I was right on Iraq too

[AGirl]

I was 19 year old and I knew the WMD argument was bullshit. Millions of people know it was bullshit around the world, including many 10 years old.

Obama didn't have any special insight on Iraq that we don't already have.

Obama wasn't in the Senate to cast the vote, he was making a speech. When he entered the Senate, he shared the same voting record as Clinton now he is using his initial opposition to the war as a selling point for how insightful he was on international affair.

Let Obama eats the cake too, huh?

[anonymous171]

1. So you're clairvoyant?

[bigbrother05]

49. So if you knew it at 19 and 10 year olds knew it

why didn't Clinton know it?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. And now you're supporting the candidate who voted for it...

So...

[TwilightGardener]

3. Can't stand that he was right, can you, Clintonites? Bwahahahaaa!!!

[ingac70]

4. Chelsea says you're clairvoyant

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/us/politics/16chelsea.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1204315251-9dzHteVxs9Rm3ZEW9lYf6Q

[walldude]

11. Lots of "clairvoyants" out there...

most of them people who didn't let their fears get in the way of their common sense.

[Kittycat]

5. Good for you. I stood swearing at the screen when I saw it coming - well before it actually

came about. And that's one major reason why I couldn't in good sense support HRC in the primary.

[jpak]

6. Obama done voted right; Clinton done voted wrong on the IWR

nuff sed

[AGirl]

16. he didn't vote..nuff said.

[Mooney]

19. And HRC did vote

and she voted for the war. Which is why she didn't get my vote.

Whether or not Obama would have voted for the war is guesswork, and always will be. HRC's IWR vote is a fact, and always will be.

[jpak]

32. What you said

n/t

[cottonseed]

7. A 10 year old's judgement is preferable to Hillary's?

There's a rule everyone should follow when trying to make a case for their candidate. Don't make your candidate look like a fool in the first sentence.

[Forkboy]

35. The OP made the most ill thought out point of all time.

:rofl:

[TheDonkey]

58. It is stunningly ridiculous

Oh my oh my.

[Forkboy]

59. Which of course makes it one of my favorite threads ever.

I love a good explosion to the face. :D

[Window]

8. LOL! Well, that should show you just how STUPID Hillary's vote was.

I have two nephews serving in Iraq, and I want them home NOW. However, as long as even one soldier is in Iraq, this damned war had better be funded.

IMO, they both voted correctly. There was very little chance of it passing anyway, and I think they knew this.

You don't send our soldiers into war and then start talking shit about cutting funding. Find some other way.

I'm getting pissed, so I'll just get the fuck out of this thread.

[AGirl]

12. they wouldnt send the soldiers to die without proper equipment and foods

[Warren Stupidity]

9. So how come Clinton didn't have the insight of a 19 year old? nt.

[AGirl]

13. It wasn't really a vote for the war, but i am sure she was under political pressure to vote for it

and she know her single vote wouldn't have changed the outcome. I obviously think Clinton was also smart enough to not go invade Iraq if she was the president.

[bunnies]

17. The name of the bill "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002"

It really wasnt a vote for the war???? :rofl: good one.

[Warren Stupidity]

20. That phrase has come to signify the utter lameness of the Clinton campaign.

"It wasn't really a vote for the war". No of course not, it was a vote for more cheese.

[Mooney]

22. If her single vote wouldn't have changed the outcome

then why did she vote for the war? After all, it wouldn't have made any difference.

[anonymous171]

30. So the "fighter" is easily influenced...

More like fair weather fighter...

[slick8790]

36. If her vote wasn't gonna change the outcome, why didn't she do the right thing?

I want a president who'll do the right thing in tough situations, not buckle to political pressure, thanks.

[Greyskye]

44. so now you say that she buckled under the poltical pressure.

You do realize, don't you, that you are not exactly helping your candidate with your arguments.

[Occam Bandage]

10. Oh, good. So even you are wiser than Senator Clinton.

[bunnies]

14. "many 10 years old" "Let Obama eats the cake"

Is english your second language?

Which brings me to "Obama didn't have any special insight on Iraq".
Oh ok, then that proves your point that 10 Year olds are smarter than Hillary. Whadda ya know... I agree.

[AGirl]

15. yup, english is my second language..

[Recursion]

54. Yes, it's her second language and she does pretty darn well at it for a learner n/t

[IndianaGreen]

18. Hillary knew Bush was lying about WMD, yet she made the cold calculation that no one would care

about it once the war was over in a couple of weeks. She didn't care about the Iraqi civilians that would have died by a US attack anymore than she cared about the Iraqi civilians that American bombing and American sanctions killed in the 8 years her husband was President.

[nonconformist]

21. I was right on Iraq too.

But that doesn't make me in any way qualified to be the leader of the free world.

Hey, guess what? I have a fresh face, too! If that's all that's required, I'm SO the best candidate.

[Warren Stupidity]

23. Were you married to a pretzledent?

'cause from where I sit, the relative experience of Clinton v Obama comes down to 'she was married to Bill'.

We routinely elect presidents with no prior experience at being leader of the free world. These days it seems the actual requirement is 'was a governor or was a senator or was a VP'. Obama McCain Clinton and that nutcase fundaloon Huckabee are all in the 'qualified' category.

[nonconformist]

24. The point is, basing your decision on that IWR vote is irresponsible.

And several people have said that was their litmus test and that's why they chose Obama, but overlook the fact that his "opposition" was ONE very safe speech in deep dark blue Chicago, that he has said himself that he's not sure how he would have voted, and that since being in the Senate he has had opportunities to put his vote where his mouth is and has failed. People are propping him up as this "anti-war" candidate, but that's just not the case.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4643795

So, there are MANY issues one should look at when making an important decision like this... and yes, experience is one of them. I really hate the "she was just a WIFE" meme, it's very degrading. We all know she was a remarkable, extremely involved First Lady.

[grantcart]

26. I agree with your subject line but every other Democratic Senator

who voted for the IWR made a clear statement that it was wrong and they made a mistake.

Senator Clinton continued to make longwinded explanations that stressed content etc, leaving everyone thinking that she was trying to have it both ways so that she would not be criticized in the GE when she was running against the republicans. This is the real reason that this issue has hurt her so much, that her explanation was aimed at parsing a major issue so that she could get the most votes in the primary and the general election; and that many of us percieve that it was this motive that guided her in her vote, that she was afraid of being out flanked on the right in the general election.

[nonconformist]

37. I agree that it's a negative, and I criticize her for it.

I wish she'd come right out and apologize for it, but at this point, I think she's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. People would accuse her of just trying to score more political points with it. She has said that she wouldn't have voted for it if she knew what Bush would have done with it, but it's not as strong as a full out apology.

That said, if she was running against people where there was a very clear difference on this point, that would be one thing. But one speech and an uninspiring Senate voting record isn't a clear difference in my book. Frankly, I think he would have voted for it or abstained had he been in the Senate at the time, based on his history.

[grantcart]

41. Yes but my point is, lets put all of that aside, lets assume that she

thinks its a mistake and he would have voted for it.

My point is that she never took control of the narrative of her own campaign. It was all packaging and consultants. I saw her on Nightline a month ago and she was fresh, accessible and compelling. The irony of this campaign is that if she had done what John McCain had done and said screw it, fired the consultants travelled by herself and had open forums and talked to the people directly she would have been the nominee.

Her handling of the IWR vote is a symptom of a larger problem she has with making decisions, exerting leadership and engaging the people.

[nonconformist]

46. It's been handled poorly, I'll give you that.

But I disagree that it's a negative mark on her ability to lead. Bush ran in 2000 as a compassionate conservative, poised to bring unity to the country and dignity to the White House. A solid campaign, actually, but those were just WORDS. Call me cynical, but I'm far more concerned about more substantial stuff these days.

[Warren Stupidity]

28. irresponsible?

Clinton's IWR is a negative against her. That is all. It is a negative that Obama does not have.

Claiming that Clinton is more experienced than Obama requires including her role as first lady, a role that is simply the fact that she was married to a president. Other than that 'first lady' is a complete fiction, a quaint tradition of referring to the spouse of the president by a non-official position.

You can't put 'first lady' on the resume and then say that noting that all that means is that she was the wife of president is out of bounds. That is all that it means. First Lady is nothing other than that.

Why was she such a remarkable first lady? As far as I remember her one foray into leadership was the failed healthcare initiative. After that she was pushed to the sidelines. After the 94 election debacle the Clinton presidency was under seige and in trouble until he left office.

[nonconformist]

38. See above, I agree it's a negative... however...

Her work as First Lady is not the only thing she's claiming as experience, it goes way back to include things like her being a member of the impeachment inquiry staff advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal, which culminated in the resignation of Nixon, but you cannot deny that being an insider in that capacity doesn't equate to experience.

And she accomplished a great deal as First Lady...

Along with Senator Ted Kennedy, she was the major force behind the State Children's Health Insurance Program in 1997, a federal effort that provided state support for children whose parents were unable to provide them with health coverage. She promoted nationwide immunization against childhood illnesses and encouraged older women to seek a mammogram to detect breast cancer, with coverage provided by Medicare. She successfully sought to increase research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at the National Institutes of Health. The First Lady worked to investigate reports of an illness that affected veterans of the Gulf War, which became known as the Gulf War syndrome. Together with Attorney General Janet Reno, Clinton helped create the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice. In 1997, she initiated and shepherded the Adoption and Safe Families Act, which she regarded as her greatest accomplishment as First Lady. As First Lady, Clinton hosted numerous White House Conferences, including ones on Child Care (1997), Early Childhood Development and Learning (1997), and Children and Adolescents (2000), and the first-ever White House Conferences on Teenagers (2000) and Philanthropy (1999).

Hillary Clinton traveled to 79 countries during this time, breaking the mark for most-travelled First Lady held by Pat Nixon. In a September 1995 speech before the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, Clinton argued very forcefully against practices that abused women around the world and in China itself, declaring "that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as separate from human rights" and resisting Chinese pressure to soften her remarks. She was one of the most prominent international figures at the time to speak out against the treatment of Afghan women by the Islamist fundamentalist Taliban that had seized control of Afghanistan. She helped create Vital Voices, an international initiative sponsored by the United States to promote the participation of women in the political processes of their countries.

[AGirl]

40. good work.

[grantcart]

25. how does this help in advocating your support of Hillary?

[AGirl]

39. I am not advocating support for Hillary on this topic.

[Greyskye]

45. Obviously.

[AGirl]

51. yup.

[rodeodance]

27. yeah, he has taken his NON-existant "vote" to new heights. Part of Swoon Effect

[JVS]

29. And yet Hillary managed to fuck it up. What gives?

[yardwork]

31. This is a very good point, and I applaud the OP.

I knew the WMD argument was bullshit too. Does that mean I have a special gift? Nah.

I certainly don't hold Obama's votes for the war since he entered the Senate against him.

[Forkboy]

33. You're not secretly working for Obama are you?

I was 19 year old and I knew the WMD argument was bullshit. Millions of people know it was bullshit around the world, including many 10 years old.

Doesn't say much about Hillary's judgment, does it? :rofl:

[guidod]

34. Stop and think!!

Do you think he may have been voting for the troops, knowing that Bush was never going to leave no matter what?

[nonconformist]

42. Obama had said in speeches that he wouldn't fund the war.

He said in 2003 (before he was in the Senate) that he would have voted against war funding, because the only way to stop the war was to stop funding it.

BUT, when he had a chance to put his vote where his mouth is, he failed MISERABLY.

Obama Gaffe on War Funding?

April 01, 2007 11:06 PM

ABC News' Jonathan Greenberger Reports: In what may be a blow to his support among the anti-war left, the Associated Press is reporting that Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., says that if President Bush vetoes the war funding bill because of its timetable for troop withdrawal from Iraq, the Congress will then swiftly provide the president with another version that lacks such a provision. According to the AP, Obama explained this by saying that no lawmaker “wants to play chicken with our troops.”

President Bush has previously vowed to veto any Iraq supplemental bill that contains a withdrawal timeline.

Obama’s comments to the AP place him alone among the major Democratic candidates for president. So far, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and others have focused on simply calling on Bush not to veto the supplemental, and unlike Obama, have not stated that the Congress would respond to a veto by sending the president a "clean?" funding bill.

Already, Obama is taking heat for his remarks from some of the anti-war left, which is a key constituency for his campaign. Influential liberal blogger Markos Moulitsas wrote on Daily Kos that he wishes Obama's comments were an April Fool's Joke. "What a ridiculous thing to say. Not only is it bad policy, not only is it bad politics, it's also a terrible negotiating approach," wrote Moulitsas. "Obama just surrendered to Bush."

Obama's campaign did not return a request for comment.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/04/obama_gaffe_on_.html

Anti-War Crowd Turns On Obama

As Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. defends himself against anti-war critics this week, his rivals are taking the opportunity to cast themselves as more firmly opposed to President Bush's Iraq policy than Obama – who happens to be the only leading Democratic candidate who publicly opposed the war when it began.

Obama has found himself facing a storm on leading liberal blogs over a weekend interview in which he spoke as though he were an observer, not a participant, in the confrontation between Congress and Bush over a threatened veto of legislation that sets a deadline for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq.
<snip>

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., in contrast to Obama, has refused to take Bush’s veto for granted. She launched a petition drive Monday to demand that Bush sign the bill. Asked in Crawfordsville Tuesday whether Obama's willingness to look past the veto was helpful or unhelpful to the Democratic position, she responded: "I'm only going to speak for myself, and my position is we have to negotiate with the president from a position of strength.

"We need to change the approach of the White House, which means you've got to stand firm and say, 'We don't expect you to veto something that represents the will of the American people,'" Clinton said.

<snip>
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/04/politics/main2645861.shtml

So obviously, there is a very good reason to question if he has the "audacity" to follow his speeches through when it actually MATTERS.

[guidod]

47. What are your plans if

he is in the General Election?

[nonconformist]

48. I'm not sure yet.

I'll vote for him as an anti-McCain vote, probably. At worst I abstain.

[guidod]

50. Don't forget how important it will be

for the dems to be able to put new Supreme Court Justices in place. If the republicans get to do that, they will own the courts.

[nonconformist]

53. Courts are on my mind

Which is why I'm hoping to muster up an anti-McCain vote.

But honestly, I'm not even sure what kind of justices Obama would appoint. I have a feeling they'd be moderate conservatives.

[Forkboy]

43. Kick for the humor of it all.

:kick:

[Johnny__Motown]

52. Then clearly you have better judgment than Hillary Clinton, doesn't that speak volumes to you?

[Arugula Latte]

55. You know, this probably wasn't the best thing for you to post

if your intention was to prop up Hillary at the expense of Obama. Just sayin'.

[AZBlue]

56. Seems Obama had special insight that Sen. Clinton didn't.

[Mezzo]

57. except that he wasn't

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