- The Washington Times - Wednesday, July 16, 2008

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

OP-ED:

From Australia to London, to almost all points in between, if there are two things people know about Barack Obama, one of them is that he has recently changed his positions on abortion, gun control, capital punishment, FISA laws, the status of Jerusalem, faith-based federal programs, public financing of his campaign, welfare, NAFTA and free trade, and his commitment to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his Trinity Church, among things.

But it is said by his supporters, and readily acknowledged by most public commentators, that this is what candidates for president routinely do. If they are Republicans, they run to the right in the primary and run to the center in the general election. If they are Democrats, they run to the left in the primary and then to the center in the general.

This is the policy version of the cynical Clinton defense - everybody does it (although there is no evidence that any other president in history copulated with a young White House intern). But we all know about the run to the center in presidential general elections.

Who can forget Ronald Reagan’s 1980 campaign where he came out for tax cuts, lower social spending and more military spending in the primary - only to back away from those policies in the general election with the famous phrase “I got a little rhetorically overexcited during the primary. On closer examination, President Carter seems to have built up our defenses sufficiently. We will have to see about those tax cuts - we may need the revenues for more social spending.”

Or what about the 1968 campaign when Richard Nixon ran on a law-and-order platform in the primary, condemning hippies, riots and rising urban crime? Then, in the general election that fall all the networks covered Mr. Nixon’s extraordinary visit to death row at San Quentin prison, after which he explained, his eyes red from heartfelt tears, (though some people say it was from squinting at the cross-tabulations of his polls, that showed he couldn’t carry Pennsylvania without carrying liberal Montgomery County) that talking with the men on death row he realized that capital punishment wasn’t the answer - more spending on early education programs was needed. He then claimed he had a secret plan to outspend Hubert Humphrey on urban renewal.

For one last example, consider George McGovern’s 1972 campaign. He, of course, ran a powerful primary battle to end the war in Vietnam. On the floor of the Senate, he proclaimed: “Every senator in this chamber is partly responsible for sending 50,000 young Americans to an early grave … This chamber reeks of blood … it does not take any courage at all for a congressman or a senator or a president to wrap himself in the flag and say we are staying in Vietnam, because it is not our blood that is being shed.”

And then, in September, he went to Vietnam to consult with the generals. Upon his return, he pivoted to the center with the announcement: “Well, leaving may not be practical. The generals tell me just another 200,000 troops and we can win this thing. So, what the heck - let’s go for a victory as all of the independent voters and most conservative blue-collar Democrats want. I may be progressive but I’m practical. If I want to win this election, I’ve got to promise to win the war.”

Of course, none of those things happened in past presidential elections. While some past presidential candidates may have emphasized more moderate parts of their agenda in the fall (although many, such as Mr. Reagan and Mr. McGovern never even did that) I would appreciate Obama supporters (or others) bringing to my attention examples of straight-out reversals of one major position after the other, such as Mr. Obama has executed recently.

I am not aware of anything remotely comparable to Mr. Obama’s recent reversal of positions. To my knowledge, it is without moral precedent in modern American presidential elections. It is an act of political cynicism, compounded in its audacity by Mr. Obama’s explicit claim to being above politics as usual.

This election season is getting interesting. Mr. Obama seems to have opened himself up to Dr. Samuel Johnson’s famous admonition: “Be not too hasty to trust or admire the teachers of virtue; they discourse like angels but they live like men.”

Tony Blankley is a syndicated columnist.

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide