By Blogonaut
March 8, 2008
Lost (for now) in the flack over the resignation of Barack Obama's chief foreign policy advisor Samantha Power for calling rival presidential candidate Hillary Clinton a "monster" is something so huge it may ultimately derail the entire Obama campaign.
The same (now former) senior advisor to the Illinois senator told BBC news this week that Obama campaign pledge to withdraw US troops from Iraq was just so much campaign rhetoric:
Obama "will of course not rely upon some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or U.S. senator" to remove U.S. troops from Iraq, Power told the BBC.
Sound familiar?
It should.
A couple weeks ago Obama's senior economist (Austan Goolsbee) met back channel with Canadian officials and assured them that Obama—the candidate's—opposition to NAFTA did not necessarily reflect what an Obama's policy would be as President of the United States, according to a government memo reporting the top aid's remarks:
"Noting anxiety among many U.S. domestic audiences about the U.S.
economic outlook, Goolsbee candidly acknowledged the protectionist sentiment that has emerged, particularly in the Midwest, during the primary campaign. He cautioned that this messaging should not be taken out of context and should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans."
So here (we think) lies the bigger story.
While the Goolsbee incident might have been dismissed as an aberration (if Obama had not denied that the meeting even took place until the memo was leaked to the press), Samantha Power's remarks to the foreign press combine with it to form a disturbing pattern.
Obama is not even the nominee yet (let alone President of the United States) and his top aids are already admitting abroad that his foreign policy positions in NAFTA and Iraq—both of which he has used to beat Ms. Clinton over the head with—are just so much political positioning, crafted during a campaign to get him elected president.
For a candidate whose entire subtext is "no more politics as usual", this is the campaign equivalent of kryptonite.
Did Power simply misspeak? As a Pulitzer Prize wining author who graduated from Yale University and Harvard Law School, an ignorant mistake appears unlikely—as is the case with the highly educated Goolsbee.
So what can we take away from this incident, other than Barack Obama is just another politician pandering to get votes?
Both of these serious campaign missteps are related to the candidate's foreign policy positions, were made (in the case of Power) by member of Obama's foreign policy team, and relate to a Clinton campaign theme—Obama's lack of foreign policy experience—a theme that Obama has announced he will vigorously challenge in the weeks to come.
And wasn't it just last week that Obama told supporters "who has the most organized campaign"?
We predict that you will be hearing more—a lot more—about "Powergate" in the weeks (and yes) months to come in this primary campaign. Why? It calls into question the very premise of the Obama campaign.
