Hillary Clinton: Obama "Missing In Action" During Key Security Decisions

CNN:

Hillary Clinton attempted to raise the stakes of the upcoming March 4 primaries Friday by forcefully calling into question Barack Obama's qualifications to become commander-in-chief.

At a rally in Waco, with more than two dozen military veterans and flag officers standing behind her, Clinton criticized Obama for being "missing in action" during key security decisions in the Senate and claimed that he had "no responsibility" when he gave an anti-war speech in 2002 as an Illinois state senator.

Read the whole story: CNN

Comments

[missionimpossible]

Saturday night live will never be the same. Who is missing in action?

[missionimpossible]

check that. data previously posted taken from 2/23/08 on dailyelectionpolls.com
The latest is

Democratic Candidate TX TX OH RI
Pollster Belo Zogby Zogby WPRI
Date 2/26-28 2/27-29 2/27-29 2/24-27
Hillary Clinton 46% 43% 45% 49%
Barack Obama 45% 45% 45% 40%
Mike Gravel - - 1% -
Other(vol.­) 8% 11% 9% 11%
Details Link Link Link Link

[BloodDAnna]

H. J. Res. 114 [107th]: Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Vote On Passage)
Senate Vote #237 --- Oct 11, 2002
Ayes: 77 (77%)
Nays: 23 (23%)

WOW so she did single handedly start a war!
The sad thing is that so many people just keep regurgitating that and I am pretty tired of it. If thats the worst thing they can say about Hillary Clinton then she has my vote.

[NoRepresentation]

My how the world turns, now Hillary truly is missing in action. Who is going to answer the phone now?

[darlamc]

www.politicalamnesia.blogspot.com

Where's Hillary? My source tells me....

[Tankan]

He wasn't missing in action when he was wise enough to vote against the misguided Iraq war!

So much for experience and good judgment Hillary!

[alchemymom]

So much for knowing the facts and not being led down a garden path by rhetoric. Obama wasn't "wise enough to vote against the misguided Iraq war!" Please try to get this fact. The vote you pillory Hillary for took place in 2002. Obama didn't come to the Senate until 2005. Do the math.

[Susan1968]

well said... alchemymom!

I'm glad to see Hillary supporters here this evening.

I felt like the only one earlier today.

:)

[Susan1968]

Hello??? Tankan???

Obama DID NOT VOTE against the war because ...

HE WAS NOT IN THE US SENATE YET.

Check your facts, Tankan!

I wonder how many Obama supporters have been led to beleive "Obama voted against the war."

[Wigglesworth]

DEAR VANESSA04 Rose-colored glasses? Moi? I was talking about political realities.

If you are so INSPIRED and so ready for CHANGE, why are you referring to Mr. Obama's opponent as "UNFAIR, BITCHY, EVIL, RACIST and MENOPAUSAL?" What enlightened person uses language like this? If his opponent had a penis, would you refer to him this way?

What do you mean there is NO REASON FOR HIM TO DEFEND HIS ACTIONS, ASSOCIATIONS OR HIS RECORD. ???

He is running for the office of President of the United States of America. He MUST not only be PREPARED to do this, he must be ABLE to do it.

What you have written is quite inconsistent with what you say you believe.

[vanessa04]

Wiggles - You obviously misunderstood my post. I was being sarcastic. Very, very sarcastic. Check my previous posts (click on "see profile").

My personal opinion is that Obama is the wrong person, in the wrong place, at the wrong time. And I am sick to death of hearing how he INSPIRES CHANGE and UNITY (many of his supporters seem to feel it necessary to cap these words) when, as far as I can see, his supporters for the most part are as divisive as a Karl Rove wet dream.

One thing is for sure: when the GOP get their teeth into him, there will be blood in the water. Obama has plenty of dirty laundry in his closet.

[Wigglesworth]

Phew! I am relieved to hear that you were spoofing.
It was alarmingly similiar to posts I have read elsewhere, and I'm afraid that THOSE were on the level. Obama supporters seem shocked that his past and his voting record are under scrutiny. It makes me suspect that for too many people it begins and ends with CHARISMA.
Which the guy undeniably has. And HOPE is powerful medicine.
I need to see the guy show that he is TOUGH ENOUGH to negotiate with the RUTHLESS BASTARDS of the world. They exist. They will shake his hand, look right into his eyes, smile in his face, sign on the dotted line...and double-cross him before he has even left the conference center.
He can't even turn and face Clinton when they are debating, preferring to look ever so busy with his legal pad and pen. If he can't look Mrs. Clinton in the eye, what is he going to do when we have given him the responsibility of protecting our nation and he is face to face with a real enemy? You can't "task it out" or appoint someone to manage that for you. You just gotta have it.

[enoughalready13]

This sums up Barack Obama:

Against war from the start?
Amazingly, he was not in the Senate at the time to vote for it !!
He has voted to support the war ever since !!
His only attack point against Hillary, and we are tired of hearing it over and over again !!

Experienced enough for the job?
Freshman Senator with less than 2 years experience !!
In that SHORT TIME, voted present 200 times on key decisions !!
Chairs a committee that 1 year later has yet to get going on anything !!
Switched his vote in IL Senate 5 times, making the vote count for both sides !!
Doesn't even know WHY we are in Iraq, nor has a clue about other major diplomatic positions !!

Wants transparency in government?
Burried Michelle Obama's Princeton thesis which outlines racism !!
Can't find 8 years worth of files - "they are lost" - while he was in IL Senate !!
Has yet to address or release information regarding Rezko dealings !!
Says he will renegotiate Nafta, and calls Canada behind our back to say it is a farse !!

Is not just flash, but substance too?
Answers "I agree with Senator Clinton" at every debate !!
Gets flustered when he has to talk about details on an issue !!
When asked what he would do Day 1, he said "look around and say this is cool" !!
Copied HRC's positions, responses, and now even her commercials !!
Cannot even reign in his wife who is proving more incompetent than he !!

I can go on and on about the under-qualified, misguided nature of the shammer... hopefully people will wake up before it is too late, put aside any personal feelings for HRC, and vote for her in the primaries because we desperately need a COMPETENT person in the White House!

Enough already - do the right thing - vote Hillary for President!

[JasonEverettMiller]

This sums up your misleading post:

Against war from the start?
Spoke out against it as he prepared to run for Senate.
Voted to support our troops since arriving at the senate, while insisting on realistic time-lines for withdrawal.
Hillary voted for the war and continued to defend that decision until very recently. Who is being inconsistent?

Experienced enough for the job?
Freshman Senator with 3 years experience in the US Senate and more than 8 years in the Illinois state senate.

No such thing as "present" votes in the US Senate.
Has admitted this deficiency with his sub-committee, but this hardly damning.
The rest of your "commentary" is too ignorant to address.

Wants transparency in government?
Not true about Michelle's thesis or his Illinois senate files. All of those are free to the public. The FBI has cleared him of any wrong-doing with Rezko.
Both Canada and Obama have denied that report. I will give him the benefit of the doubt.

Is not just flash, but substance too?
His long years of experience in both DC and Illinois informed his answers in this 52-minute, uncut interview with the editorial board of the SF Chronicle that was very illuminating, even for an Obama supporter: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?o=0&f=/c/a/2008/01/18/MNSNUH8DR.DTL.

This man has the PERFECT resume to be president - community organizer, civil rights attorney, constitutional professor, state legislator and US Senate, but not so much that he has been corrupted by the system.

Hillary is a severely compromised candidate for a number of reasons, not the least of which I don't agree with any of her stands on any issue nor do I think she has the ability to deliver on any of it. At best, she would have a divided Congress and a presidency devoid of progressive achievement - kind of like her husband's.

Perhaps it is you who needs to do more research. Face it. Hillary will never get elected with half of the country hating her going into the election. Not going to happen. So, what good does she do by supporting her own ego instead of trying to work with what could be a very progressive Obama administration?

[ChimpmasterDJ]

Interesting she should bring up "key security votes" in the Senate, because anyone who looks at hers could well think her voting orders were phoned in to her by Dick Cheney.

Her "key security votes", which are insults to the Constitution and to our collective intelligence, are one of the principal reasons that I both "reject and denounce" her candidacy for the Democratic Party's nomination.

[joje]

It's good that you agree with Sen Clinton about difference between denounce and
reject. It took several tries before Obama got it. So, how did she vote in those key security issues? Do you really know or making it up in support of Obama?

[SouthCentralDel]

"missing in action"? Hillary is such a secure person when she runs for office. Political calculation seems to be the job from day 1 with Hillary. The more I get to know her, the more I dislike, unfortunately.

[Wigglesworth]

Your comment about POLITICAL CALCULATION seems to me, right on the mark.
This is a major consideration when trying to judge Mrs. Clinton's character. And now is the time for US to do exactly that with Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama. Just as it is time for THEM to begin to reveal their records and deal with criticisms of their actions. Now is the time for them to explain WHO they are and WHAT they believe in, and WHY they believe it. It's as simple as that.

There is no denying the Clintonians are shrewd and calculating. (Just take a look at their demondog, James Snakehead Carville.) This has always bothered me. At its most extreme, it's like she is working to position herself, her husband, daughter, friends, associates and contributors to become the next Ruling Class. So that is a very strong negative perception of Mrs. Clinton, because there is not supposed to be Ruling Class in the United States of America. We , the People, are a republic of states which operate within a democratic system.

HE HAS HIS EYES ON THE PRIZE AND HIS HEAD TO THE SKY
I am watching Obama closely. He presents himself with dignity and grace. He is extremely tasteful and courteous. He is intelligent and good-natured. These are very old-fashioned qualities, not seen much in recent decades. They are a novelty.

HOPE has great power. Hope, in the end, is all we have to keep us going. Mr. Obama's confidence and idealism are inspiring. These are major considerations when judging his character.

HOW could the guy be as good as he seem--but so unwilling to engage in a dynamic political dialogue with Mrs. Clinton? In one-on-one debates, he sits with head bent, scribbling notes, appearing removed and unaffected by Mrs. Clinton...­..not looking at her. He rarely looks at her, but she looks right at him when she is speaking. Why can't he speak to her face to face, and ignore the camera?

We have a right to ask questions like this.

[Wigglesworth]

This is what is supposed to happen in a political contest, isn't it?
Each candidate shreds the hell out of each other's claims by researching the historical record and finding contradictions. And then they fight back and make counterclaims. From what I've been reading here and elsewhere, a lot of voters don't like this sort of confrontation.
But now is the time when we really get a chance to see what Obama and Clinton are made of, and it matters. People who want to be world leaders had better be able to defend their beliefs and records of action. Power politics is a multi-layered game of dirty pool, and viable candicates have eyes in the backs of their heads, and a pocketful of countermoves.

[ztower]

Correct you are Wig - it seems all about the quick hit, doesn't it?

Senator Clinton's charge, for example, would be much more powerful had she acutally voted on security matters herself. But she relies on voters not following up.

Project Vote Smart for provides a very nice detail of the voting records of all the Candidates. Very Revealing!

[vanessa04]

You have it all wrong, wigglesworth.

It's totally wrong for Hillary to shred, or even attempt to shred, Obama's claims about anything under the sun. It's unfair, dirty, bitchy, evil, racist, and menopausal.

But when Obama shreds Hillary's claims about any and everything, THAT"S a good thing. It shows his ability to CHANGE, INSPIRE, and LEAD. And it's all totally fair. Because Obama, you see, although a politician, is not actually, a politician. So there is no need for him to defend his actions, associations, or his record. And anyone who says he should be asked to is unfair, bitchy, evil, racist, and menopausal.

Please adjust your rose-colored glasses accordingly.

[Wigglesworth]

Oh dear, Vanessa04, I don't know where to start.

First of all, I am not the one wearing rose-colored glasses.

Secondly, if you are for CHANGE, INSPIRATION and LEADERSHIP, then you had better stop using language like UNFAIR, BITCHY, EVIL, RACIST and MENOPAUSAL to describe Mr. Obama's opponent. It is completely inconsistent with the what you say you believe.

Third, your comment that there is NO NEED FOR HIM TO DEFEND HIS ACTIONS, ASSOCIATIONS or his RECORD just leaves me breathless. What do you think this is all about? A Charisma Contest? American Political Idol?

Sheesh, it just occurred to me that maybe this is exactly what you think.

[ProgressiveNotLiberal]

How many thousands are dead because of you Hillary? Wanna take that vote back now?

[vanessa04]

She already said if she had one vote she could take back, that would be it.

Time to move on.

[KDH]

The senate voted 77-23 for the Iraq war. Even If Hillary had voted no, the resolution would have passed. Hillary was not for unilateral attack. The following is from her Senate floor speech, prior to her vote. You can read the whole speech at: http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html

" I will take the President at his word that he will try hard to pass a UN resolution and will seek to avoid war, if at all possible"

"My vote is not, however, a vote for any new doctrine of pre-emption, or for uni-lateralism, or for the arrogance of American power or purpose -- all of which carry grave dangers for our nation, for the rule of international law and for the peace and security of people throughout the world."

To blame her alone for the dead because of the Iraq war is inaccurate. Predicting that Bush would mis-use the war vote, and violate her trust, was a LUCKY GUESS by many. They had no facts to say he would do as he did. Where were those clues indicating he was going to break his word, prior to the war vote? Hillary is a politician, not a prophet.

[JasonEverettMiller]

Levin Amendment. Those are the only two words needed to refute this claim. No, she is not alone to blame for voting for the war, but without her support it might have been much harder to pass. Had she stood for principal instead political calculation we might have never gone into war. Had the Democrats gone to the people to shut this thing down, we would have never gone to war. There is ZERO excuse for that vote. I forgive all involved for making sure the troops stay funded, however. Both Hillary and Barack.

[oscarp]

It seems as if Hillary were the only person responsible for authorizing to go into war. Is she the only member of the US Senate? One vote does not give the president the right to go to war, yet Hillary is the only one being accused of taking us into war. Obama was not even close to the Senate those days, so he just gave a speech, bet he would have voted too, no!, let me rememeber this, he would have voted PRESET as he has done in many occasions. But his supporters are so blind that they can't see the truth that is just before them. By calling Hillary names, the rest of non Obama supporters can only understand where this country is going, you have to be ignorant and lack the minimum education to call her al the adjectives you have been calling her in posts. Once again, if you are the future of this country, I'd rather grab my things and get the heck out of here, this country will be an anarchy with people like you. Get an education, watch less American Idol and get a book on History and MANNERS first.

[ffa]

Now, this is a kitchen sink.