Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama in 2006 echoed his 04' comment about senators possibly being justified to vote for the IWR...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Progress And Change Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 03:27 PM
Original message
Obama in 2006 echoed his 04' comment about senators possibly being justified to vote for the IWR...
ObamaNation claims he said this in 2004 only to protect that ticket. Why did he repeat the same thing in 2006?

Obama and him and Hillary:

"So its not clear to me what differences weve had since Ive been in the Senate. I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although Im always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was that I didnt have the benefit of U.S. intelligence. And, for those who did, it might have led to a different set of choices. So that might be something that sort of is obvious."

And for a good laugh (bear in mind this was in the fall of 06' and when Obamamania began):

How would one run against Hillary Clinton, in that sense?

Oh, I dont know.

You never gave it any thought?

I havent.

You sure?

Positive.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/10/30/061030on_onlineonly04?currentPage=3
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. Voting for IWR to get weapon inspections meant once Bush invaded DESPITE reports
Edited on Sat Dec-08-07 03:34 PM by blm
from weapon inspectors that proved force was not needed, THEN you better have opposed that decision. Clinton and some others claiming they only wanted weapon inspections should have publically opposed Bush's rush to invade before, during and after he invaded. Kerry did because he actually MEANT his vote to be for weapon inspections. Those who stayed silent maintained their trust and support for Bush, no matter what they say now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Then maybe Obama should have made himself
clear when he consented to an interview by the Chicago Tribune. He told the reporter that he would not hesitated to bomb Iran. He said he would send missiles into that country.

Now Hillary and the senators who voted to give bush permission to hunt for WMD in Iraq did not say they wanted to send missiles into Iraq or to BOMB IRAQ.. OBAMA SAID HE WOULDN'T HESTITATE TO BOMB IRAN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Big difference between WILL bomb and bomb IF NECESSARY. Why spin as if Obama = Bush
Edited on Sat Dec-08-07 04:07 PM by blm
when the only Dems who = Bush are the Dems who supported Bush PUBLICALLY on his terrorism and Iraq war decisions for the last 6 yrs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Progress And Change Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. what conditions did he cite for it being "necessary" and why did he say it in 2004?
Edited on Sat Dec-08-07 04:15 PM by Progress And Change
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maximusveritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
4. Because he was protecting Hilary
He hadn't decided to run yet and was possibly even leaning against it. At that point, Hillary was going to be the presumptive frontrunner and eventual nominee, so he was protecting her just as he did for our 2004 nominees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Progress And Change Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. "protecting" her from what?
Edited on Sat Dec-08-07 04:16 PM by Progress And Change
A statement made by Barackstar in a two year old interview would have affected the outcome of the 2008 election if Clinton were the nominee? Obama said the same thing twice over a two year span. Maybe that is what he believes? That is what his voting record on Iraq suggests...

So you think Obama would have endorsed Clinton if he did not run instead of Edwards and the other candidates? Interesting...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
7. At this point I'm more concerned with getting OUT, rather than pointing fingers
at who helped get us there. People fucked up -- All four Senators running for Prez supported it. Dennis didn't. Their support or non support isn't an indication of what their plans are NOW to extricate us from this quagmire. That's what we need to focus on -- who's got a plan that will work NOW.

Enough living in the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Progress And Change Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-08-07 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
8. no defense from ObamaNation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Progress And Change Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-09-07 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
9. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 17th 2024, 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC