[Peace-discuss] Re: Obama and the anti-war movement (C. G. Estabrook)

[C. G. Estabrook]

I think they're afraid that it was a bit too revelatory of the
identity of Obama's policy and the administration's.  They
prefer more "balanced" (ambiguous) positions (don't like the
war, but can't just run, etc., etc.)  

As they were leaving the visitation, I asked Obama why he
hadn't mentioned torture, Iran, the Downing Street minutes,
Israel, impeachment, imprisonment without trial by the US
government, etc., etc.  (He answered that he'd answered one
question on the war, and "Didn't other people have a right to
have their questions answered?")  His press person interposed
himself, holding our flyer (which consisted largely of
quotations from Obama), angrily demanding to know why we
hadn't included other statements by Obama.  "I pushed the
button on that press release myself!" he said, not denying the
accuracy of the quotes but insisting that we'd left other ones
out.  (See ambiguity, above.)

I had the quotes in context with me, so when that bottomed
out, he went and got David Mendell, the Tribune staff reporter
who'd written up the interview in which Obama said, “...having
a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is
worse [than] launching some missile strikes into Iran” -- to
try to insist that it was more ambiguous than that.  Mendell
smiled and got into Obama's ethanolized SUV...

Best, CGE


---- Original message ----
>Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:51:19 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Tom Mackaman <tmackaman at yahoo.com>  
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Re: Obama and the anti-war
movement (C. G. Estabrook)   
>To: "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu>
>
>   Thanks for the note.  Most interesting that Obama
>   wants to back off that statement.  I wonder if it
>   was primarily for AWARE's benefit or if his weather
>   vane is registering a change in the current.  If so,
>   he's likely more worried about the wind blowing from
>   the right than the dust kicking up from below-- at
>   least for now.  It seems that the liberals, when
>   they muster the gumption to criticize the war, have
>   done so only after right wing prompts legitimize
>   criticism.  Such was the case with Kerry in the
>   election, who waited for the well-known attack by
>   McCain and Hagel, ignoring broad public anger and
>   discontent from the start.  
>    
>   Best,
>   Tom