Obama Overseas: Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes

Acting like little girls in their tween years obsessed with Miley Cyrus, the media hopped aboard a plane and rushed to meet up with Senator Barack Obama. If only someone had told them that as a candidate for the American presidency, Sen. Obama would be coming back. Apparently there was some sort of contest to see who could get the Illinois senator to admit that the surge worked. Honorable mention goes to Katie Couric for her numerous attempts:

1. Before the surge, as you know, Senator, there were 80 to 100 U.S. casualties a month, the country was rife with sectarian violence, and you raised a lot of eyebrows on this trip saying even knowing what you know now, you still would not have supported the surge. People may be scratching their heads and saying, "Why?"


2. But didn't the surge help do that?


3. But do you not give the surge any credit for reducing violence in Iraq?


4. But talking microcosmically, did the surge, the addition of 30,000 additional troops ... help the situation in Iraq?


5. But yet you're saying … given what you know now, you still wouldn't support it … so I'm just trying to understand this.


6. And I really don't mean to belabor this, Senator, because I'm really, I'm trying … to figure out your position. Do you think the level of security in Iraq would exist today without the surge?
   

"Katie, I have no idea what would have happened had we applied my approach, which was to put more pressure on the Iraqis to arrive at a political reconciliation. So this is all hypotheticals. What I can say is that there's no doubt that our U.S. troops have contributed to a reduction of violence in Iraq. I said that, not just today, not just yesterday, but I've said that previously. What that doesn't change is that we've got to have a different strategic approach if we're going to make America as safe as possible."

Just to throw this in, last September, Sen. Obama was quoted saying, "Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was.

The best way to protect our security and to pressure Iraq's leaders to resolve their civil war is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months or one year - now."

Senator it's a simple yes or know, you're the candidate for change, it's ok to CHANGE your mind, politicians do it all the time- assuming you don't make a habit of it. Or has he? It's certainly what Sen. John McCain wants to prove.

As USA Today had to say, "Why can't Obama bring himself to acknowledge the surge worked better than he and other skeptics thought that it would? What does that stubbornness say about the kind of president that he would be?" This quote was mentioned on today's edition (July 27) of Meet the Press by Tom Brokaw to Sen. Obama. In response Obama said, "Well, listen. I, I actually think that there's no doubt that the violence has gone down more than any of us anticipated, including President Bush and John McCain. If you, if you would--if you had talked to them and, and said, "You know what? We're going to bring down violence to the levels that we have," I think--I, I, I suspect USA Today's own editorial board wouldn't have anticipated that. That's not a, that's not a hard thing to acknowledge, that the situations have improved more rapidly than we had anticipated. That doesn't change the broader strategic questions that we've got to deal with." Not a hard thing to acknowledge ey, so why can't you just come out and admit it?

Alright, so the surge worked, so who cares if Barack Obama admits it or not? You and I will both know that it did, what's important now is what happens next. Apparently the next phase would be focusing back on Afghanistan. Barack Obama's plan for Afghanistan:

1. More troops; add 2 more brigades to the American fighting force.


2. Germany prepared to another 1,000 troops.

Along with Afghanistan is Pakistan, and all this from the candidate who began with the plan for immediate withdrawal. But it wasn't until John McCain criticized him for not meeting with American commanders in the Middle East did the light bulb finally go off and Obama headed overseas. A man who as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and running for president, made his first trip four months before voters head to the voting booths. "Well, look, the, the fact is, is that I've been busy also working on issues like Iraq, on nuclear proliferation. There are a whole range of issues that we've got to deal with," said Obama- he certainly loves playing dodge-ball. And after Obama's huge speech in Berlin, does that sound like an to fighting? Well actually yes, accept when you think that's he calling for the world to step it up with the support. We may pull out of Iraq, but that doesn't mean we're pulling out of the Middle East. So to lower any speculation, Sen. Obama needs to once and for all be very clear what his plans are, and where he stands now! Because if he doesn't, John McCain is just going to keep rolling adds similar to the one above. People say their voting for him because, like already stated, he's for change, well I 'd like to know if that includes changes from something he said a year ago. And finally, whatever Obama or McCain say now, can go a completely different way on Day One. So it's time for Sen. Obama to finalize on those, as David Bowie would put it, ch-ch-ch-ch-changes.

Obama Overseas: Déjà Vu

While John McCain shopped with voters, dodged criticism from the media for criticizing Barack Obama, and tries to make it known that he too is in the presidential race, Sen. Obama was standing before the masses in Berlin.

The scene of Thursday's gathering mirrored that of the March on Washington political rally back on August 28, 1963, or that of when President Ronald Reagan spoke in Berlin back on June 12, 1987. Saying he was speaking as a citizen, and not as a presidential candidate, Barack Obama came to deliver a speech of unity for the people of the world to take a stand against terrorism. But didn't we already come together for such a cause once before?

"People of the world - look at Berlin, where a wall came down, a continent came together, and history proved that there is no challenge too great for a world that stands as one.

...In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone.

...Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more - not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.

That is why the greatest danger of all is to allow new walls to divide us from one another.

The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down."

Unfortunately for Obama the majority of the crowd was most likely not American, and therefore can not cast their vote for him in the fall. By taking such a stand for peace as one who could be president certainly helps to boost not only Sen. Obama's image, but the image of America. But if the world is to come together and fight against those who would do us harm, is it because of Barack Obama? Would Europeans have rallied together if President Bush was to have made such a speech, or Sen. McCain? Does one join in unity for the better of humanity because one man made a speech on something we should've already been for? Was it really this speech to get such an obvious message out there? Did Sen. Obama just re-ignite the call to fight?

"People of Berlin - and people of the world - the scale of our challenge is great. The road ahead will be long. But I come before you to say that we are heirs to a struggle for freedom. We are a people of improbable hope. With an eye toward the future, with resolve in our hearts, let us remember this history, and answer our destiny, and remake the world once again."

Some say it's time for American forces to come home, and some say we have no right being over there, and President Bush as ruined America. But thanks to Sen. Obama's speech of coming together against terrorists, and doing away with nuclear weapons, make the American mind-set will change- hey, isn't Barack running for change? I don't know, sounds more like déjà vu.

Obama Overseas: The Man America Should Elect?

In case you were not aware, Sen. Barack Obama has flown over to the middle east. It's a trip that can basically be described as a way to help increase where he stands on foreign policy and the War on Terror. I, along with many others, applaud the Illinois senator on finally taking such action. If one who is running for president of the country plans on talking like he or she knows what's going taking place on the other side of the world, especially if it affects this country, one must go and see for one's self.

Israelis and Palestinians on Obama:

Charles Gibson, anchor of ABC's World News, was one of the many journalists following Sen. Obama through Jerusalem. In the evening Gibson stopped at some of the local cafe's to get the opinions of what the locals though of Obama, and to ask as to whether or not Obama or John McCain could make a real difference in the region- they found considerable skepticism. One Palestinian girl said that they have been disappointed so many times with the U.S., saying all the policies are the same and are followed the same way- just doesn’t give a da*n about it anymore. Some Israelis and Palestinians don't care about what Obama says, they're more interested in his actions. A young Palestinian man sees Obama's trip as nothing more than a reason to boost his foreign policy credentials. One woman says that attraction to Obama is because he’s different- he’s young, he’s black, and he’s a minority. One Palestinian man said, " We need a change, ...that’s why we need a new face like Obama, to have a change, because McCain is another Bush."

But while ABC reported this outlook on Obama, Katie Couric of CBS's Evening News had this to say when sitting down with the senator, "...according to a recent poll out of Jerusalem, Israeli Jews favor John McCain for President 43 to 20 percent, with one-third undecided. Why do you think that's the case?"

Said Obama, "Well, I think it … I'm not as well known as John McCain. I think that's obviously a factor. And, you know, I think, understandably, Israelis are very interested in making sure that whoever takes the White House is absolutely committed to their security, regardless of other issues. And they know John McCain. He's been there. Despite the fact that my record is as strong as John McCain's on all the issues related to Israeli security, people just don't know me as well. That's part of the reason why we're gonna spend a day visiting there in discussions and hopefully give people confidence that I have a track record that will assure not only the people of Israel, but friends of Israel back home, that, in fact, Israel's security is paramount."

With Israelis and Palestinians debating their personal feelings of Barack Obama, how important or meaningful are their views when some say he's the man America should elect?

Not Positive

In case you haven't noticed there's this door in Washington D.C. that President Bush is trying to open. Unfortunately for the president every time he's able to unlock the door, Congress is there to keep him from entering.

The topic of offshore drilling has certainly been a hot topic what with the high gas prices, and today President Bush promised to lift the ban on offshore drilling. By making this move, the president has placed the pressure on a congress mostly made up of Democrats. "For years, my administration has been calling on Congress to expand domestic oil production," said Mr. Bush. "Unfortunately, Democrats on Capitol Hill have rejected virtually every proposal. And now Americans are paying at the pump." But though the president wishes to lift the ban, it takes the action of congress to completely do so. Apparently there are two prohibitions on offshore drilling, one imposed by Congress and another by executive order signed by the first President Bush in 1990. Said the president, "When Congress lifts the legislative ban, I will lift the executive prohibition."

Now maybe you're sitting there reading this thinking how President Bush has failed the country again, but I would just like to point out the key word here, "Congress". Also, when you hear how Bush's approval rating continues to fall, ask yourself why that is, and then ask if the people who believe he's failed really know what they're talking about.

Sen. John McCain shares the same feelings as the president on this topic, while Sen. Obama wishes to help Americans with a second economic stimulus package so they can afford to pay the high gas prices. Both candidates also wish to develop alternate energy sources, but while it's a good idea, we're no where near that point.

According to Obama spokesman Bill Burton offshore drilling would provide short-term relief at the pump or a long-term strategy for energy independence. "It would be worthy of consideration, regardless of the risks," he said. "But most experts, even within the Bush administration, concede it would do neither. It would merely prolong the failed energy policies we have seen from Washington for thirty years." Thank you Mr. Positive, and when can we expect results from the Obama administration? Oh yeah, that's if he's elected, and that plan would still be a good decade or two away from completion.

Apparently even if Congress was to do their part is lifting the drilling ban, we wouldn't see results anytime soon, and when drilling operations finally got underway the results would be insignificant. But come on, isn't it better to try and so something than blaming the president for doing nothing? So thanks to the negativity on Capital Hill who knows what we can expect, because so far when it comes to gas, it's certainly not positive.

Independence

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Those words penned two-hundred and thirty-two years ago, marked the moment when little America made its declaration for independence. Here we are in 2008, and just look at how far we've come. Since my post on this day a year ago, I can turn on the television and see that we are still at war. Times remain tough for many, but I can't help but once again repeat what the echoes of past posts are saying, "at least we're safe, at least we have our freedom." Sure things may not be going great for many but we're a lot better of then others around the world. So on this 4th July, continue to remember our soldiers, and while they fight for our safety, soldiers of America's Revolution fought for your Independence.

And just something to keep in mind this election year...

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

- Declaration of Independence