Obama didn't know how he'd vote on Iraq in 2004

WRL

WRL

Well...the right is right
This is an Obama quote from 2004 after he was in the Senate, seems he took the safe rout when it mattered as well. And he attacks Clinton for something he shows little conviction of...


when asked how he would have voted if given the chance to in the 2002 vote that authorized the war in Iraq...

"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.''

He somehow sounds a little more convincing today??? Wonder why...
 
It's nice to see Obama have the sense to support a 'surge' in Iraq, but somewhere on the path to the nomination, the truth lost it's wheels, and Obama now opposed the surge.

lol I love using his own words on him, this is going to be great...
 
" this is going to be great..."

Sure is. Rest assured, if you keep coming here with this BS between now & November, you're only setting yourself up (though, as I recall, you tend to bail for a few months after devastating elections, like the Dems taking Congress in '06).

The GOP is in complete disarray, WRL. Conservatives don't even like your nominee.

Try to put quotes in context if you're going to use them to smear someone. Hack.
 
You know what my favorite part of this thread is?

This is the exact same misrepresentation that Bill Clinton tried to smear Obama with. It's the same out-of-context quote.

Good company, WRL. Vincefostergate!
 
Even the racism and swiftboating the republicans are going to throw at him aren't going to help. Obama will slaughter the geriatric old geezer.
 
Onceler said:
You know what my favorite part of this thread is?

This is the exact same misrepresentation that Bill Clinton tried to smear Obama with. It's the same out-of-context quote.

Good company, WRL. Vincefostergate!
Click to expand...

Sorry I could have snipped that quote to simply say...

Barack Obama when asked in 2004 if he would have voted for the Iraq war said...

"What would I have done? I don't know"
That would have been clipping the quote, which I could have done, and it sounds a lot worse, and he did say it, but I was fair and included the entire quote. Clinton just bungled the delivery trying to claim he was opposed to the war as well. I just don't see us having the same problem.
 
Onceler said:
You know what my favorite part of this thread is?

This is the exact same misrepresentation that Bill Clinton tried to smear Obama with. It's the same out-of-context quote.

Good company, WRL. Vincefostergate!
Click to expand...

Wow, its been years now since Hillary paid me those 200 G's to off that effing attorney. I done spent all the money on booze and sex long since...
[/outed]

Sorry, just couldn't hold it in any longer... I'll be down at the bunny ranch if anyone wants to subpoena me...
 
there are numerous instances prior to the invasion of obama saying its a bad idea. ALL ON VIDEO. This tact wont work.
 
Chapdog said:
there are numerous instances prior to the invasion of obama saying its a bad idea. ALL ON VIDEO. This tact wont work.
Click to expand...


I don't even really get what the point of it is coming from a McCainiac. Hillary used it to show that his position was much closer to hers than he has acknowledged. McCain, on the other hand, wanted to invade Iraq in 1998 so I don't see how attacking Obama for being far less war-hungry than McCain is a winning tactic.

What's the point?
 
Chapdog said:
there are numerous instances prior to the invasion of obama saying its a bad idea. ALL ON VIDEO. This tact wont work.
Click to expand...

Exactly, so what is he a flip flopper or a typical politician? One moment it's immoral, wrong, next, well I'm not certain how I would have voted, back to it's immoral and wrong. And when he made the Statements he was in the Senate, so he could have answered unequivocally no, instead he waffled on the issue.
 
WRL said:
Exactly, so what is he a flip flopper or a typical politician? One moment it's immoral, wrong, next, well I'm not certain how I would have voted, back to it's immoral and wrong. And when he made the Statements he was in the Senate, so he could have answered unequivocally no, instead he waffled on the issue.
Click to expand...

Yeah, look at this floor statement, it's pretty unequivocal:

Mr. President, there is no reason for the United States of America to remain in Iraq. The American people want them home, I believe that the majority of Congress wants them home, and to set an artificial date of March 31 or even February 1st, in my view, is not acceptable. The criteria should be to bring them home as rapidly and safely as possible. An evolution, which I think could be completed in a matter of weeks.

Mr. President, our continued military presence in Iraq allows another situation to arise which could then lead to the wounding, killing, or capture of the of American fighting men and women. We should do all in our power to avoid that. Date certain, Mr. President, are not the criteria here. What's the criteria and what should be the criteria is our immediate, orderly withdrawal from Iraq. And if we don't do that, and other Americans die, other Americans are wounded, other Americans are captured, because we stayed too long, longer than necessary, then I would say that the responsibilities for that lie with the Congress of the United States who did not exercise their authority under the Constitution of the United States and mandate that they be brought home as quickly and safely as possible.

But the mission which the American people supported and this Congress supported, in an overwhelming resolution, has been accomplished. The American people did not support the goals of nation-building, peacemaking, law and order and certainly not warlord funding. For us to get into nation-building, law and order, etc, I think is a tragic and terrible mistake.
Click to expand...
 
He's wrong about "matter of weeks", unless we are willing to leave behind a ton of very expensive equipment.
 
WRL said:
Exactly, so what is he a flip flopper or a typical politician? One moment it's immoral, wrong, next, well I'm not certain how I would have voted, back to it's immoral and wrong. And when he made the Statements he was in the Senate, so he could have answered unequivocally no, instead he waffled on the issue.
Click to expand...

If you read the full context of the conversation he was having, you would know that your statement above is dishonest at best. He has never flip-flopped or waivered on Iraq, and his own feelings toward the decision to invade.

It's really a grasp, WRL. You can't be this desperate, this early in the campaign.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top