How Obama became a Flip-Flopper

[CatnHat]

On "Meet the Press" Barack Obama offered an explanation for his
shifting opinions on the Iraq War, without displaying so much as a glimmer
of comprehension that what he said about himself was terribly incriminating.

Obama was singing a different tune a few years ago.

MR. RUSSERT: You were not in the Senate in October of 2002. You did give
a speech opposing the war. But Senator Clinton's campaign will say since
you've been a senator there's been no difference in your record. And other
critics will say that you've not been a leader against the war, and they
point to this: In July of '04, Barack Obama, "I'm not privy to Senate
intelligence reports. What would I have done? I don't know," in terms of
how you would have voted on the war. And then this: "There's not much of a
difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush's position at this
stage." That was July of '04. And this: "I think" there's "some room for
disagreement in that initial decision to vote for authorization of the war."
It doesn't seem that you are firmly wedded against the war, and that you
left some wiggle room that, if you had been in the Senate, you may have
voted for it.

SEN. OBAMA: Now, Tim, that first quote was made with an interview with a
guy named Tim Russert on MEET THE PRESS during the convention when we had a
nominee for the presidency and a vice president, both of whom had voted for
the war. And so it, it probably was the wrong time for me to be making a
strong case against our party's nominees' decisions when it came to Iraq.

The Senator has no observable interest in refuting the glaring inconsistency
or trying to nuance it away. He genuinely seems to believe that
illustrating the a-principled, purely political motivations behind his
fairweather war support somehow acquit him.

So now we're left to wonder - is Obama's eternal, unshakable, principled
objection to the war fictional? Or is it real, but apparently so flimsy
that he was willing to publicly disavow it.

[IndieLeft]

1. Just answer this: Did he get it right when it counted?

Yeah, I think he did.

Did Hillary? No.

And furthermore... He was trying to be supportive of the party, and those who made the mistake he did not.

He did it for the good of the party. Maybe you should follow his example.

[Mezzo]

5. actually, he only voted "present"

when it came to Iran. I might still vote for him tomorrow, but your argument hoists you on your own pitard.

[Seen the light]

2. If you are going to blame him for that.....

then you must blame the VAST majority of Democrats, even the many that were against invading Iraq, that went along with Kerry in hopes that we could get rid of Bush.

You must also blame 99% of DUers as well as they went along with Kerry/Edwards united in hopes of getting Bush out of the White House.

EDITED: And I just realized someone gave me a heart! Sweet! Thanks!

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

3. Hillary has STILL not admitted that her IWR vote was a mistake.

I'll take the "flip-flopper", thank you.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Hey you! You left out some stuff!

and it only shows your own motive....which is a nefarious one, obviously!

Summary: Interviewing Barack Obama on Meet the Press, Tim Russert read a quote he attributed to Obama to suggest that he has "not been a leader against the war": "In July of 2004, Barack Obama: 'I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports. ... What would I have done? I don't know,' in terms of how you would have voted on the war." Russert did not quote the very next sentence of Obama's statement, which was, "What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made" for authorizing the war.

At the time....
The Times also reported that Obama "declined to criticize Senators Kerry and Edwards for voting to authorize the war, although he said he would not have done the same based on the information he had at the time":
http://mediamatters.org/items/200711110004

THE FACT CHECKER

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/01/obama_and_iraq.html#more

As the keynote speaker, Obama was trying to be loyal to the Democratic nominees, John Kerry and John Edwards, both of whom had voted in favor of the war authorization resolution, along with Hillary Clinton.

In an interview reported by the New York Times on July 26, on the first day of the convention, he reiterated his opposition to the war but declined to criticize Kerry and Edwards, saying he was "not privy to Senate intelligence reports."

He then continued: "What would I have done? I don't know. What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made."

(The Clinton campaign left out that important last sentence when it e-mailed reporters with backup material for the inconsistency claim, which was also made by Hillary Clinton in the televised debate Saturday night.)

In an interview published in the Chicago Tribune the following day (July 27,2004), Obama said that he would have voted "no" on the Senate resolution. But he said he was not in favor of "pulling out now." On the issue of whether to stay in Iraq , he said "there's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage." The context of his remarks makes clear that he was not referring to the original decision to go into Iraq, but the question of whether to remain.

His views on whether to stay in Iraq have changed, of course, as he now advocates a phased withdrawal.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/01/obama_and_iraq.html#more

so because we had candidates that had voted for that fucked up IWR, Obama, not wanting to EMBARASS THE NOMINEES, stayed vague to a degree.

THANK YOU, BARACK OBAMA.

Desperate in NH: Fibbing About Obama and Iraq?
Campaigning in Dover, New Hampshire the day before the primary, Senator Hillary Clinton once again pounded Barack Obama for being big on talk and small on deeds. And before a crowd that could barely fill half of a modest-sized gymnasium, she continued to claim that Obama is a disingenuous politician, no noble and inspiring force of change. Using the thin opposition research her campaign operatives have managed to unearth on her rival, she recited what's becoming the campaign's regular litany of Obama's alleged hypocrisies. Saying you oppose the Patriot Act and then voting to extend it—"that's not change," she declared. Saying you're against special interest lobbying and then having a lobbyist co-chair your New Hampshire campaign—"that's not change," she thundered. Saying in a campaign speech that you will not vote to fund the Iraq war and then voting for $300 billion in war financing—"that's not change," she exclaimed. After the event, in an interview with Fox News, Clinton was even sharper. She referred to Obama's (and John Edwards') "hypocrisy," and said, "Senator Obama has changed many of his positions." Voters, she insisted, deserved to know this: "Talk is, as they say, cheap."

Her charges against Obama have generally been weak—standard truth-stretchers for standard political campaigns. But in casting Obama as a phony on the Iraq war, Clinton has veered close to outright lying.

Yesterday, in an interview with CNN, Clinton said:

If someone is going to claim that by their very words they are making change, then if those words say... I'm against the war in Iraq and I'll never vote for funding and then, when they go to the Senate, they vote for 300 billion dollars' worth of funding , I think it's time for people to say, "Wait a minute, let's get real here." There's a big difference between talking and acting, between rhetoric and reality.

Did Obama actually vow, as Clinton said, to never vote for funds for the Iraq war? If he had, he would indeed be a major promise-breaker—and a fraud on a critical issue for Democratic voters. This was a powerful allegation.

I sent an email to a Clinton spokesperson who specializes in opposition research, asking for a citation to back up this charge. He quickly replied with a link for a page on a Clinton campaign website that contains a quote from a speech Obama delivered in November 2003, when he was running for Senate:

Just this week, when I was asked, would I have voted for the $87 billion dollars , I said no. I said no unequivocally because, at a certain point, we have to say no to George Bush. If we keep on getting steamrolled, we are not going to stand a chance.
Is it possible to read that statement as a promise never to vote for Iraq war funds? Not by any reasonable interpretation. In fact, during Obama's Senate campaign, he explained his opposition to this particular war funding bill in detail. From a September 29, 2003 Obama press release:

Obama challenged the Congress to 'stand up to the misplaced priorities of this Administration' by delaying the $87 billion for Iraq until the President provides a specific plan and timetable for ending the U.S. occupation, justifies each and every dollar to ensure it is not going to reward Bush political friends and contributors, and provides 'investment in our own schools, health care, economic development and job creation that is at least comparable' to what is going to Iraq. 'It's not just Iraq that needs rebuilding. It's America, too,' Obama said.

Perhaps as an opponent of the Iraq war, Obama could have been expected to vote against funds for the war once he reached the Senate. But he, like Clinton (who now opposes the war) and other Senate Democrats, have continually voted for funds, while attempting (albeit unsuccessfully) to attach conditions and timetables to that funding. Because Clinton cannot attack Obama on the policy—given that they have voted the same—she has accused him of being a hypocrite. But where was the beef?

I sent the Clinton oppo guy a follow-up email:

I looked at the quote . He was clearly speaking about the $87 billion package. But what Sen. Clinton told CNN was that Obama said, "I'll never vote for funding." He doesn't say that in the quote. Was she accurately quoting him?
I received no response.

As Hillary Clinton was leaving Dover, I attempted to put the question to her. She had just finished the interview with Fox and another with a local station. Inside the gym, I was two feet away from her. "Can I ask you one question about Iraq and Senator Obama?" I inquired. She looked at me for a nanosecond and walked away.

During her speech to supporters at Dover, Clinton said, that it's important to disseminate information on all the candidates "so voters can make a well-informed decision.... I will do whatever I can to make sure voters have the information they need." But ascertaining that this information is accurate is apparently not on her to-do list.
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/01/6786_desperate_in_nh_1.html

Responding to Clinton’s attack on Iraq

IRAQ: Obama Consistently Opposed the Iraq War.
In January of 2005, Obama criticized Condoleezza Rice for not offering a timetable for withdrawal;

in February he criticized the Administration’s policy in Iraq while praising our troops;

in May and June, he called security in Iraq “horrible” and criticized the Administration for linking the 9/11 attacks and the war in Iraq;

and in October and November, he called for a phased withdrawal of our troops, saying that we should “get out as soon as we can.”

Obama called for a phased withdrawal of our troops in November of 2005 and voted for an amendment stating that the US should not “stay in Iraq indefinitely.”

He consistently called for troop withdrawal throughout 2006, and voted for a resolution in June urging the President to begin troop withdrawal during 2006.

Obama spoke out against the surge the same night Bush announced it, and introduced his bill to end the war at the end of January, which would have prohibited the surge and set a timetable for withdrawal of all combat troops by the end of March 2008.

That bill became the template for the Democratic caucus’ position.

IRAQ: Obama Has Consistently Opposed A Blank Check for Iraq.

Since Obama came to Washington in January of 2005, every single Senate Democrat has voted for every single Iraq funding bill that has come to the Senate floor until President Bush vetoed a timetable for withdrawal.

After that, Obama voted against funding for the war, stating that “This vote is a choice between validating the same failed policy in Iraq that has cost us so many lives and demanding a new one…We should not give the President a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path. With my vote today, I am saying to the President that enough is enough. We must negotiate a better plan that funds our troops, signals to the Iraqis that it is time for them to act and that begins to bring our brave servicemen and women home safely and responsibly.”

IRAQ: Clinton Continues to Unfairly Truncate Obama’s Quote on Iraq. Below is the full excerpt from the New York Times:

“He opposed the war in Iraq, and spoke against it during a rally in Chicago in the fall of 2002. He said then that he saw no evidence that Iraq had unconventional weapons that posed a threat, or of any link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. “In a recent interview, he declined to criticize Senators Kerry and Edwards for voting to authorize the war, although he said he would not have done the same based on the information he had at the time.

“‘But, I’m not privy to Senate intelligence reports,’ Mr. Obama said. ‘What would I have done? I don’t know. What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made.’

“But Mr. Obama said he did fault Democratic leaders for failing to ask enough tough questions of the Bush administration to force it to prove its case for war. ‘What I don’t think was appropriate was the degree to which Congress gave the president a pass on this,’ he said.”
http://thepage.time.com/obama-camp-memo-on-clintons-mtp-iraq-statements/

PS. Barack, just remember how users are. They use you when they can, and then jump on you when your back is turned. remember barack, you are dealing with vultures when you deal with the Clintons, who were handing out the talking points for the seat of their confidente, DNC Chair McAuliffe.




Now contrast that to this:


"That's why I supported the Iraq thing." Bill Clinton, June 23, 2004 (CNN)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/index.html

"I opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning." Bill Clinton, 11/27/2007, (NYT)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/us/politics/28clinton.html?ex=1353906000&en=cf3f18a5f01db61b&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

So who flipped & flopped?