Obama clearly states that he would have voted NAY on the IRW in a 2002 Video interview

[FrenchieCat]

The interviewer asks Obama this specific question on the video.
Obama responds that he would have voted like Dick Durbin, Voted Nay.

This video is dated 11/25/02
question is asked at 2:11 of the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po

[BuyingThyme]

1. Not good enough for dishonest people.

[papau]

2. I would have too if I could have - guess that makes us both ready to be President!

[Cha]

4. Better than

hilary by far. Obama has a lot more going for himself besides being able to see the difference between a political war and a necessary war, though.

[jackson_dem]

3. And he contradicted that statement in 2004 and 2006

We don't know how he would have voted because he didn't have a vote and was pandering to the most liberal district in Illinois. What we do know is he consistently voted to fund the war and consistently opposed calls for withdrawal--until he began running for president... Change you can believe in! :eyes:

[FrenchieCat]

6. Can you show me some quotes with links instead of just

talking off the top of your head? I'd like information from you I can believe in.

That's what people do when they want to "prove" something. Thank you.

Plus, Obama was actually running for his senate seat already, against 6 primary opponents....and running a state wide campaign, not a district one.

He didn't drive the truck into the ditch, Hillary and McCain did. NO need Not allow the truck to run out of gas while it is trying to get out of the ditch, I say?

[jackson_dem]

10. It has been posted many times over the campaign

You choose to ignore it. I am not a campaign opposition researcher so I don't have an army of links bookmarked like some "posters" here do. ;)

Yes, 6 opponents. How do you separate yourself from the pack? How did he do it? When he got to Washington did he suddenly "change" or did Axlerod's political calculations change?

[FrenchieCat]

13. That's not an excuse. If you want to make a statement countering

facts that I have presented....than talking out of your ass isn't going to do it.

He was against the war because he was against the war.......not to be politically expedient. That was Hillary's schtick....if you will remember.

[democrattotheend]

28. He was being polite in 2004

You don't get invited to give the keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention and then criticize the nominee. That's what the interviewer was trying to get Obama to do by asking him if he disagreed with Kerry and Edwards' votes on the war, and that's why he said he didn't know how he would have voted.

By that point in 2004, being against it wasn't considered political suicide as much as it was in 2002, so if he said in 2002 that he would have voted against it, I take him at his word, because I don't think most people felt it was the politically savvy thing to oppose it at the time.

[boston bean]

34. he flat out lied in 2004. nt

[FrenchieCat]

36. According to you, without a link!

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/

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?

[democrattotheend]

42. Can you post that as an OP?

That's good info.

[BlueStater]

5. Big deal. It's easy for him to say how he would have voted WHEN HE WASN'T IN THE SENATE!

This is what I don't like about him. He can attack his opponents over their past mistakes because he conviently wasn't in a position where he would have to make the same decisions they did.

[FrenchieCat]

8. So why would you opine that he would have voted differently.....

if he states then how he would have voted.

And being in the Senate didn't stop Sen. Durbin nor more than 1/2 of Dem Senator who voted NO.


And Senators were not the only ones who counted then or now. For you to say so is pretty elitist!

[BlueStater]

19. His senate votes certainly don't convince me he would have voted against it

Not showing up to vote against the Iran bill for one thing. That's just plain politcal cowardice and is almost as bad as Hillary's "Yea" vote.

That and how he continues to fund the war. And how he hasn't really done shit to end it since he's been a senator.

[FrenchieCat]

22. Almost doesn't quite get it.......

McCain voted for IRAN resolution. Hillary Voted for IRAN Resolution. Barack Obama didn't vote for IRAN Resolution.

Two are the same, and one is not.

In addition:

JANUARY 2005

Obama Criticized Condoleezza Rice For Not Offering A Timetable, Reiterated That Job Of Senator Is To Confirm That Administration Is Making Decisions Based On Facts. During Condoleezza Rice’s confirmation hearing, Obama said, “And I recognize that you are hesitant in your current position to provide a timetable. On the other hand, constituents and families in small towns all across Illinois need some more satisfactory answer than that. And it strikes me that this whole issue of training troops, turning over security functions to the Iraqi government is critical to that…I guess the comment that I'd like to make is that in the activist proactive strategies that you pursue, it seems to me that this administration often asks that we simply go along and have faith that you're making the right decisions. But I think that from the perspective of my constituents in Illinois, at least, a number of people did vote for George Bush and do trust him. But my job as a senator is to make sure that we're basing these decisions on facts and that I probe and not simply take it on faith that good decisions are being made.


FEBRUARY 2005

Obama Criticized Iraq War At Town Hall Meeting. The Pantagraph reported that during a town hall meeting, "Asked about the Iraq war, Obama said poor planning by the Bush administration has left Iraq woefully incapable of handling its own security. He expressed hope that more intensive training will be provided for Iraqi forces, saying such measures could allow most American troops to return home next year. While Obama said the recent Iraqi election is an encouraging sign for democracy, he questioned Bush's rationale for the Iraq invasion. 'I didn't see the weapons of mass destruction at the time, I didn't think there was an imminent threat from Saddam Hussein,' Obama said."

Clinton Said Setting A Deadline For Withdrawal Would Strengthen the Insurgents. Clinton said a deadline for withdrawal would strengthen the hand of the insurgents. "I don't think it's useful to set a deadline because I think it sends a signal to the terrorists and the insurgents that they just have to wait us out," said Clinton.

Despite Declining Security, Clinton Claimed That Many Parts Of Iraq Were "Functioning Quite Well." On Clinton's second trip to Iraq in February 2005, security was so bad she was unable to drive through Baghdad's streets, even in armored cars. "It's regrettable that the security needs have increased so much. On the other hand, I think you can look at the country as a whole and see that there are many parts of Iraq that are functioning quite well," Clinton said.

Clinton Said That A Rash Of Suicide Attacks Meant That The Iraq Insurgency Was Failing. After 55 people died in Iraq on the holiest day on the Shiite Muslim religious calendar, Clinton maintained that the rash of suicide attacks was a sign that the insurgency was failing. "The concerted effort to disrupt the elections was an abject failure. Not one polling place was shut down or overrun," Clinton said. "The fact that you have these suicide bombers now, wreaking such hatred and violence while people pray, is to me, an indication of their failure."


MAY 2005

Obama Said Security In Iraq Was 'Horrible.' At a town hall meeting, "Obama described the security in Iraq as 'horrible.' He said U.S. troops should come home if the Iraqi government is functioning properly and the Iraqi troops are trained correctly. 'Our young men and women have been incredibly brave and effective in very difficult situations.'"

Clinton: I'm Not Comfortable Setting Exit Strategies. In an interview with Judy Woodruff on CNN, Clinton said about Iraq "I am not one who feels comfortable setting exit strategies. We don't know what we're exiting from. We don't know what the situation is moving toward."


OCTOBER 2005

Obama Said US Needed To Get Out Of Iraq "As Soon As We Can." In 2005, Obama said, "We should start phasing out our military presence in Iraq. We have to have a very credible, specific plan to stabilize the country as soon as we can and get out as soon as we can."

Clinton Opposed Setting A Deadline For Withdrawal From Iraq. According to the Associated Press, at a speech in Atlanta, Clinton "said she doesn't support a deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq nor does she support leaving our troops there for an open-ended period. Instead, she said the U.S. should encourage the Iraqi people to take more control of their security and let them know American troops won't be there forever."


NOVEMBER 2005

Obama Called for A Phased WIthdrawal From Iraq, A Commitment To Having No U.S. Bases In Iraq Within a Decade. In a speech in the Senate, "First and foremost, after the December 15 elections and during the course of next year, we need to focus our attention on how reduce the U.S. military footprint in Iraq. Notice that I say 'reduce,' and not 'fully withdraw.' This course of action will help to focus our efforts on a more effective counter-insurgency strategy and take steam out of the insurgency...Second, we need not a time-table, in the sense of a precise date for U.S. troop pull-outs, but a time-frame for such a phased withdrawal. More specifically, we need to be very clear about key issues, such as bases and the level of troops in Iraq. We need to say that there will be no bases in Iraq a decade from now and the United States armed forces cannot stand-up and support an Iraqi government in perpetuity - pushing the Iraqis to take ownership over the situation and placing pressure on various factions to reach the broad based political settlement that is so essential to defeating the insurgency."

DECEMBER 2005

Obama Said He Supported A Phased Withdrawal To Avoid Security Vacuum; Said War In Iraq To Blame For Terrorist Problems. Obama favors starting 'a phased withdrawal process' of troops next year. The process would be based on what happens with the elections, he said. 'What we're engaged in is a difficult balancing act here…Having gone in, how do we step back but ensure that there's not such a vacuum that either chaos occurs or jihadists take over critical areas that can make huge problems elsewhere? The irony, of course, is that there really wasn't a terrorist problem before we went in. There is now.'"

Clinton: America Still Has A "Big Job" To Do In Iraq. In a letter to her constituents, Clinton said, "I do not believe that we should allow this to be an open-ended commitment without limits or end. Nor do I believe that we can or should pull out of Iraq immediately." She added, "America has a big job to do now. We must set reasonable goals to finish what we started and successfully turn over Iraqi security to Iraqis."


JANUARY 2006

Obama Said It Was Important To Start Phasing Down Troops. The Sun-Times wrote, "Obama said 'if we don't see significant political progress' over the next six months or so, 'we can pour money and troops in here until the cows come home but we are not going to be successful.' It is important, Obama said, 'to start phasing down the troops' and 'to give the Iraqis more ownership.'"

Clinton: Withdrawal From Iraq Could "Make a Bad Situation Worse." At a fundraiser in Portland, Clinton said, a quick withdrawal of U.S. troops "could make a bad situation worse." Instead, Clinton said, the administration needs to do a better job of leveling with Congress and working out timetables for extracting Americans from Iraq. "We need to begin to bring our troops home as they begin to provide for security in Iraq for themselves," she said. "I believe that is the responsible position. I know there is disagreement about it."


MARCH 2006

Obama Said If Iraqis Aren't United, US "Can't Hold That Country Together." The Seattle Post-Intelligencer wrote, "'We've reached a point where there are no military solutions to the problems of Iraq. They're all political.'…Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish leaders of the fractured country need to get together and 'decide if they're for a united Iraq…If they're not, we can't hold that country together. We need to move forward toward the beginning of a phased withdrawal.' If Iraqi leaders want to hold a united country, in Obama's opinion, they will have to shoulder the burden 'with technical assistance and some military help' coming from the United States."

Clinton: The U.S. Can't Commit To A Specific Withdrawal Date. In an address to the Long Island Board of Realtors, Clinton said she did not believe that the U.S. can commit to a specific withdrawal date, adding "The Iraqi people cannot expect us to be there for them indefinitely."


APRIL 2006

Obama Said By the End Of The Year "Our Job As The Police And Army Of Iraq Should Be Complete." At a town hall meeting, Obama said, "'If I continue to see what seems to be the case right now--an inability and unwillingness on the part of the various factions to want to live together--we can't be in a position where we're in the middle of a civil war...If we're not seeing a government that is actually committed to working together, then I don't see how our presence there can be helpful,' Obama said. Even if a new government is formed, Obama said, by the end of the year 'our job as the police and army of Iraq should be complete. We will have done our task and we should start phasing down our troops.'"

Clinton Said Setting A Deadline For The Establishment Of An Independent Iraqi Government And The Removal Of U.S. Troops Was Dangerous. Clinton told the Syracuse Post-Standard editorial board, "If you postpone a deadline that you set, you look weak. If you don't meet a deadline that you set, you look weak. You really give a lot of power to the people you don't want to empower."


MAY 2006

Obama Said Bush Rhetoric Cannot Hide "2,400 Flag-Draped Coffins." At an EMILY's List lunch, Obama said, "This idea…that somehow if you say the words 'plan for victory' and 'stay the course' over and over and over and over again, and you put these subliminal messages behind you that say 'victory' and 'victory' and 'victory,' that somehow people are not going to notice the 2,400 flag-draped coffins that have arrived at the Dover Air Force Base."

Clinton Opposed A Timetable For Iraq Withdrawal. Clinton opposed both a timetable for withdrawing troops and an open-ended commitment in Iraq. In a Washington Post interview, Clinton defended herself. "I've said many times I regret how the president has used his authority," she said. "But I think I have a responsibility to look at this as carefully as I can and say what I believe, and what I believe is we're in a very dangerous situation and it doesn't lend itself to sound bites, and therefore I have resisted going along with either my colleagues who feel passionately they need to call for a date certain or colleagues who are 100 percent behind the policy and with the president and Prime Minister Blair."


JUNE 2006

Obama Called For an "Expeditious Yet Responsible Exit from Iraq." In 2006, Obama said, "What is needed is a blueprint for an expeditious yet responsible exit from Iraq."

Clinton Said It Was Not "Smart Strategy" To Set A Certain Date For Troop Withdrawal. Clinton said of the war, "we have to work our way out of it" rather than abandoning the effort. Clinton said that she did not "think it is smart strategy to set a date certain. I do not agree that that is in the best interests...of our country." She said "our job is to do everything we can to help this government succeed. It will be difficult and dangerous."


SEPTEMBER 2006

Obama Said US Must Leave Iraq Responsibly. In West Virginia, Obama said, "We must exit Iraq, but not in a way that leaves behind a security vacuum filled with terrorism, chaos, ethnic cleansing and genocide that could engulf large swaths of the Middle East and endanger America...We have both moral and national security reasons to manage our exit in a responsible way."

Obama Said US Must Leave Iraq Responsibly. In West Virginia, Obama said, "We must exit Iraq, but not in a way that leaves behind a security vacuum filled with terrorism, chaos, ethnic cleansing and genocide that could engulf large swaths of the Middle East and endanger America...We have both moral and national security reasons to manage our exit in a responsible way."


OCTOBER 2006

Obama Said US Is Not Going To Baby-Sit Iraq For The Next 50 Years. In 2006, Obama said, "I try not to micromanage military decision-making. But there are a lot of officers on the ground who believe that if we start reducing our footprint in Iraq that we could potentially have some better outcomes." The Rockford Register Star wrote, "Obama, who called President Bush's Iraq policy 'poorly conceived from the start,' said a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops would 'send a signal not just to Iraqis, but to those surrounding the region, that they have a stake in stabilization. This is not something that America is going to baby-sit for the next 50 years.'"

Clinton Distanced Herself From Calls to Begin Withdrawal of Troops. Clinton distanced herself from calls to begin the withdrawal of troops from Iraq by the end of 2006. "You can have a small, phased redeployment to send a message" as long as that's part of a broader plan, she said.


JANUARY 2007

1/30/07: Obama’s De-Escalation Plan Would Pressure Iraqis To Political Accommodations, Bring The War To A Responsible End. “Our troops have performed brilliantly in Iraq, but no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else's civil war," Obama said. "That's why I have introduced a plan to not only stop the escalation of this war, but begin a phased redeployment that can pressure the Iraqis to finally reach a political settlement and reduce the violence…The American people have been asked to be patient too many times, too many lives have been lost and too many billions have been spent," Obama said. "It's time for a policy that can bring a responsible end to this war and bring our troops home.”

Senate Democratic Leadership Used Obama’s Iraq Bill As The Blueprint For Iraq Redeployment Plan. An Obama press release said, “On Thursday, the Senate Democratic Leadership announced an Iraq redeployment plan that sets a goal for redeploying American combat brigades by March 31, 2008, the same date proposed by Senator Barack Obama in the Iraq De-escalation Act introduced in January. The leadership plan further mirrors the Obama legislation, ensuring that the training of Iraqi forces continues, our troops remain protected during their redeployment, and that counter-terrorism activities proceed. The Obama Plan and the Leadership Plan Share Key Provisions: Obama Legislation The redeployment of the Armed Forces under this section shall be substantial, shall occur in a gradual manner, and shall be executed at a pace to achieve the goal of the complete redeployment of all United States combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008, consistent with the expectation of the Iraq Study Group, if all the matters set forth in subsection (b)(1)(B) are not met by such date, subject to the exceptions for retention of forces for force protection, counter-terrorism operations, training of Iraqi forces, and other purposes as contemplated by subsection (g). (S. 433, introduced January 30, 2007) Leadership Legislation - The President shall commence the phased redeployment of the United States forces from Iraq not later than 120 days after the enactment of this joint resolution, with the goal of redeploying, by March 31, 2008, all United States combat forces from Iraq except for a limited number that are essential for the following purposes: protecting United States and coalition personnel and infrastructure, training and equipping Iraqi forces, and conducting targeted counter-terrorism operations.”

Feingold: “Obama Probably Made The Proposal That Was Most Helpful In Moving The Caucus In The Direction I Would Like To See It Go.” Feingold said, “I've been pleased that his opposition has intensified over time. I was not that happy with his initial opposition to a timeline…I regard him as clearly stronger than Sen. Clinton, indeed than Sen. Edwards…Of all the people I've worked with that are running for president, I think Sen. Obama probably made the proposal that was most helpful in moving the Caucus in the direction I would like to see it go.”


OCTOBER 2007

Obama Said That Sanctions On The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Must Not Be Linked To Keeping Troops In Iraq Or Taking Military Action Against Iran. Obama said in a release, “It is important to have tough sanctions on Iran, particularly on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard which supports terrorism. But these sanctions must not be linked to any attempt to keep our troops in Iraq, or to take military action against Iran. Unfortunately, the Kyl-Lieberman amendment made the case for President Bush that we need to use our military presence in Iraq to counter Iran - a case that has nothing to do with sanctioning the Revolutionary Guard.”

Kyl-Lieberman Stated That The U.S. Military Presence In Iraq Will Have Long Term Consequences For The Future” Of The Middle East And “In Particular” Iran And That U.S. Military Instruments In Iraq Should Be Used To Support A Policy Of Rolling Back Iran’s Influence. “(b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate-- (1) that the manner in which the United States transitions and structures its military presence in Iraq will have critical long-term consequences for the future of the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, in particular with regard to the capability of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to pose a threat to the security of the region, the prospects for democracy for the people of the region, and the health of the global economy; (3) that it should be the policy of the United States to combat, contain, and roll back the violent activities and destabilizing influence inside Iraq of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, its foreign facilitators such as Lebanese Hezbollah, and its indigenous Iraqi proxies; (4) to support the prudent and calibrated use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq, including diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military instruments, in support of the policy described in paragraph (3) with respect to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its proxies.”



REALITY: EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT HAS VOTED TO FUND THE WAR IN IRAQ
2005-2007: Since Obama Came To Washington, Every Single Senate Democrat Has Voted For Every Bill Funding Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan Until President Bush Vetoed A Timetable For Withdrawal – Including Both Emergency Supplemental Bills And Defense Appropriations Bills. Since Obama came to Washington in January of 2005, every single Senate Democrat has voted for every bill funding operations in Iraq and Afghanistan until President Bush vetoed a timetable for withdrawal – including both emergency supplemental bills and defense appropriations bills that included bridge funding with the expressed purpose of continuing operations in Iraq as well as Afghanistan.

---

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck2/2008/01/

See Senator Kennedy's voting record here: http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53305

[BlueStater]

31. But Obama still voted to confirm Rice in the end, didn't he?

And I find it appalling how you try to minimize BO's cowardice in not showing up to vote against the Iran bill by saying he wasn't as bad as Hillary. There was still no excuse for the lack of political courage BO displayed.

[Skip Intro]

7. He has also stated that he did not know how he would have voted, AND

that there was room for disagreement on that vote.

I guess it is easy to be on the right side of an issue when you have been on every side of that issue.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Provide link to back what is coming out of your mouth.

thank you.

[Skip Intro]

20. Will you respond when I do?

[FrenchieCat]

37. Still waiting.......

[FrenchieCat]

40. Still Waiting.....

[Skip Intro]

41. We have done similar before, FC, promise you will respond and I will post the links

they have been posted here a million times, but tell me you will respond and I will repost them just for you.


waiting...

[FrenchieCat]

46. Of course I have the answer.....As I noticed you dropping off sentences here and there

of what Obama actually stated in the interviews you linked. But why am I not suprised!

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."

again.....

"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.

again--

(July 27,2004), Obama said that he would have voted "no" on the Senate resolution

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.

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.

again!

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.”

"What I don’t think was appropriate was the degree to which Congress gave the president a pass on this"

http://thepage.time.com/obama-camp-memo-on-clintons-mtp-iraq-statements/

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?

[FrenchieCat]

47. Of course I have an answer, and it is a better one than telling you what the word Is is.

to be supporting a war voting candidate, you sure have a lot to say about a candidate that spoke out on this war from the get. Funny how that works. I'd call it ironic, myself!

She also voted for IRAN, but somehow, she's "better". What a laugh! And no, not in a truly funny way.


But I am no longer suprised by the gall of Clinton supporters and their sorry double standards.
--------------------------------------------------------

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."

again.....

"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.

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/

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?

[Skip Intro]

50. How does the second line redner the first line meaningless? Magic words?

so what if he said "from my vantage point." How the hell does that change his immediately prior statement that he didn't know how he would have voted on the IWR? If line two negates line one, why is line one there? C'mon.

and you're actually thanking him for betraying his supposedly deeply-held beliefs for political reasons? Well, at least you admit it.

and what about his "I think there's room for disagreement" line about people who voted for the IWR?

you don't address that one at all.

dobule standards, me? are you sure?

[Skip Intro]

43. Well, I hope you respond, here are his words, and the link - hes all over the map on the IWR.

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.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21738432/page/2


He admits saying things in 2004 that he did not really mean, for political reasons.

So when is he being straight with you and I, and when is he saying whatever he feels the political climate demands? And for what reasons would he say things he supposedly did not really mean, other than political ambition?

When else is he dishonest?

Now? Then? Tomorrow?


I will be shocked if you reply, FC.

[Skip Intro]

44. still waiting...

[FrenchieCat]

48. You are sorry, not shocked.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4800782&mesg_id=4813173

[Abacus]

11. "What I would've been concerned about was a

carte blanche to the administration for a doctrine of preemptive strikes that I'm not sure sets a good precedent."

Pretty clear, K & R.

[maddiejoan]

15. IWR was not carte blanche

If Bush had honored the intent of IWR and lived up to it's needs --he couldn't have invaded.

Nice of you to buy into the RW's version of what IWR was though --and thanks for letting Bush off the hook.

[FrenchieCat]

18. It was a carte Blanche........

the Levin Amendment was not.

Hillary voted no against the Levin Amendment.

The Senate’s Forgotten Iraq Choice
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/opinion/01chafee.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[Recursion]

38. YES IT WAS

My Battalion got mobilization orders 3 days after it passed

We're not stupid.

[maddiejoan]

12. He said he 'thinks' he would have voted NAY

then goes on do demonstrate how little he knew about the vote by saying we would've needed Inspectors back in (which IWR provided) and that he was against pre-emptive war (which was not a feature of IWR)

In fact --he says nothing different than Hillary's speech of October 10, 2002 about IWR on the Senate Floor.

[FrenchieCat]

14. Not on that video. On the video, he states that he would have voted

Like Dick Durbin, he would have voted NAY.

Him saying "I think" is a red herring on your part....
He said that a pre-emptive strike would have been a bad precedent.

[maddiejoan]

16. watch it again, sweetheart

he says he "thinks' he would have voted Nay

[FrenchieCat]

17. So sad that what the meaning of Is is is still something that you

want to hang on to......honey.

[maddiejoan]

21. So sad that you are blind

to political maneuvering

[FrenchieCat]

24. So sad that you are

blind and deaf and dumb to political maneuvering.

maddiejoan--->

[maddiejoan]

26. Well

We can't all be as wonderful as Frenchie Cat, hey?

[FrenchieCat]

29. You said it......

hey? :shrug:

[Lerkfish]

23. hey, don't confuse people

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4800344&mesg_id=4800344

LOL!

[FrenchieCat]

33. That was the point!

:hi:

They are holding on to the same thing Bill was holding on to....which is what compelled Ted K to jump into the frey!

[flpoljunkie]

25. Thanks, FrenchieCat. Obama could not have been more clear on the IWR.

[Major Hogwash]

27. Good post. It's sad that a few people here still support the IWR vote.

Not that it's going to make a difference to them, but almost 4000 men and women have been killed in the Iraq War.

10's of 1000's have been severaly wounded and nearly 1 million will suffer mental anguish for the rest of their lives from having been sent over there.

Since Hillary won't apologize for her vote, I guess that means she isn't sorry.

[Ichingcarpenter]

30. Mr. Peabody and Marty McFly thank you for your way back machine

:) :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :kick:

[FrenchieCat]

32. Thanks!

:hi:

[Johnny__Motown]

35. K&R

[Mezzo]

39. and here he talks about the time he said he would have voted for it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lN30M6StFfk

[bigbrother05]

45. Thanks FrenchieCat

you do amazing work

[rug]

49. What other things would he have voted NAY on before he was in the Senate?