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

[Progress And Change]

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 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."

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 don’t know.

You never gave it any thought?

I haven’t.

You sure?

Positive.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/10/30/061030on_onlineonly04?currentPage=3

[blm]

1. Voting for IWR to get weapon inspections meant once Bush invaded DESPITE reports

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.

[Bitwit1234]

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.

[blm]

3. Big difference between WILL bomb and bomb IF NECESSARY. Why spin as if Obama = Bush

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.

[Progress And Change]

6. what conditions did he cite for it being "necessary" and why did he say it in 2004?

[maximusveritas]

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.

[Progress And Change]

5. "protecting" her from what?

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...

[gateley]

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.

[Progress And Change]

8. no defense from ObamaNation?

[Progress And Change]

9. kick