A Commander-in-Chief Who War Elected to End a War

Barack Obama's presidency will be recorded in the history books as having begun on January 20, 2009, in Washington, D.C.

In fact, it began on another, colder January night in Dubuque, Iowa. Obama was not in Dubuque that night.

But Brianna Cleland, a 22-year-old teacher, was.

"I really want to make something happen in America," she told me that night. "And the way to do that is with someone new, with someone different, and that's Barack Obama."

Cleland had never caucused before.

Neither had most of the Iowans who joined her at Dubuque County Precinct 19's Democratic presidential caucus in the Mississippi Riverfront city's Carnegie-Stout Library.

For them, and for thousands like them, Obama represented the promise of fundamental, transformational change.

It was not just a matter of breaking with George Bush.

It was a matter of breaking with Bill Clinton, and with the definition of the Democratic party as a managerial institution that was poised to run things for awhile after a more dynamic but less able Republican party had messed up sufficiently to make dull centrism seem appealing.

As Obama takes office, far from Iowa, and far from the political dynamic that was in play last January, he would do well to remember that it was this sense that he would be different that made people like Brianna Cleland brave the cold, and people like 25-year-old Liz Wagner, a high school social studies teacher who caucuses wearing an orange "I Caucus for Darfur" t-shirt that night.

Wagner's shirt may have referenced a neglected region of Africa, but she was really motivated by a deep, genuinely pained frustration with a foreign-policy consensus that saw Democrats joining Republicans in making excuses for humanitarian, diplomatic and strategic failures that culminated with a unwise and unnecessary war in Iraq.

"I'm glad that he was opposed to the Iraq War before it started," Wagner said of Obama. "It shows he has some judgment. That's more that you can say about most of the other candidates or most of the Democrats in Congress."

Wagner was right. Obama might not have run as an anti-war candidate, but he was understood as such. The Iowans who caucused for the young senator from Illinois, giving him the victory that would propel him into serious competition for the presidency, did so because they saw him as the most political viable foe of the Bush doctrine and the disasters it has caused.

It ought never be forgotten that Barack Obama became the Democratic nominee because of his opposition to George Bush's wrongheaded approach to the world.

As a candidate, Obama promised change.

Today, as he assumes the presidency, Obama will continue to promise change.

Pundits in Washington may debate what that change entails.

But the people who made Barack Obama our president understand – and so should the man who is now our president.

The first and most fundamental change must come in how this nation relates to the rest of the world.

And the place to begin is with Iraq.

This new president, our new president, should end George Bush's war.

Comments (16)

1. One would hope. The democrats that won during the most recent mid-term election all with ending the Iraq War as a major part of their platforms (if not pragmatically, the only platform).

   I want what they ran on to be delivered.

   Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:04am

2. It ought never be forgotten that Barack Obama became the Democratic nominee because of his opposition to George Bush's wrongheaded approach to the world.

   posted by John Nichols on 01/20/2009 @ 12:53am

   Not true. Obama became the Dem nominee because ya'll didn't like Billary.

   Posted by ACook at 01/20/2009 @ 01:18am

3. not should, "must".

   plus, there's no money left (to borrow, that is).

   Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2009 @ 01:21am

4. "billary" would have won the white house for the same reason.

   bluster away though ACook, bluster away.

   Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:21am

5. dunno,

   mccain might have pulled it off against hillary.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2009 @ 01:24am

6. not a chance. the anti-bush feeling was very strong.

   john kerry may have lost though.

   Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:26am

7. Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:21am

   You can't spin this one UR. Ya'll did not want Billary for president. Not that I had a problem with it. I just think John Nichols is being dishonest with himself and the readers.

   Posted by ACook at 01/20/2009 @ 01:31am

8. Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:21am

   You can't spin this one UR. Ya'll did not want Billary for president. Not that I had a problem with it. I just think John Nichols is being dishonest with himself and the readers.

   Posted by ACook at 01/20/2009 @ 01:31am

9. ACook - so Hillary didn't run as anti-Bush?

   riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

   you're being dishonest with yourself.

   Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:35am

10. rio,

    the senate votes had nothing to do with "information".

    it was about appearing unamerican.

    war on terror? puh-lease...

    Posted by frosty zoom at 01/20/2009 @ 01:39am

11. Posted by comanchenation at 01/20/2009 @ 01:42am

    bush did "serve" for 8 years - the constant echoes of his lies are ringing in your ears. it'll take a little time to heal from his train wreck of a presidency.

    Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:44am

12. Information that was cherry-picked and then tweaked to give the message Bush Corp. wanted, not the actual info.

    "Mission Accomplished" you bet!

    The Bush Administration will go down in history as one big case of "Grand Theft USA."

    Posted by nyknicks12 at 01/20/2009 @ 01:52am

13. ACook - so Hillary didn't run as anti-Bush?

    riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

    you're being dishonest with yourself.

    Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 01:35am

    Where is this coming from?! I wasn't disputing the platform she was running on, I said YA'll (meaning you libs) didn't want her as your president.

    I think you're sleepy. Go to bed.

    Posted by ACook at 01/20/2009 @ 01:54am

14. acook -you're arguing that barack did not win the nomination due to anti-bush stance--but merely because libs didn't want hilary.

    this is untrue - it's "dishonest"

    Posted by urmygyro at 01/20/2009 @ 02:00am

15. acook = out of his mind

    Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2009 @ 02:42am

16. btw, it's "commander-in-chief of the armed forces"

    Posted by darladoon at 01/20/2009 @ 02:43am