies on more than just military power -- that is needed to stabilize Iraq.
Let me be clear: Ending this war is not going to be easy. There will be dangers involved -- just as there would be dangers involved with staying indefinitely. We will have to make tactical adjustments, listening to our commanders on the ground, to ensure that our interests in a stable Iraq are met and to make sure that our troops are secure.
From the July 6 edition of CBS' Face the Nation:
SCHIEFFER: Senator Obama's been saying he'll begin an immediate withdrawal of the American forces in Iraq once he becomes president. If he does -- here's the way he put it back in March:
OBAMA [video clip]: In order to end this war responsibly, I will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. We can responsibly remove one to two combat brigades each month. If we start with the number of brigades we have in Iraq today, we can remove all of them in 16 months.
SCHIEFFER: But last week, he seemed to have a slightly different take. Here's what he said last week:
OBAMA [video clip]: When I go to Iraq and I have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.
SCHIEFFER: So is this a change in policy? Some in the McCain campaign go so far as to say it is a flip-flop. Senator Kerry, explain for us.
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA): Well, the Republicans and John McCain specifically are trying desperately to get away from the reality of John McCain's position, which is that he has a plan for staying in Iraq and Barack Obama has a plan for getting out of Iraq. Barack Obama has a plan for ending the war, John McCain has a plan for continuing the war. And he has said so very clearly dozens and dozens of times. What the McCain campaign is trying to do is take the normal statement of anybody smart enough to be president of the United States and ready to be president, who says he'll refine -- may refine tactically what you might decide to do over the course of that withdrawal and how you protect American troops and how you, in fact, get the Iraqi army to stand up faster. But it is no change whatsoever in his fundamental determination to end the war.
John McCain, on the other hand, has proven that he's been wrong about every judgment he's made about the war. Wrong about the Iraqis paying for the reconstruction, wrong about whether or not the oil would pay for it, wrong about Sunni and Shia violence through the years, wrong about the willingness of the Iraqis to stand up for themselves, wrong even about his own judgment about timelines, et cetera, which he's now changed.
SCHIEFFER: All right, so let's let --
KERRY: So they're just -- they're -- Bob, the bottom line is, they're trying very hard to make an issue where there really isn't one and where the contrast could not be more forceful.
SCHIEFFER: All right. Well, let's go to Senator Graham here, because Senator, what Barack Obama is saying here -- he's saying he's going to listen to the commanders on the ground -- that is exactly what Senator McCain has been telling him he ought to do. But instead of saying, "That's a good thing you've done there, Senator," the people in your campaign are now saying, "This is some kind of a flip-flop. Here he goes shifting his position again." Why has the campaign come down so hard on him about this?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Well, I hope he will go to Iraq and listen to the commanders and evaluate the progress. He hasn't been since January 2006. And I guess what disturbs most of us here is that during the primary season, he was as hard over as you could be about leaving Iraq, ending the war now.
Of course such "refining" would be an unspeakable act by a GOP candidate, no doubt.
What part of "immediately" does "talk to the commanders on the ground and further refine my position" take up?
Immediately withdrawing from Iraq is a principled postion, much like "stay the course". It's not reactionary, but rather, intuitive. Obama really pushed this stance of his when he was running against Hillary, but seems to be distancing himself from principle now.
It's a moot point to me. I am not some bleary eyed idealist that expects candidates to not adjust their positions over time. The campaigns now last about a year and a half. I expect some big things to change over that time period. I don't see adjustments as a weakness. To the contrary, I see it as a good sign.
One of my biggest criticisms of George W Bush's early Presidency was his steadfast commitment to a tax cut designed during and for a booming economy but was enacted during a slowdown. The first taxcut had almost no value to stimulate the economy as it should have if Bush would have adjusted the cut to fit the needs of the time instead of a simple and foolish keeping of his outdated and obsolete campaign promise.
Obama really pushed this stance of his when he was running against Hillary, but seems to be distancing himself from principle now.
Of course, as with everything you post, the truth is the exact opposite of what you claim. It's very easy to look up what he has said during the entire campaign, and his position has not changed.
First Obama was a Muslim.
Then he was a Christian with a racist pastor.
Then he was the most liberal Senator.
Now he is supposedly moving to the center.
-- We will have to make tactical adjustments, listening to our commanders on the ground, to ensure that our interests in a stable Iraq are met -- Obama
Now that Obama senses that he will really have to make military decisions...he sounds like a clone of Pres.Bush.
He has talked a good story about getting out of Iraq when he was giving a reach around to the far left...now it's a different story. Here's a good laugh:
-- It’s time to set a hard date to signal a new mission in Iraq and to begin to bring our troops home. It’s time to ensure that we complete the change in mission and the drawdown of our forces, by the end of April 2008 – a date that is consistent with the date in my plan back in January. -- Obama Jul-07
-- If we start now, all of our combat brigades should be out of Iraq by the end of next year (Dec08) -- Obama Sep07
Just another politician...no better than the rest when it comes down to having to make the hard decisions. He's fooled the liberal anti-war voters into making him the nominee...I'll bet many might like to have that vote back...now that he has reneged on his promise for an immediate withdrawal and has moved the goal posts to now include a "stable Iraq" as a condition for leaving.
Reminds me of the song lyrics "Well I fooled you...I fooled you...I got pig iron...I got all pig iron"...
I am one of those far left, anti-war liberals. I never had the illusion that Barack would or could withdraw immediately. More importantly, he never said that he could withdraw immediately.
But honestly, you are desperate. Your quotes say what? All they show is the consistent message that Obama has delivered.
Were you following the Democratic primaries any? The candidates to pick for immediate withdrawal were Kucinich and Gravel and Richardson proposed a six month timetable. The leading candidates (Obama, Clinton and Edwards) had extended withdrawal plans.
And 9/07 to 12/08 is a sixteen month timetable. Obama has always maintained it would take sixteen months to remove all the combat troops from Iraq. When he gets into office, the troops will start withdrawing and all combat troops will be withdrawn within sixteen month.
Obama's shifting policies are causing trouble in paradise. The following from Donald Sutherland at Huffpo.
-- The DNC's 'Terry McAuliffe mind-set' ruined the campaigns of Gore, Kerry and Senator Clinton and now the legions of McAuliffites who have surrounded Barack Obama are doing their damndest to undermine the possibility of his Presidency. They've turned this man we thought was a lion into a little lamb and they're leading him to slaughter. There's a well sourced rumor...
that his base support will be so demoralized they won't have the vital conviction they'll need this August to withstand a McAuliffite push to persuade disenchanted delegates on the floor of the convention to make a resurgent Hillary Clinton the Party's nominee!...
This morning's news in the Washington Post is that he's revised his positions on abortion and troop withdrawal! His supporters are being sent to hell in a handbasket and it has to be stopped! --
Yikes! Will Hillary ever go quietly into that good night?
Wesley,
Maybe you can answer my question this time around, since you ignored it on the other thread.
Do you think Obama should ignore new facts and stick to his original position, stubbornly and without thought?
Since you are intent on labeling him a flip/flopper, I assume that's what you think.
I don't believe you have actually shown anything to prove he is a flip/flopper though. He appears to be very consistent in his statements. You have pretty much confirmed that with your postings.
But please, answer my question, it would go a long way to understanding your take on these things.
Thanks
But please, answer my question, it would go a long way to understanding your take on these things.
That way lies madness.
Obama KNEW in 2007 that things could change and he said whatever he could to win the loony-left base. Now he risks alienating those same people who gave him the nomination.
Point is he's not a NEW politician. Same-old LIAR angling for votes. No CHANGE here!
No Lefty,
So vote for McCain! No one is stopping you.
Bob is a TOOL and an inline conservative tool, he manufactures what ever he needs, to fit what he wants to say, he can be correct, many times, but has this penchant for wanting too... make crap up, why/ he's getting old and it's hard to change your ways, especially when not many have called your on you bullcrap, the blogs have, made calling crap, crap a trueism.
Bob just ignores and lays out some facts that everyone already knows is true and smiles, like a man who sold a rain coat in a piss storm, then tells you, yes it rained, but leaves out the rain was yellow.