This is the way the Obama administration begins, not with a bang, but a whimper

With little criticism in the US press, incoming equivocator-in-chief Obama has just basically surrendered to the neo-cons, and the only question is whether the thing that can be seen waving is a white flag or Obama’s tail between his legs. You would think that with all the noise during the presidential campaign about the need for retreat from Iraq, that someone would notice. But no.

Obama owed his victory in the Democratic primary contest largely to his posturing as an antiwar candidate, repeatedly raising the October 2002 vote cast by Clinton, his principal rival, to authorize the US invasion of Iraq. But instead of remaining true to his alleged principles, Obama appointed a cabinet dominated by the war’s supporters, something that he led voters to believe he would never do.

Obama, who insisted that Clinton’s foreign policy views made her unfit to be president, has now nominated her as his chief foreign policy official.

The decision represents a stunning and humiliating reversal of course by the Obama administration, which had vehemently opposed any support for neo-con policies.

Obama’s choice of national security team members pretty much guarantees that US combat forces will be involved in escalating the other war, in Afghanistan, and preparing for new and even bloodier conflicts, something else about which Obama warned repeatedly.

And finally, nobody noticed that Obama didn’t bother to invite William Ayers or Kos over for Thanksgiving and serve them turkey.

I am totally happy to have a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq — but I would have been even happier if we had never gone in there in the first place.

From the original article (above):

“Bush has just basically surrendered in Iraq, and the only question is whether the thing that can be seen waving is a white flag or Bush’s tail between his legs.”

Were liberals going to pass the same judgement against Obama for doing the same thing?
Au contraire.