What should Obama flip-flop on next?

He’s already changed his positions on Iraq, NAFTA, FISA, China, campaign finance, abortion (thrice!), and now the chatter is over whether his opposition to offshore drilling is sustainable.

The Weekly Standard
When it comes to offshore drilling, a growing number of Obama’s Senate colleagues are distancing themselves from his steadfast opposition. They’re even starting to side openly with McCain’s proposal to allow it. First it was Sen. Durbin, the senior senator from Obama’s home state, who said yes to offshore drilling and no to Obama. Then reports emerged that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid might change his tune on allowing offshore drilling. Now there’s word that the rise in oil prices has inspired a change of heart in Sen. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, who had previously opposed such plans.

If you could tell Obama what issue he should abandon his previous claims on next, what would you say? I’ve previously suggested free trade with Colombia and affirmative action.

What do you think?

5 thoughts on “What should Obama flip-flop on next?”

  1. It would be difficult,and potentially dangerous, for America to withdraw too rapidly from Iraq.

    “Re negotiating” NAFTA would be an uphill battle.

    Was FISA’s passage a feit accompli when he decided he didn’t hate it?

    America does in the neighborhood of 400 billion in trade with China, it would be difficult to slow that down.

    What I’m suggesting is that, if Bush was “the decider” Obama seems to be setting himself up as “the decider of least resitstance” meaning he’ll take the position that allows him to expend the least political Capital; he will protect the status quo.

    On a number of issues, including China and Iraq the status quo is not a bad outcome. As gas prices rise and as the election approaches Congessmen from both parites are likely to see expanding domestic oil exploration as a relatively easy win. If everybody is moving in that direction anyway, I think Obama will take the course of least resistance and say “I have always supported off-shore drilling”.

    Unfortunately, I don’t know that trade with Columbia will suddenly catch fire with either congress or the public. And if things aren’t moving that way, Obama is unlikely to expend political capital to secure the victory against the FARC.

    All of this brings me to an important question about Obama: What, if anything, has he ever risked his career for?

    We know the answer with McCain, he doubled down on completing the COIN cycle in Iraq. McCain may risk his presidency to stop Iran from getting the bomb (a poor use of resources but not the end of the world) or to kick Russia out of the G8 and form a non-partisian Anti-Chinese League (Guns of August 2014.) On the other hand, McCain could risk his presidency on taking down North Korea or reining in government spending, which could be very positive.

    What will Obama risk his presidency for?

  2. I’d like to see him come out for a constitutional amendment that overturns Lawrence v. Texas. Not that I think such an amendment is a particularly good idea, but just because I would like to see Obama betray yet another of his core consitituencies.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *