More Openness and Transparency?

Obviously, those words were just campaign promises Teh One doesn't feel like honoring.

As a senator, Barack Obama denounced the Bush administration for holding "secret energy meetings" with oil executives at the White House. But last week public-interest groups were dismayed when his own administration rejected a Freedom of Information Act request for Secret Service logs showing the identities of coal executives who had visited the White House to discuss Obama's "clean coal" policies. One reason: the disclosure of such records might impinge on privileged "presidential communications." The refusal, approved by White House counsel Greg Craig's office, is the latest in a series of cases in which Obama officials have opted against public disclosure. Since Obama pledged on his first day in office to usher in a "new era" of openness, "nothing has changed," says David -Sobel, a lawyer who litigates FOIA cases. "For a president who said he was going to bring unprecedented transparency to government, you would certainly expect more than the recycling of old Bush secrecy policies."

Just words, just speeches...

More Obama Flip-Flops

The Obama flip-flops you don't know. It's a very concise list, and should be kept handy to debate those on the Left who argue that Obama is keeping his promises.

I Agree with Barack Obama...Twice

Can the Second Coming be far away?

First, I agree with President Obama regarding credit card reform. It's one thing when a credit card company raises your fees for abusing your limit. It's another thing for a credit card company to raise your fees because you used another credit card.

I know the free market argument here: credit card companies should be allowed to function as they please. If you don't like the fees, don't use the card. And while I can agree with that logic, I can't justify rate hikes because you used a different card or the company's "marketing strategy changed." I don't use credit cards much (we have 2 or 3, I think, but don't use them very often), but I really don't feel like being punished when I choose to.

The second thing I agree with is Obama's flip-flop on military commissions. Trying terrorists in federal court was never a wise decision, and it's good to see Obama has come to his senses on this one.

Obama: We Don't Have to Kill Osama bin Laden

I'm waiting for the Left to howl and scream about Obama's statement that we don't have to kill Osama bin Laden.

"My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him," he said. "But if we have so tightened the noose that he's in a cave somewhere and can't even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America."

Liberals have sneered endlessly that George W. Bush was incompetent because he didn't capture or kill bin Laden. And before the election, Obama insisted that capturing bin Laden was paramount. But now Obama suggests that being trapped in a cave somewhere is just as good. He's right, of course, but it was just as true when President Bush said it.

It was better to contain bin Laden than kill him. Killing him would have created a martyr. Capturing him would have left us with the unpalatable problem of how to give him a trial without giving up every national secret we have. Personally, I preferred that the soldiers who captured him accidentally shoot him in the head, but that's just me.

As things have turned out, we get treated to a video periodically with Osama pathetically challenging us, but not much else comes of it. Which is better all around.

Obama Wants Talks with Hamas

The Guardian is reporting that the Obama administration is preparing to engage in "low level" talks with Hamas, even though (as Allahpundit notes) Obama condemned talking to terrorists just last April). Chalk it up to the latest round of flip-flops by Teh One, a flip-flop soundly applauded by the usual moonbat sources who never met a terrorist they didn't think we should negotiate with.

Documenting Obama's Flip-Flops

Patterico has a good post regarding the collection of Obama's flip-flops. Commenters were asked to give the flip-flop and links. Great sourcing.

Obama Is Bush's Third Term?

I'm not sure how much I buy the premise that Obama is running to the right of McCain, but there's certainly enough flip-flops as evidence.

Most Presidential candidates adapt their message after they win their party nomination, but Mr. Obama isn't merely "running to the center." He's fleeing from many of his primary positions so markedly and so rapidly that he's embracing a sizable chunk of President Bush's policy. Who would have thought that a Democrat would rehabilitate the much-maligned Bush agenda?

There's his embrace of FISA. And now, his trip to Iraq will surely result in a new flip-flop for the Democrat candidate. Easy money says he will come back and, after having run on pulling out of Iraq because we're losing, determine that we aren't losing and that leaving Iraq hastily will only cause more problems.

Look for Mr. Obama to use his forthcoming visit to Iraq as an excuse to drop those withdrawal plans faster than he can say Jeremiah Wright "was not the person that I met 20 years ago." The Senator will learn – as John McCain has been saying – that withdrawal would squander the gains from the surge, set back Iraqi political progress, and weaken America's strategic position against Iran. Our guess is that he'll spin this switcheroo as some kind of conditional commitment, saying he'll stay in Iraq as long as Iraqis are making progress on political reconciliation, and so on. As things improve in Iraq, this would be Mr. Bush's policy too.

On domestic policy, Obama was against NAFTA and now he's for it (another Bush position). Judicially, he agreed with the minority opinion in the child rape case the Supreme Court announced a couple of weeks ago, and he agreed with the majority that the Second Amendment is an individual right. These are extraordinary flips, given Obama's stated positions not so long ago. Yet both positions are conservative ones.

Worse for moonbats like Amanda Marcotte, Obama has embraced President Bush's faith-based initiatives. And welfare reform. What's next?

I don't particularly believe these flip-flops. I think they are an attempt to moderate his liberal past, his ties to extremists, and appeal to a Bush-weary electorate. It remains to be seen if he can fool enough of the people enough of the time.

More Obama Flip-Flops

I've asked both here and at Common Sense Political Thought what the next Obama flip-flop would be. After all, he flip-flopped on his loyalty to Reverend Jeremiah Wright, his opposition to FISA, his endorsement of campaign financing, and his opposition to gun ownership, among others.

Over at CSPT, I just added a comment to my flip-flop post (with a nice illustration added by Dana!), stating that the latest flip-flop is a double flip with a twist to the Left.

After previously saying he opposed gay marriage and that he respected the rights of states to set conditions for marriage, Obama has now said that he opposes California’s initiative to ban gay marriage — and that he would use federal law to end such efforts(.)

As Ed Morrissey points out, this sets up a disturbing trend with Obama, and makes one wonder how he can switch positions so quickly with so little thought. The case can be made that Obama doesn't know anything about the issues (which, Morrissey says, should disqualify him for president) or that the debate has changed his positions on these matters (in which case, he's probably not fit to be president anyway), or that he's just lying (in which case, he's not fit to be president anyway).

But I spoke too soon. Farther down on Memeorandum comes Obama's flip-flop on welfare reform.

ABC News' Teddy Davis and Gregory Wallace Report: Barack Obama aligned himself with welfare reform on Monday, launching a television ad which touts the way the overhaul "slashed the rolls by 80 percent." Obama leaves out, however, that he was against the 1996 federal legislation which precipitated the caseload reduction.

"I am not a defender of the status quo with respect to welfare," Obama said on the floor of the Illinois state Senate on May 31, 1997. "Having said that, I probably would not have supported the federal legislation, because I think it had some problems."

As I've noted before, Obama's shift to the center (a grab for votes) has meant abandoning his base on the Left. Whatever flip-flops McCain might have engaged in, they have been playing to his base.