Iraq In Iowa

Update II: As a comment from Kostner points out (quoting Citizen53) today Obama “dismissed his Democratic rivals’ change of heart on the Iraq war as too little too late.” But in November 2006, when Obama was not running for president, in a New Yorker Magazine article Obama said something quite different: “You know, I think very highly of Hillary. The more I get to know her, the more I admire her. I think she’s the most disciplined–one of the most disciplined people–I’ve ever met. She’s one of the toughest. She’s got an extraordinary intelligence. And she is, she’s somebody who’s in this stuff for the right reasons. She’s passionate about moving the country forward on issues like health care and children. So it’s not clear to me what differences we’ve had since I’ve been in the Senate. I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although I’m 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 didn’t 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. But, again, we were in different circumstances at that time: I was running for the U.S. Senate, she had to take a vote, and casting votes is always a difficult test.”

Update: The desperate Obama campaign, falling apart even in his home state of Illinois, shows its hypocrisy once again. Obama’s flowery words say we should put “politics aside” even as his actions (For instance, following Hillary to Iowa and purposefully scheduling a speech a few blocks away from hers, days after Hillary announced her speech. We are sure he will say this is another “staff mistake”) once again demonstrate his true intent to divide Democrats in their attempts to stop the Iraq War. As Admin stated in the comments, Obama’s record in the Senate is clear. Obama has voted identically to Hillary in the Senate and has not attempted to block war funding until he decided to run for President. We thought Obama wanted to be a uniter not a divider. He is dividing Democrats on this critical issue for his desperate political needs.
—————–

We noted way back in May in an article called Hillary On Iraq, Part II a central point about Hillary’s position on Iraq. Here is what we wrote then:

Hillary also understood that Bush was not to be fully trusted. Hillary tried to legislate restraints on Bush. Hillary voted and advocated for the Byrd Amendment. The Byrd Amendment would have revoked the war authority after 1 year. Senators such as John Edwards, opposed her. Senator John Edwards at the time was pushing the Iraq Resolution as a co-sponsor. Edwards rejected restraints on Bush and any amendments to the Iraq Resolution. Because of this opposition the Byrd Amendment failed.[See, Byrd Amdt. No. 4869, As Amended; To provide a termination date for the authorization of the use of the Armed Forces of the United States, together with procedures for the extension of such date unless Congress disapproves the extension.]

Yesterday, under Hillary Headlines, we noted this story in the Quad-City Times:

New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama will hold simultaneous campaign events on Tuesday just blocks apart in Iowa’s capital city. Each is considered a leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Clinton is scheduled to deliver a 10 a.m. speech on the Iraq war at the Temple for the Performing Arts. At the exact same time, Obama will hold a town hall meting on the economy at Des Moines Area Community College’s urban campus.

Clinton announced Saturday that she would speak in Des Moines. Obama’s trip was announced this morning.

It appeared yesterday that Senator Clinton would have something of importance to say regarding the Iraq War and her continuing efforts to restrain Bush from the very beginning. We hope that this time all Senators, even Senator Clinton’s opponents for the Democratic nomination, support her plan to end the war. Stephanie Bjornson, a Hillary campaign spokeswoman told the Des Moines Register that in the speech “She’ll go through the details of her current plan and elaborate a little bit more.”

Until we get the full details of what happened in Iowa today we do have Senator Clinton and Senator Byrd discussing their proposal in today’s New York Daily News.

Here are some excerpts of the plan all Democratic Senators should support:

The American people have waited long enough for progress in Iraq. They have waited long enough for the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. Today, more than 150,000 members of our armed forces are caught in a civil war. According to the Pentagon, overall levels of violence in Iraq have not decreased since the surge began. The last three months have been the deadliest period for American troops since the start of the war. It is time for the waiting to end and for our troops to start to come home.

That is why we propose to end the authorization for the war in Iraq. The civil war we have on our hands in Iraq is not our fight and it is not the fight Congress authorized. Iraq is at war with itself and American troops are caught in the middle.

….

The 2008 defense authorization bill is now before the U.S. Senate. This legislation presents a vital opportunity for Congress to step up and force the President to change course in Iraq. Amending the bill to deauthorize the war would do exactly that. We intend to lead that effort.

If the Bush administration believes that the current war, as it is being executed, is critical to America’s future, then it should make the case and let the people decide. Explain to the public why our young men and women should be sent into the middle of a fight between religious factions. Explain why we should continue to devote $10 billion each month to this fight.

Prior to the vote on the original authorization of force in 2002, we worked to limit that authority to one year. Unfortunately, the amendment failed — a fact rendered all the more distressing in hindsight.

….

As Bush admitted in his State of the Union address in January, “This is not the fight we entered in Iraq.” We could not agree more. This is not the fight Congress authorized, Mr. President. If you want to continue to wage this fight, come to Congress and make your case. Otherwise, bring our troops home.

Share

20 thoughts on “Iraq In Iowa

  1. Obama launches attack on Hillary. Is this too little too late?

    Presidential contender Barack Obama on Tuesday dismissed his Democratic rivals’ change of heart on the Iraq war as too little too late, while Hillary Rodham Clinton urged a quick end to U.S. involvement in the conflict. Obama and Clinton focused on the four-year-plus war in dueling speeches only a few city blocks apart in the first-in-the-nation voting state of Iowa. “It will be enormously difficult to invest in jobs and opportunity until we stop spending $275 million a day on this war in Iraq,” Obama said in prepared remarks obtained by The Associated Press. “I believed then and still do that being a leader means that you’d better do what’s right and leave the politics aside, because there are no do-overs on an issue as important as war.”

  2. It does not sound like he is leaving “politics aside”. Didn’t he vote on Iraq issues just like Hillary when he was in the Senate? Yup. He voted for all the war authorizations too, right? Yup. Didn’t he say he did not know how he would have voted on the Iraq resolution if he would have been in the Senate for that vote? Yup.

  3. lol barack(mr. pretender) obama is having it both ways. also it’s sweet that he want’s to be president but he barley is winning his own home state in the new arg poll. hmmmm, like edwards too. at least hillary leads by 25 to 30 points in ny. GO HILLARY GO!!!!

  4. Obama is repeating far leftists’ mistake. If he wants to attack Hillary on that war vote, he should have done it from the get-go, not when you’re 20 points behind in national polls.

    People are tired of rehashing that vote. It had been done by Howard Dean in 2004.

    I predict this move will gain no traction for him what so ever. Looks like Obama and Edwards are vying for the same peacenik pie.

  5. yup kostner, obama reminds me of dean except a better public speaker and more african-american support. he really has nothing to say of substance. in canned speeches he is ok. but in debates he have to be quick on his feet and know what to say off the cuff and he can’t.

  6. The people straining at a gnat have set up as a purity test a public mea culpa with the narrowest of condition. My guess is that the vast American public could not begin to care about the distinctions between how Edwards has confessed the war is wrong, Obama has confessed it, and Hillary has confessed it. Their differences are nuances on nuances. Moreover, while I consistently have opposed this war, most of the American people once supported and only recently have come around. That makes them more like Hillary than Edwards or Obama.

  7. Hat tips to citizen53 on mydd, Obama’s hypocritical criticism on Hillary.

    Obama now:

    Presidential contender Barack Obama on Tuesday dismissed his Democratic rivals’ change of heart on the Iraq war as too little too late

    Obama back in November 2006

    Where do you find yourself having the biggest differences with Hillary Clinton, politically?

    You know, I think very highly of Hillary. The more I get to know her, the more I admire her. I think she’s the most disciplined–one of the most disciplined people–I’ve ever met. She’s one of the toughest. She’s got an extraordinary intelligence. And she is, she’s somebody who’s in this stuff for the right reasons. She’s passionate about moving the country forward on issues like health care and children. So it’s not clear to me what differences we’ve had since I’ve been in the Senate. I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq, although I’m 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 didn’t 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. But, again, we were in different circumstances at that time: I was running for the U.S. Senate, she had to take a vote, and casting votes is always a difficult test.

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

    Oh, I don’t know.

    You never gave it any thought?

    I haven’t.

    You sure?

    Positive.

  8. Hi administrator,

    I don’t know why I can’t attach the link to any article.

    This was published by ‘New Yorker’ in November 2006.

  9. Kostner: the links were broken (specifically at the date after the slash mark between the 10 and the 30). Our software takes a long while to verify links in order to prevent spam (we get lots of spam with links to services that Senator Vitter might be interested in).

  10. admin,

    Tucker show’s transcript is out. Yup, that idiot was indeed HENNEBERGER. The exchange is hilarious:

    CARLSON: Well, it‘s interesting. I don‘t really understand it. Every woman I know doesn‘t like Hillary, and yet the polls suggest a lot of women love her. What‘s the truth?

    HENNEBERGER: I can‘t really speak to the polls. I can only speak to what I hear. People can tell you things polls never can, and vice versa. I went to 20 states over 18 months, talked to hundreds of women across the entire spectrum. It was the opposite of a poll. I never said Hillary up or down or any other candidate.

    So it was completely open ended, and in that way, probably the no vote was over-represented. However, the one patch of common ground I saw from left to center to right was an expressed antipathy for Hillary Clinton.

    CARLSON: Really, on what grounds?

    HENNEBERGER: It depends who you are talking to. On the right, I don‘t need to explain. On the left—not to you. On the left, it is over the war. It‘s over her support of the war and her reluctance to call her support a mistake. But in the center—and those are the voters without whom no Democrat can win the White House.

    In the center, it is a vaguer, more visceral feeling that what you see is not what you get; that she would say whatever might be required; that this lack of authenticity.

    CARLSON: It is interesting. The antipathy is profound and measurable among well educated women.

    HENNEBERGER: The women who are most like Hillary like her the least.

    CARLSON: Right. Here‘s this fascinating “Washington Post”/ABC News poll; Support among female voters without college degrees, Hillary Clinton, 61 percent, if you‘re talking about the Democratic field; Barack Obama, 18. This is a group that Mrs. Clinton‘s campaigns as, quote, women with needs.

    But poor, less educated women love Hillary.

    HENNEBERGER: Again, I can‘t really explain the poll.

    BUCHANAN: Who did you talk to?

    HENNEBERGER: I talked to everything from very wealthy to literally homeless—


    BUCHANAN: Did you get those numbers too?

    HENNEBERGER: Yes, I‘ve seen the numbers. I‘m just saying that what I heard a lot form the most—from the strongest Democrats, I heard guilt because they don‘t like Hillary. I heard, I know I should and I would love to have a woman, but not her.

  11. I’m not sure I understand Henneberger’s logic. Why would women lie to pollsters about Hillary but be honest with her? I’d think the reverse is true. I’ve read that Hillary’s support is somewhat hidden, and I tend to agree with that. I believe many women will pull the lever for her and surprise all the inside-the-beltway “experts.”

    That also explains Margaret Carlson’s “No women I know like Hillary” statement; the D.C. establishment is too insular. Plus, that crowd’s never liked her, and she frankly couldn’t care less.

    Poll after poll after poll shows her doing very well among women. I’m also curious how many nonwhite women Henneberger talked to.

  12. She, just like other DC pundit, is an idiot. If you don’t believe poll, okay, GO TO NEW YORK AND FIND SOME WOMEN WHO ACTUALLY VOTED FOR HER OVERWHEMINGLY TWICE.

    The more the MSM underestimates Hillary and spouts idiotic ‘nobody i know likes Hillary’ theme, the happier I am.

  13. kostner, I couldn’t agree more with you about underestimating her. People have been doing that since she ran for the Senate in 2000, and look where she is now.

  14. “I was running for the U.S. Senate, she had to take a vote, and casting votes is always a difficult test.”

    A test too difficult for Obama, that’s for sure. Outside of the Senate he thrills us all with his tough rhetoric, but when it matters, he votes for every single war funding bill until he decides to run for President!?!

    This would be suprising, but as HI44 has shown us, this is just Obama’s way of doing things – Say one thing, maybe even something a little tough and fiery, and then just when you think no one is looking, do another, and try to have it both ways. I bet Obama is upset he can not vote present in the US Senate like he could in Illinois when he voted “present” on partial birth abortion.

Comments are closed.