Once Quiet, Obama Now Charges Iran Bill 'Opened Door' To War

Sen. Barack Obama, D-IL, went on the attack today in a sharply worded editorial on the Lieberman-Kyl Iran Amendment that graced the pages of the New Hampshire Union-Leader. There were two targets of the Senator's ire: the first was the amendment itself, which accuses Iran of fighting "a proxy war against the Iraqi state and coalition forces in Iraq" and designates the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. The second was Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, for her vote in favor of the measure.

Obama charges that the amendment has "opened the door" to military action with Iran, and calls out Clinton as "the only Democratic presidential candidate to support this reckless amendment." He continues: "We do need to tighten sanctions on the Iranian regime... But this must be done separately from any unnecessary saber-rattling... Above all, it must be done through tough and direct diplomacy with Iran, which I have supported, and which Sen. Clinton has called 'naive and irresponsible.'"

Despite his condemnation for Lieberman-Kyl, Obama didn't vote against it. He didn't vote at all. Both he and Sen. John McCain, R-AZ, were on the campaign trail when Majority Leader Harry Reid allowed the amendment to hit the Senate floor (on relatively short notice).

But even prior to the amendment's passage, the Huffington Post has learned, Obama didn't weigh in. According to a high-ranking Hill staffer, "he wasn't there at all," neither during debate over the measure nor when the Democratic caucus purged two provisions that, among other things, would have declared prudent the "use of all instruments of United States national power in Iraq... with respect to the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Obama also didn't mention the amendment during the most recent Democratic presidential debate despite being asked two questions specifically about Iran. The debate was on Sept 26, the day the measure was approved.

Obama's camp dismissed the significance of this "late-to-the-party" critique.

"[The Senator] strongly differs with Senator Clinton and others supporting the amendment on Iran and he will continue to speak out because he believes the way to achieve diplomacy is to actually pursue it--which is what he would do as president," his spokesperson Jen Psaki, told the Huffington Post.

But at least one critic of the Lieberman-Kyl amendment said that the Senator's silence during the lead up to the vote and when the vote took place hurts his credibility on the issue.

"In theory I would agree with what Obama says [in the Union Leader]," John Isaacs, Executive Director of Council for a Livable World, told the Huffington Post. "But he has the same problem with this vote as with his criticism of his 2002 vote authorizing Bush to use force in Iraq: it would have been easier for him to lob this criticism if he had been there to vote against the amendment."

Comments

[caltech]

Obama is desperate. He didn’t even show up to vote on the Iranian National Guard Issue just as he was not in the senate to vote on the Iraq war. He has no claim on judgment when he doesn’t have the guts show up to vote or have the length of time in the senate to have voted on important issues. He continues to display his inexperience with the issues as well as campaigning. He’s a looser going down.

[genmalia]

The reason for his not being there for the vote has long-since been established. Where have you been?

[JimR]

Reid took the amendment off the floor and Obama was under the impression it would not be reintroduced until the following week, so he left for New Hampshire. Reid reintroduced the amendment the next day.

And if you are going to call him a "loser," at least learn how to spell it. One "o."

[thegaygardener]

Keep Swinging Barak! Maybe HRC was able to be in D.C. to make the vote because one of her Billionaire Lobbyist backers lets her use their plane! Or maybe her good buddy, RUPERT MURDOCH flew her back for the vote!
Has Senator Clinton gotten ONE War Vote right?
Nope! We need CHANGE people. And Hillary ain't it.

[lawyeredup]

thegayg; Nonsense! I am still waiting for a Hillary hater to tell why she's been hated. My guess is because of the 50 million dollar job the right wing neo-con & the phamarceutical company did on her & Bill. What else is there? She's got my vote..... and I, am a black man.

[AeneasAnnai]

Well as one black man to another, wtf is wrong with you?

Obama 08

[JimR]

Some think she's too cozy with corporate America. And they are right:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/berman

[TurnThePageGA]

Well as far as this Black Man is concerned she can go to....the Lake of Fire. I ain't no Naderite and am not a member of that "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy". I supported Wesley Clark last time around and with his kissing up to her for VP or Secretary of Defence he can join her.

FYI. I have been vehemently against this war for all the reasons that Barack indicated back in 2002. It has been used by this President and Karl Rove for political reasons. One of the victims was an Honorable Senator from my state. What he has suffered pales in comparison to those who have paid the ultimate price for this foreign policy fiasco while the gentile Senator "Manned Up" and voted to give the President the authority to start this fiasco. She had access to more information than I had. The head of Intelligence Committee, Senator Graham, pleaded with her an other senators to read this information. She claims she did not read it nor did her staff. The other candidates, Edwards, Biden, and Dodd, who voted like she did have had the decency to acknowledged that the vote giving the butthole the authority to go to war in 2002 was a mistake. Either she was Naive or Just had bad judgement. More likely she was "playing the game". And the reason she won't acknowledge the mistake is because she is "playing the game". Some of us are sick and tired of the politics as usual that she is being high marks for playing. The American People are losing while she is "Playing The Game". Soldiers are dying while she is "Playing The Game". Innocent Iraquis are dying while she is "Playing The Game". Billions of dollars are being wasted on this fiasco while she is "Playing The Game". She has stated that this is President Bush's War. Well until you do the decent thing and admit your mistake it is Senator Clinton's War. Senator's Edwards, Biden, and Dodd have done the decent thing. Have you no Decency Senator Clinton?

[kellygrrrl]

I wish Obama and Edwards would face the reality that they cancel each other out of the equation.
If they could team up now, and one of them take the passenger seat, and announce that they are running as a team they could take the primary.

I know it's highly unlikely that this will happen,
but that is my hope.

[lawyeredup]

Kellygr; u're right! but what will the state of our country looked like with those two? If true change is what we went, our best chance is to elect Hillary. there is no doubt she will be our own iron lady -- with knowledge and perseverance and, world leaders will definitely respected her... And the last time I checked, it is better to be respected than to be feared. More than I can say for the lots of them out there.

[detwob]

Do you really want "our own iron lady"??

That's what Margaret Thatcher was called. Wasn't Reagan (and BushBush) enough for you?

And although I agree with your basic idea that Hillary is conservative, I don't think she is quite Thatcher conservative.

After all, Thatcher was also called "Attila the Hen"

[GreatFutureForAll]

"If true change is what we went, our best chance is to elect Hillary."

The only thing Hillary Clinton is going to change is decrease the number of Democrats in the House and the Senate.

Face it: Gridlock would reign for the next four years if Hillary ran things. Afterwards, a Republican would win in 2012.

Outside of the Democratic party, people cannot stand her. She will divide the country even more than it is today.

I'm a lifelong Democrat. And even I don't like her cause she supports the surge and walks lock-step with Bush in the Middle East.

Lieberman was a Democrat, too. But, just like with Hillary, I'd never vote for him to be president of the United States because he's nuts when it comes to foreign policy.

Just being a Democrat is NOT ENOUGH.

[jeffmorgan]

As a person who hasn't sold my soul to one party or another, I have a difficult time understanding how Hillary would be considered our best chance for true change.

All the Dems are fairly lined up on the party platform, and the party platform will be a big change from the Republican one... so when we compare Dems, those aren't the issue.

This isn't the 90's anymore. When the cold war ended, when information tech was just booming and largely in the US, when we blissfully ignored global warming and put it off, when we didn't have a foreign policy disaster to recover from.

I worry that Clinton would try to do things like they were done in the 90's inappropriately.

By the way, does anyone here know what percentage of today's heads of state were around during the Clinton administration?

[watchingthings]

I don't think the present twerp in the W.H.. is feared as much worldwide as he is hated for his lying and hurting innocent people. The world is tired of listening to this "leader". When he talks to children, they can't understand his babbling. When he babbles to adults, nobody can't figure out what he's talking about. Wheather he's about to attack another country or just reciting from "my pet goat"

[Chocolate2008]

In case you are wondering where all the Obama Supporters are.

We're out canvassing while all you little Trailer Trash Racist POS's are sitting up here writing shet in Yo Mamas basement.

IOWA!

[lawyeredup]

Choco; I am glad you are for Obama!. Wow!!!!.

[detwob]

Do trailers have basements?
&
If I don't support Obama does that mean I am racist?

[Zhonni]

Offcourse not.

[GreatFutureForAll]

"If I don't support Obama does that mean I am racist?"

Stupid? Yes. Racist? No.

[jeffmorgan]

But if you don't like Hillary you're a sexist!

joking,
kinda

[Bleedingroseca]

The "Iran Counter-Pr­oliferatio­n Act of 2007," which Obama cosponsored on April 24, 2007, states clearly that:

"The Secretary of State should designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) and the Secretary of the Treasury should place the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists under Executive Order 13224 (66 Fed. Reg. 186; relating to blocking property and prohibiting transactions with persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism)­."

[MPeter]

You have no idea what the word standing even means, do you? Obama has all the credibility in the world on thi isue. He is the only one qualified to say what he is saying about Iran and the warmongers in the HRC camp.

[lawyeredup]

MP; what actually qualifies Obama for what he's say? Plzzzz, don't tell me is because you happen to agreed with his point of view --not good enough... okay?

[jeffmorgan]

People who call themselves experts that are always wrong, can't be called experts anymore.

Is there anything that suggests Hillary is right?

[Bleedingroseca]

There is only one problem with Obama going after Clinton on this vote, and it isn't really because he ducked it, although that is huge.

It is because in April he co-sponsored a bill that did almost the very same thing.

The "Iran Counter-Pr­oliferatio­n Act of 2007," which Obama cosponsored on April 24, 2007, states clearly that:

"The Secretary of State should designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards as a Foreign Terrorist Organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189) and the Secretary of the Treasury should place the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists under Executive Order 13224 (66 Fed. Reg. 186; relating to blocking property and prohibiting transactions with persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support terrorism)­."

[SensibleAmerican]

Where have you been all this time BleedingRC!!!???!!! We need more people like you commenting here!!! Thanks and post more ...

[peaceandfreedom]

Oh Senseless,

"We need more people like you commenting here!!!" Cuz I'm lonely and have no one to play with, so maybe you can come over my house for milk and cookies and play my new X Box game, ROVETROLL, CUZ it's a 1st person shooting game where we can blast the hell out of the truth, character assassinate those who dispute us, and blow enough smoke in the air to confuse Bob Marley!!!

[jeffmorgan]

The designation of the IRG as a foreign terrorist organization isn't what actually is opening the door, and isn't what Obama is criticizing.

But hey if pretending Obama says that feels good, do it!

[SiskoKid]

This coming from the man who didn't vote on it. He also missed the MoveOn.org vote.

He has to put his votes where his mouth is or he has to STFU.

[JimR]

The MoveOn.org vote was a complete farce and waste of everybody's time and you know it. Here's what Obama had to say:

"It's precisely this kind of political game-playing that makes most Americans cynical about Washington's ability to solve America's problems. By not casting a vote, I registered my protest against this empty politics."

Bravo!

[SiskoKid]

His job is to vote on things in the Senate. Yes, not all of them are worth their time, but it's their job.

I'm glad he avoids both the large and small votes. Really reflects well on his work.

Bravo to his BS work ethic.

[peaceandfreedom]

JimR--

Why is that so hard for people to understand?

The man took a position.

That's more than most of them!

[klondiker]

I'm sorry. Obama has absolutely NO standing here to criticize Hillary.

How convenient that he accidently misses all the votes on which a controversial position needs to be taken!

And this is not an isolated event. He's missed something like 3 times the number of votes that Hillary has missed.

Oh, and by the way, if he's so concerned about war with Iran, how about co-sponsoring Webb's bill?

[Zhonni]

WHY OBAMA HAS MISSED MORE VOTES THAN HILLARY

1) Obama is not a spouse of a former President. Which makes him less known.

2) Clinton is a household name and is leading by double digits which allows her some leisure time. Poor Obama has to run from state to state to get more name recognition.

A friend of mine thought he was Harold Ford. She couldn't even remember Harold Ford. The conversation went like this, "em, em, is that Haro, Harod", you mean Harold Ford? I interjected. "Ya that is Harold Ford" No, he isn't, that is Barrack Obama and he is running for President. "Oh! I never heard of him."

The above conversation took place during the ABC sponsored debate.


If Obama was a household name and is up by double digits, believe me, he would spend more time in Washington than in other states trying to introduce himself to American voters.

[OhPlease2007]

Yes, Obama is correct, but lets remember history accurately, shall we?; John Edwards took this position BEFORE Obama. It doesn't matter, it is the correct stance; NO candidate has a 'patent' on this correct position. Going to war with Iran based upon BOGUS intel will be disastrous for our credibility worldwide; Democrats that voted 'yes' on this resolution to help the neocons build support for a bogus preemptive attack on Iran should ALL be ASHAMED of themselves!

[SensibleAmerican]

The Kyl-Lieberman is non binding and frankly much ado about nothing, which by the way is the same as the Nader-herd­-far-left'­s agenda! Beat a dead horse because they have nothing better do!

As for Barack Hussein, I thought he was purely fluff, which he is. But now he cannot even take a stand and runs away from MoveOn and such votes! It's worse than fluff, it's worse than hot air: it is pure baloney! A lot of people are waking up to this fact ...

[OhPlease2007]

"Barack Hussein" ... another Ann Coulterism talking point faxed directly to you from the Rush Limbaugh drug-addict syndicate?

The logic in your first paragraph is off; par for the course for most of your comments. However, I agree 'somewhat' with your second paragraph; in my opinion, when the pressure gets too hot for Obama, he folds, and that is why I will not vote for him in the primary. But 'if' Obama wins the Dem nomination, I WILL seriously consider voting for him.

Having expressed all of this, at this critical juncture, Democrats cannot afford to lend ANY kind of perceived support to the war-criminal war-profiting neocons who are looking for any bogus reason to preemptively attack Iran. So, you bet, ... I DO support "Barack Obama" in this position.

[joebhed]

Actually, it is you who is beating the Nader-herd, far, radical, extreme left, socialist dead horse here.
It's you who are the joke.
This is a relevant issue.
Let us talk about it, please, without the name calling wedge-driving BS.
Of course, those criticizing Barak for his two-facedness are right on. But, as if Hillary is better because she DID vote for the Resolution? Well, that is a farce.

This Resolution is obviously the opposite of what you say it is. It is much to do about everything.
If you are in favor of peace, that is.

And, we will still be here debating this issue and all the others, after you DLCers have landed the Hillbag nomination.
This Resolution marks a sovereign nation's army as a terrorist organization. That's wrong.
That's what the Resolution does.
It has been handily criticized internationally as unfounded grandstanding.
But the Dem pollsters tell the candidates that they CANNOT afford to be soft on terrorism.
So scapegoat Iran.
This resolution caused the Iran legislature to pass an equivalent measure against us.
Escalation.
Yeah, that's good politics.
For some reason, you brain-dead party loyalists just don't get it.
It is the issues that are important.
Not the candidates.
You are exactly the reason why the Democratic PARTY really doesn't matter anymore.

[rmbell]

The vote was pulled from the docket by Harry Reid so Obama left D.C. to campaign in New Hampshire. Shortly after, Reid put the amendment back on the floor for a vote.

Though, it is unfortunate that he was able to voice his dissent from the floor, he did put out a statement against the amendment in short order. Obama certainly has a right to make clear that Senator Clinton is again operating under the flawed idea that we can trust President Bush.

[SensibleAmerican]

RMB: you can cut 'n' paste this same excuse for Barack Hussein all over the board but he has ran away from a lot of votes! When you are just fluff, you cannot blame it on Harry Reid or anyone else but on your own shenanigans!

The truth shall set you free!!!

[TurnThePageGA]

The truth is you nor anyone in this blog has challenged this "cut and paste" with any facts. I have not researched it, but if you have any facts I am willing to listen (please provide links when you provide). And if it did not happen that way and you have facts I will also criticize the Senator.

[peaceandfreedom]

rmbell--

It's funny how all this becomes a game of "he said, she said," isn't it? And the truth and facts take a back seat.

Kerry was a war hero, Gore did not claim to invent the internet, hillary really doesn't cackle, and Obama was clear from the get go about what transpired on that bill. Facts.

There are those here, however, who choose to take the easy way of the MSM and the screaming lead line--whether true or not--and repeat it until enough folks experience brain fatigue that the truth is shouted down.

Don't let them! As nolalily says below,the populace is all to willing to listen to liars. Our bad, I guess, but to me it means we just need to turn up the volume on the truth until people listen.

When posters cut and paste from the Republican Committee handbook, we just need to have a big ole can of whiteout on hand.

PS--Senseless, the proper verb form is "he has run..." LOL

[amerdiaspora]

TRUE HE DID NOT VOTE
HOWEVER THAT GOP LITE NUMB SKULL DID AND THAT IS A FACT!

[LiberalBeliever]

Barack Obama hasn't got a leg to stand on in this criticism he is waging against Senator Clinton. He misses the vote entirely and then has the nerve to attack her for her vote? Give us a break Obama. You are beginning to sound like a fool.
A desperate one at that.

[DonkeySerenade]

They are flip sides of the same coin - not voting is a vote for future attack - and voting yes is a vote for future attack. They are one and the same on this issue and Barack is barking up the wrong tree. His skirts are just as dirty as hers. And that is damn dirty.

[JimR]

He never got the chance to vote, as Harry Reid suddenly put the bill amendment back on the floor after Obama had already left for New Hampshire.

In 2002, Obama also took the then-unpopular stance of speaking out against a war with Iraq, while Hillary Clinton and John Edwards were voting to authorize it.

[nolalily]

That's right.

At the rate we're going we'll never elect a decent President. The populace is all to willing to lie or listen to liars.

[lawyeredup]

Ya rite!... He never got the "CHANCE" to vote?. And speaking out and being there are definately two different thing.