Clinton Camp: Obama Opposed The War, But What Has He Done Lately?

Clinton Camp: Obama Opposed The War, But What Has He Done Lately?

Huffington Post   |   March 17, 2008 10:16 AM


digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

The Clinton camp has issued a memo criticizing Obama's work on national security issues at the beginning of this week's 5th anniversary of the Iraq War:

To: Interested Parties From: The Clinton Campaign Date: March 17, 2008 RE: Just Words for Five Years


Over the last few weeks, the question of who is most ready to be Commander-in-Chief has rightfully dominated the presidential campaign. Who is ready to take the 3am call? Who has a record of action on national security issues? Who is ready to be president on day one?

Senator Clinton has worked to answer these questions by presenting her record to voters and enabling them to judge her based on the record she has amassed during her 35 years of public service - as a first lady who traveled to 82 countries and as a U.S. Senator who sits on the Armed Services Committee.

Lacking a comparable record, Senator Obama has premised his campaign on just words, most notably the resounding speech he delivered in October 2002 against the Iraq war.

But with the fifth anniversary of the invasion upon us, the onus is now on Senator Obama to demonstrate what he did to act on that 2002 speech when he got to the U.S. Senate.

Hillary has long argued that what matters in this campaign isn't what we've said but what we've done. Are words backed with action?

This week, the Clinton Campaign will continue to discuss which candidate is ready to be Commander-in-Chief on day one. We will urge Senator Obama to show that he hasn't simply amassed five years of words, that his record on ending the war is one of action.

Senator Obama gave an anti-Iraq speech in 2002 that he removed from his website in 2003, calling it "dated." When he got to the Senate, Senator Obama failed to take advantage of the opportunity provided by his new position and did little to turn his words into action until he became a White House candidate. In fact, he voted for over $300 billion in funds for the war and waited 18 months to speak on the Senate floor about Iraq, delivering a speech AGAINST the Kerry amendment that set a hard deadline for withdrawal.

When he took over the subcommittee that oversees NATO and Afghanistan and had a chance to follow up on the part of his 2002 speech that argued that Iraq diverted attention from Afghanistan, he failed to hold a single hearing. And as a candidate, he regularly touts a plan to set a hard end date for Iraq that has now been dismissed by one of his foreign policy advisers as just words.

Voters need to know whether they can count on their candidates to act on the ideas they tout on the stump. While Senator Clinton has acted on the words she uses on the campaign trail, Senator Obama's words aren't backed by action.

At the end of the day, the true test for a president is not the speeches he or she delivers - it's whether he or she delivers on the speeches.


 
Comments
141
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
- StephenS I'm a Fan of StephenS 4 fans permalink

When Obama gave his October 2002 speech against going to war with Iraq, it looks like Obama was expressing the view of about 25% to 40% of the American public.

A poll conducted in early November 2002 showed 26% of the American public opposed removing Saddam by force and another 12% had not yet made up their mind. 62% favored removing Saddam by force.

See the poll from the Pew Research Center for People and the Press

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=165

http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/165.pdf

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:04 PM on 03/18/2008
photo

Well, I'm glad Hillary took the opportunity on this solemn occasion to go on the attack in order to distract us from the fact that she enabled the existence of this solemn occasion. As Barack Obama has pointed out, when he got to the Senate, the bus was already in the ditch. He voted for susequent funding because it was the responsible thing to do. Meanwhile, what has Hillary done that is responsible? Vote for Bush to invade Iraq? Hold the Democratic party hostage with her "nominate me or I will bring you all down" style of campaigning? Doesn't sound like the kind of leader I want at all.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:06 AM on 03/18/2008

What has he done since? He certainly did not hold a meeting in 14 months on his "concern" of Afghanastan. And as a STATE Senator, Obama had NO security clearance to read anything to make any kind of sound judgement on Iraq. None. He could not vote. Which means he had no accountability in the event he had been wrong. He is on record later saying "had he had the information, he may have voted for the war. He doesn't know what he would have done". He never mentions any of this!
Anyone can make a speech! And that is exactly what Obama does. Makes speeches. Including using Kerry and others to back him up and endorse him...but wait, Kerry voted for the war, too. Words!
Once he was a US Senator, his voting record regarding Iraq is the same as Clinton's. And that "judgement" he speaks of and literally campaigns on seems to be a little "boneheaded". Rezko, Wright, Ayers... these poor judgement calls just keep coming.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 AM on 03/18/2008
- ErikW65 I'm a Fan of ErikW65 11 fans permalink

The Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs point is moot, because NATO's role in Afghanistan is a major issue that needs to be taken up by the full Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Joe Biden chairs, which did just this on 1-31-08.

You write, "Obama had no security clearance...to make any kind of sound judgement on Iraq." And yet, even without reading the classified NIE (which Hillary failed to read) he was able to say this before the vote to authorize force:

"I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda."

So Obama could see what was really going on and was not fooled by Bush, where Hillary failed to do her job and read the NIE, and claims to have been duped by a dope. And you expect people to vote for Hillary because of this? I don't think so.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 AM on 03/18/2008
- ErikW65 I'm a Fan of ErikW65 11 fans permalink

You write, "Obama had no security clearance...to make any kind of sound judgement on Iraq." And yet, even without reading the classified NIE (which Hillary failed to read) he was able to say this before the vote to authorize force: "I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda."

So Obama could see what was really going on and was not fooled by Bush, where Hillary failed to do her job and read the NIE. And you expect people to vote for Hillary because of this?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:52 PM on 03/18/2008

Answer the legitimate issues put on the table by the Clintons!! Looks like you Obamanuts are not able to do that so are trying to defelct them using right-wing smear tactics.

Note that Hillary is staying focused on the issue of the Iraq war not getting inti the other stuff that has put Obama in the hot water. She is campaigning and raising legit issues especially the issues that Obama has been using over an year to attack her. What is she supposed to do? Sit back? No!!! She has every right to ask what exactly Obama had been doing to stop the Iraq war.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 AM on 03/18/2008

bETWEEN THE CLLINTONS AND THE FOX MEDIA MOUTH PIECE FOR THE CLINTONS------------THIS HAS TURNED INTO A RACIAL ISSUE! THE FACT STANDS THE CLINTONS HAVE NOT COME OUT AGAINST FOX NEWS PLAYING THE RACE CARD OVER AND OVER AGAIN. SO WHEN YOU SAY OBAMA SHOULD HAVE SPOKE OUT AGAINST HIS PASTOR AND MOVEDFROM THE CHURCH BECAUSE OF HIS MINISTERS VIEW-------------------------------------THAN YOU TELL ME WHY YOU CAN SIT THERE AND SAY IT'S OK FOR THE CLINTONS TO USE THE FOX MEDIA TO SPREAD RACIAL DIVIDE IN OUR COUNTRY AND NOT SAY ANY THING! AFTER ALL, SHE WANTS TO BE COMMANDER AND CHIEF AND LEAD THE US. IN DOING THIS--------SHE'S SAYING SHE WILL ALLOW AND PROMOTE RACIAL TENSIONS AND DIVIDES AMONG THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN THE WORSE FORM THIER CAN BE --------------AND STAND BY AND LET IT HAPPEN! WHILE OTHER PEOPLE TRY TO FIGHT THE BATTLE----------AND NOT TO RETURN TO THE DAYS OF MARTIN LUTHER KING. IF YOU HOLD OBAMA ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS PASTOR -----YOU'D BETTER HOLD CLINTON ACCOUNTABLE FOR NOT TRYING TO PUT A STOP TO THE RACIAL TENSION AND DIVIDE FOX NEWS IS SPEWING! IT CUTS TWO WAYS-------------------------IS SHE READY TO BE COMMANDER AND CHIEF OF BOTH BLACK AND WHITE AMERICA--------------OR IS THIS JUST A SPEECH SHE'S MAKEING THAT SHE IS ACCUSEING THAT SPEECH'S IS ALL OBAMA HAS!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:54 AM on 03/18/2008
- mengwise36 I'm a Fan of mengwise36 3 fans permalink

What the hell is with all caps? Are you trying to convey that you are shouting the entire time? Chill out already.

First and foremost, Clinton was not the one who turn it into a race issue. She did not say LBJ accomplished things because he was white or MLK only inspired because he was black. Her statement was true but the Obama camp made it into a race issue. And let's be honest, Obama has enjoyed that divide since SC when 80-90% of black democratic voters have voted for him.

Second, Geraldine Ferraro's statement was also true. Because 80-90% of black democratic voters are voting for Obama, he is lucky. Are they voting for him because he is that much more qualified? Or because he is black? If it is not because he is black, then I will submit that he should win each race demographic at the same ratio. But he is not.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:48 PM on 03/18/2008

It appears as if Karl Rove is working as an adviser to the Clinton campaign.

Is this not what the Republicans did to John Kerry? Took one of his biggest strengths (service in the Viet Nam war) and turn it against him? Hillary appears to be doing the same thing. The more we watch and listen to the cunning and manipulative Hillary, the more it sounds like Rove channeling through her!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:59 AM on 03/18/2008
- mengwise36 I'm a Fan of mengwise36 3 fans permalink

Are you saying that Karl Rove is the only smart guy there is? Attacking your components strength is nothing new. Karl Rove was just one of the many who knows how to use it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 03/18/2008
- Denni I'm a Fan of Denni 12 fans permalink

How will Hillary "celebrate" the fifth anniversary of this disaster? Will she and Mccain get together and lament that their joined 'lifetimes of experience' served them poorly, as well as poorly served the fallen and wounded soldiers, their families, the innocent dead Iraqi, and the American public, in general? Somehow, I doubt it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:20 AM on 03/18/2008
- mengwise36 I'm a Fan of mengwise36 3 fans permalink

I just found out that John Kerry voted for the war just as Hillary did. Was his judgment called into question in 2004? If not, then why not? Could it be that in 2004 the war was NOT as bad as it was in 2005 or 2006? Could it be that the war BECAME wrong only AFTER it became a disaster? Could it be that the war was not a disaster but the post-war adventures was the disaster? Have you asked yourself all these questions?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:55 PM on 03/18/2008
- harriscrl3 I'm a Fan of harriscrl3 191 fans permalink

Hilary is either the person with the biggest chutzpa or she is an idiot. I mean GMAB whatever Obama does in the 5 years after Opposing the war CANNOT surpassed what she has done in VOTING for IT. Why should the American people trust you after a colossal disaster like giving Bush a Blank check to go to war. Then she has the nerve to turn it around and use it as a weapon to attack Obama. I hope the American people are NOT that dumb as to fall for Hilary's nonsens. When is she going to admit that she made a mistake. She is still claiming she didnt know that it was a vote for war puleeze

Carol

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:18 AM on 03/18/2008
- mengwise36 I'm a Fan of mengwise36 3 fans permalink

I did not know what chutzpa meant so I wikied it: "In Hebrew, chutzpah is used indignantly, to describe someone who has over-stepped the boundaries of accepted behavior with no shame." So you are just call her shameless or idiot. Not much of a choice if you ask me. But the word might mean something else to you.

Let me ask you one thing: Did you vote for John Kerry in 2004? Chances are you did since you seem to be a Democrat. But did you know that he voted FOR the war also?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:12 PM on 03/18/2008

Re: the "first lady who traveled to 82 countries and as a U.S. Senator who sits on the Armed Services Committee."
Impressive.
..."traveled to 82 countries"...
Vote for me, I'm a jetsetter! (How many trips extended beyond airports, palaces and cocktail parties with elites?)
..."a U.S. Senator who sits on the Armed Services Committee."...
Who didn't have the time or energy to so much as read the N.I.E. on Iraq for, y'know, that little thing she calls the "most important" and "crucial" and "toughest" vote of her career.

The woman is a neocon in a skirt, Joe Lieberman with a vagina.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:17 AM on 03/18/2008

And what has Clinton done? Did she not vote for the same things Obama did? Did she not also vote for war funding? What a hypocrite. Obama's subcommittee doesn't "oversee" Afghanistan. It oversees relations with Europe, with NATO falling under that jurisdiction, which gives him limited capacity to discuss strategy in Afghanistan. And he's only been in that position for the last year, which has been spent campaigning. A far cry from the YEARS Clinton has spent on the Armed Services Committee with a much more direct influence over military strategy. What has she done? I can't believe Obama's campaign isn't CRUSHING her over this absurd and blatant double-standard.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:09 AM on 03/18/2008

Hillary is way too kind to Senator Obama, she should have said he can tout 2002-2003-2004 he was against the war ..but where was he during those years.He didn't vote at all, why he wasn't eligible.as he wasn't in the US senate in 2002 when Hillary cast that vote he says was wrong. I don't know how Obama can say for sure how he would have voted when ,not being a US senator, he wasn't privy to US intelligence reports and Bush's telling of WMD like Dodd, Kerry, Daschle ,& Ben Menendez were ,these guys are senators and Obama endorsers who voted exactly as Hillary did in 2002. Mr Obama wasn't in the US senate in 2002 not 2003...and NO not even in 2004.........he wasn't even sworn in til Jan 2005....and then he did vote to fund the war in Iraq.....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:57 AM on 03/18/2008

Hillary is way too kind to Senator Obama, she should have said he can tout 2002-2003-2004 he was against the war ..but where was he during those years.He didn't vote at all, why he wasn't eligible.as he wasn't in the US senate in 2002 when Hillary cast that vote he says was wrong. I don't know how Obama can say for sure how he would have voted when ,not being a US senator, he wasn't privy to US intelligence reports and Bush's telling of WMD like Dodd, Kerry, Daschle ,& Ben Menendez were ,these guys are senators and Obama endorsers who voted exactly as Hillary did in 2002. Mr Obama wasn't in the US senate in 2002 not 2003...and NO not even in 2004.........he wasn't even sworn in til Jan 2005....and then he did fund the war in Iraq.....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:56 AM on 03/18/2008
- kiga I'm a Fan of kiga permalink

The real story is that Obama is not electable due to unpatriotic behaviors of his "spiritual" advisor, his wife and himself. so let's get to the business of journalism and write about how the Democrats will lose the White House if Obama is the nominee. When I hear Rve. Wright say, "God damn America," I see the next swiftboat 527 forming! The Republicans have won on dems being unpatriotic and will win again, the shoe fits!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:34 AM on 03/18/2008
- CarbonDate I'm a Fan of CarbonDate 6 fans permalink
photo

I like how this memo glosses over Hillary's active support of the war before she was running for President. Yeah, that never happened.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:29 AM on 03/18/2008

All this is beside the point. She voted for the war because it was politically pragmatic (what if the war turned out okay?--her career would have been over). She voted yes, and a lot of people are dead. I understand she and many other Dems were essentially blackmailed by the Bush administration. Okay. I can accept that, but then to attack Obama with this twisted logic???? She is appealing to uninformed people. Anyone who cannot see HRC's transparent strategy to "swiftboat" Obama is blind.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:31 AM on 03/18/2008

To Clinton Camp
What the Clintons didn't do when they were in the W/H for eight years was to avoid dealing with Osama bin Laden. They made no all-out effort to get him, had eight or ten opportunities. Their focus was not on our security nor on worldwide terrorism. They failed....and Osama bin Laden succeeded, was able to proceed with 9/11. That's what Barack Obama didn't do, he did not fail to protect us. He also was right on about the Iraq war: which would not have been possible had bin Laden been stopped while the Clintons own private agendas took priority.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:04 AM on 03/18/2008
- ErikW65 I'm a Fan of ErikW65 11 fans permalink

Wait a minute, can I suggest not going there? It is definitely not in Sen. Obama's best interest to have his supporters blaming Bill Clinton for 9/11!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 AM on 03/18/2008
- SCharb I'm a Fan of SCharb 3 fans permalink

Periodically bombing Iraq during the 90's didn't exactly help.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:06 AM on 03/18/2008

Blaming BC to be the cause IS actually a bit much, BUT I think it's important to go there. He may not have been the cause, but a STRONG contributor and antagonist when the entire story is read. CLEARLY, you know nothing about the relations, interaction, nor funding directly to Afghanistan AND Osama Bin Landen during the Clinton era... oh boy. You might want to dig in there....

additionally...

"Bush promised her. She believed him. That shows bad judgment. I've never heard the "no time to read it" excuse. That should come as some surprise to Sen. Bob Graham, who had time to read it and urge Hillary to do the same, because it contained reports that strongly dissented from the view that Iraq had WMD. "

I love how HRC is sometimes competent, at other times just a woman of her feelings and senses. HRC had access to the same reports, documents and briefs as every other congress member who was to vote on the war that year. Did she read them such that she could make a more informed decision? Clearly not. IS that absolutely alarming and frightening to me. YES!!!! This is a woman who claims that her 20+ as a first lady merit a presidential seat. WOW. SERIOUSLY -- this is HER argument, not mine. If that doesn't reek of entitlement, gross privilege misuse, and lack of REAL concern about America (as this presidency is more about just another notch in her belt), I don't know what does. And for the LAST time, HRC is a hawk -- unilateralism and inflexibility are her portion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:44 AM on 03/18/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next › Last » (5 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect