Boortz castigates Obama for his arrogance:
After General Petraeus tells Obama that a timetable for withdrawal would be wrong – that withdrawal should be based on conditions and results, not a calendar. So what does Our Savior do after his meeting? Well, he basically says that Petraeus is wrong and he is right and that as commander in chief a timetable it will be.
All well and good, but for one little snag -- Bush agrees with Obama, not Petraeus!
U.S. President George W. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki have agreed on "a general time horizon," not an "arbitrary timetable" for a drawdown of U.S. forces, the White House said Friday.
Now, is a "general time horizon" any more based on conditions and results than an "arbitrary timetable"? They are both deadlines set in advance of any future conditions and results, but "general time horizon" allows Bush to pretend his timetable is not a timetable.
As John LeBoutillier notes, Bush also caved on negotiating with Iran unless they cease trying to build nuclear weapons, thus leaving McCain out on a limb all by himself:
They sent the Under Secretary of State, William Burns, to join the ongoing talks the EU was having with Iran. This sudden change of policy - granted, Secretary Burns was instructed to ‘listen’ and not to say anything - has sent shock waves throughout the foreign policy community. (At meetings like this there is much off-the-record conversation in hallways and back-rooms; this is where real breakthroughs happen - and where real communication takes place. Undoubtedly Burns had private face-to-face talks with Iran.) It is viewed as a total reversal by a lame-duck Bush White House which is now trying to patch up a badly damaged legacy.
Obama has for over a year advocated a dialogue with Tehran.
On the heels of this shocker came another: the Bush White House again reversing itself and agreeing to something called - and it sounds utterly Clintonian - ‘Time Horizons’ with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki. Let’s face it, these Time Horizons are the very same Time Lines that Bush - and McCain - have been blasting for years. But Bush has now just - like Bill Clinton - used semantics to flip his previous position. Bush is now on the same page as Obama who, for years, has advocated a timetable of withdrawal.
So we are left wondering once again: is there a dime's worth of difference between the two parties?