ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC Political Researcher



Hillary charges Obama agreed with Bush

Posted: Saturday, December 22, 2007 4:45 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: , ,


From NBC/NJ’s Mike Memoli
MILFORD, N.H. -- Clinton today said it was “silly” of Obama to ask why top foreign policy officials from her husband’s administration were now supporting him, and said the campaign shouldn’t be based on lists.

Clinton, after shaking some hands and posing for pictures with patrons of the River House Café, stopped to take questions from reporters and was asked to respond to Obama’s claims of greater support from Clinton administration figures.

“Obviously we demonstrated that that wasn’t accurate," Clinton said, alluding to a list produced by the campaign last night, which First Read reported on earlier. "But really that’s not the point. You can have lists of people who are advising you but what matters is who’s sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office, and who’s ready to be president on Day One.”

Obama had asked rhetorically why “the national security advisor, the secretary of the navy for Bill Clinton, the assistant secretary of state for Bill Clinton” had endorsed him. “I just think that it’s kind of a silly question,” Clinton responded today. “I mean, honestly it’s a silly question. We have hundreds of people’s support. … This is not a campaign between lists of advisers. This is a campaign between real people with experience and qualifications to be president on Day One.”

Clinton continued to emphasize that the real debate for voters should be which candidate, and not which policy team, was most qualified. “We cannot predict every challenge and every crisis that will come to the attention of our president, and therefore it’s important to pick the person who can make the best decisions,” she said. “When the door closes, and you’re having to make those difficult decisions that presidents confront every day, ultimately there is no adviser you can count on. You have to make the decision and live with the consequences.”

Obama had said the reason so many former Clinton advisers were backing him was based on his opposition to the Iraq war and the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Clinton countered that their records on Iraq are closer than Obama would have voters believe.

“He wasn’t in the Congress at the time,” she said, “and when he was running for the Senate, he said that he basically agreed with George Bush’s policy and conduct of the war. When he came to the Senate he voted to support it. So I think that once you’re in a position of responsibility and you actually have to be counted by what you do or what you look for, his record is the same as many of us.”

Clinton added that based on her experience “during the previous administration” and on the Senate Armed Forces Committee that she is “in a very good position to withdraw our troops in a safe, responsible way, starting as soon as possible.”

The Obama campaign responded to Clinton’s comments in an e-mailed statement by again highlighting the Iran vote. “If Senator Clinton wants to make this election about who's made the best decisions on foreign policy, that's a comparison we're happy to make since Barack Obama is the only major candidate who opposed the war in Iraq and refused to give George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran.”

The Milford stop was the second for Clinton today. After speaking with reporters, she went outside to greet a throng of supporters who had been pressing against the café’s windows taking pictures. As she worked her way through the crowd, Clinton distributed candy canes and wished voters a merry Christmas.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

I am so sick of Obama's "I didn't vote to go to war" defense mechanism. He wasn't in the senate at the time. Things look alot different when you're in the Hot Seat. Was he in New York on 9/11? Was he there in the aftermath? No he was not. Hillary however was there, she was at ground zero, she saw firsthand what had happened, it's alot different seeing that up close in person rather than images on TV.
Let us face it, the US of A is NOT ready for a black cheif of staff.  Obama really should have waited for another four years and then go for it.  He is just too inexperienced and he is also getting to be like the rest of them .........
obama nor any thinking person did not have to be in congress on 911 to know Iraq had nothing to do with 911 and all the reasons for this war were based on LIES which hillary clinton went along with wholeheartedly. she did not critisize bush at all and voted with him every time. therefore, she can not get my vote!!!SHE SUPPORTED GEORGE BUSH ON EVERY VOTE!!!EVERY VOTE!!!!she gambled for the republican support to win the presidency,but alienated her democratic base. now the republicans still can't stand her and will not vote for her and the democratic base sees her for what she is!!!!its her own fault-voting with bush, she is as much to blame as bush is!!!!
But it is true, he didn't vote for the war. HIllary flip-flopped so much about the license deal.  She was caught in a lie on National t.v. then tried to lie out of it. Both Edwards and Obama called her on it, then Bubba left the brothel long enough to try to defend her.
And so "getting to be like the rest of them" means 'experienced' and ready to lead lobbyists and special interests rather than America?  I think Barack Obama will do. Thank you.
Another classic Right-Wing frame.  Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.  Wake Up!! HRC's judgment is predicated on polls.  If you actually took the time to objectively explore the past maybe you'd have a better grasp of where the country should go.  What did HRC learn from her 2002 War Vote?  That Iran's Revolutionary National Guard is now a terrorist group?  Thanks for that insight Dick Cheney.  Senator Obama accurately predicted the mess in Iraq in a prescient 2002 speech.  If you want someone that can't learn from past failures or continually shades the truth then vote for the Clinton dynasty.
"Hillary however was there, she was at ground zero..." Tareli

HILLARY NEVER EVEN READ THE INTELLIGENCE REPORTS!, about Iraq, who wants a president like that, that just follows what is popular all the time.

What do we want?...CHANGE
When do we want it?...NOW

OBAMA 08
Tareli -- Despite what Hillary claimed in 2002, there is absolutely no connection between 9/11 and Iraq.  Why would "seeing firsthand what had happened" on 9/11 in any way inform your decision making regarding Iraq?  If these two things are linked for Hillary than she shouldn't be in charge of our foreign policy.
He keeps touting how he didn't vote on naming the Iranian Guard a terrorist group and that was only because he was busy on the campaign trail trying to get nominated! WTF! What are his priorities?  What a freakin' hypocrite - how can he expect Amercian people to believe this rhetoric?  

I'll stick with a proven leader - Hillary Clinton '08
Senator Clinton claims that her and Senator Obama's positions on Iraq are "closer than Obama would have voters believe.".  Well all I have to do is look at what they both had to say on the eve of the vote to Authorize Military Force:

Senator Obama: "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." 10/02/02

Senator Clinton: "This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction.

And perhaps my decision is influenced by my eight years of experience on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue in the White House watching my husband deal with serious challenges to our nation. I want this President, or any future President, to be in the strongest possible position to lead our country in the United Nations or in war." 10/10/02

Senator Clinton had even more information available to her than then state senator Obama, and she still got the most important foreign policy decision of a generation WRONG! Now she's asking us to "trust her experience"?  Give me a break!  
They all sound negative-how about some poitive statements! I belevie the American people are are sick and tired of Politics as usual.
juicy lucy -- Has Obama committed to having a black Chief of Staff?  I haven't heard that before.  We currently have a black Secretary of State, which is a much more high profile position than White House Chief of Staff, so I wouldn't worry about it; Obama's potential chief of staff choice won't be weighing too heavily on the minds of voters.
Hillary is so experienced.  Obama lacks the gravitas needed in these difficult times.  The choice is clear:  America needs Hillary Clinton.
obama ,please stop whinning. grow up!
Juicy Lucy you're pretty ignorant. Obama is going to be commander and chief. And, it's not about his color. It's about his character, commitment and qualifications. He will be the next President.

Obama 08'
Obama is the only candidate that hasn't marched lockstep with the Bush administration. Clinton likes to keep bringing up that Obama "wasn't in the Senate at the time" as if the royals in the senate are the only decision makers who's decisions have any clout.
Obama was at the time, running for the U.S. Senate against primary opponents who were backed by millions of dollars. He was publicly making the case against a "dumb war" while Bush had a 90% approval rating, and the Dems in the Senate, Clinton and Edwards, were too cowardly to vote against Bush. Clinton talks about judgement, but she didn't even have the judgement to read the damn NIE from 2002 with the dissenting opinions against the case for military action in IRAQ, and the dissenting opinions that exposed Bush's claims of WMD in Iraq as being bogus.
Obama didn't have access to the classified dissent in the 2002 NIE, yet he had the foresight and judgement to propheticly predict what would happen if the United States followed Bush and the NeoCon cabal of Rumsfeld and Cheney into an illegal, unilatteral war in Iraq.
Instead of being spun by the Clinton/Bush appologists,
Why don't people hear take a look at these videos of exactly what Clinton, Edwards, and Obama were saying about going into Iraq in 2002:
Clinton:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSu0zXCR9sE
Edwards:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY6BZgkI0kI
Obama:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUV69LZbCNQ
The choice is yours America. Judgement and level headed foresight and honesty are the two most important characteristics of a Presidential Candidate.
Even if you really want to talk about experiance,
It is OUR experiance with the results of Clinton and Edwards experiance that should really count. How can we vote for two people that have cost us a trillion dollars, 4000 American Lives, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives?
please, obama proposed his own bill labeling the iranian guards "terrorists".
yet he missed the bill the vote on a bill that stated the exact same thing.

he simplly doesn't show up to work
I think people are on board with Obama simply because Oprah came into the picture.  Let's remember that if we get Hillary-we also get Bill- who kept this country running like a well-oiled machine. I hate it when someone changes religious convictions to suit the moment. Obama keeps harping on the fact that Hillary voted for the war.  He would have, too, if he had been in Congress then-even though he will deny it.    
Tareli, thats a bit of a leap to say that because obama wasn't in new york on 9/11, he couldn't feel the real impact and decided not to go to war. if you read speeches from 2002, he predicted nearly every single wrong turn the iraq war has taken, including the US becoming bogged down in sectarian violence that would not be fixed with guns (hint to his insight of the outside world, pretty sure he was a bit more educated about iraq and islamic regions in general compared to GWB... or clinton for that matter). not only that, he supported (right after 9/11), and still supports military operations in afghanistan.

I am sick and tired of hillary clinton's "ready from day one" rhetoric. the president is a unique job that does require on the job training, even if you were first lady. you think laura bush is ready to be president?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/opinion/18brooks.html?hp

check this out, its just an opinion, but one articulated well.
Juicy Lucy, if that is your real name!
We aren't ready for a black president, or are you not ready for a black president?  Is it really that he should have waited four years, or is it "how dare he threaten Hillary's ambitions!"?  Honest questions

Tareli,
I am pretty sure Hillary was in D.C. when 9/11 happened.  I am pretty sure that Obama, too, visited Ground Zero.   All of that is without consequence to the point.
Now of course, we've heard before that Obama wasn't in the senate at the time of the vote for going to war with Iraw.   He was in the Illinois state senate, a state which greatly supported the war.  He gained nothing by voicing his opposition to the war at a time when so few were against it, he put himself at risk.  Nonetheless, he voiced his opposition.. and that's a documented fact.
As for it being a defense mechanism, it's an honest point.  He may have had limited foreign policy experience, but he had enough judgment to know what so many of us, myself included, didn't even stop to consider.  He wouldn't need to say something to his defense if Hillary's campaign didn't constantly slander him.

Hillary Clinton, cut from above, speaking of Barack Obama:
“He wasn’t in the Congress at the time,” she said, “and when he was running for the Senate, he said that he basically agreed with George Bush’s policy and conduct of the war. "

YouTube the debates between Obama and Alan Keyes.  Your candidate is outright lying to the American people.
Criticize the Iraq vote when he wasn't there to cast one.  Criticize the Iran vote when he wasn't there to cast one.  All the preasent votes on controversial issues in the State Senate.  

If you don't want to vote, don't vote, but don't go criticizing people who do stand up for their convictions and accept the responsibility for their action.

What a coward.  Won't take a stand himself, but can't wait to popint fingers at people who do.
Oh please are you guys forgeting that OBAMA DIDN'T SHOW UP TO MAKE THE IRAN VOTE, BUT CO-SPONOSORED THE SAME EXACT BILL DESIGNATING THE IRANIAN NATIONAL GUARD A TERRORISTS ORGANIZATION

PAKISTAN ALREADY HATES THEM BECASUE HE IMPLIED HE WOULD INVADE THEM

AND OBAMA VOTED IN FAVOR OF REAUTHORIZING THE PATRIOT ACT.. AMERICANS ARE DOING A DISSERCIVE TO THIS COUNTRY BY ELECTING THIS FAKE INTO OFFICE




VOTE FOR ANOYONE BUT THE FAKE OBAMA THAT HAS TAKEN MILLIONS FROM LOBBYISTS

PAUL AND KUCINICH WERE ACTUALLY THE ONLY TWO CANDIDATES TO VOTE AGAINST THE WAR IN IRAQ
Wait a minute! Mrs. Clinton's now 'borrowing' Obama's word 'silly'. Tsk. Tsk. Tsk to Mrs. Clinton. She's pathetic, afraid to be beaten, and at best can only hope to be as qualified as Obama. Mrs. Clinton's just not a good looser.

It's silly for Mrs. Clinton to say that this campaign shouldn't be based upon lists. If she's telling the truth then she should apologize to Obama for her baseless accusations listing 146 times that he allegedly didn't vote - out of possibly 4,000 times. Mrs. Clinton's unbelievable! She's absurd and hypocritical!!!!

It's silly for Mrs. Clinton to think she's more experienced than Obama. Oh! Wait a minute, she must mean her negative experiences! They include the recent distortions about Obama's senate voting record, her untrustworthiness, her inability to connect with voters, her on-going lack of accountability on her first Iraq War vote, her lack of good judgement about the Iraq War vote, her intransigence with politicians over health-care reform, her life-long connections to corrupt people, her questionable ethics, the infidelities of her husband, her inability to unite people on health-care reform, and her meanness. So yes, Mrs. Clinton's got lots of experience in negative ways.

Mrs. Clinton is not the best candidate for America. trustworthy. She isn't trustworthy, she is mean-spirited, dishonest, and divisive.

Barack Obama is the best candidate for America. He's the person we can trust. He's honest, authentic, and the right person to serve America!!!

Go, Obama!!!!


Honestly, l read some silly comments that make my head spin in disbelief.  There were many enlightened citizens outside the government who opposed the preemptive strike against Iraq.  Opposition to the war is not limited to those who had the privilege to vote for or against.  If the then chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, former Senator Bob Graham, voted against authorization of preemptive strike against Iraq, those who voted should tell us what they read that Graham missed.  Please read what Bob Graham wrote in Washington Post for enlightenment.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/18/AR2005111802397.html

Furthermore, if many foreign policy experts who worked under President Clinton’s administration decided to back Senator Obama, it means they have confidence him and distrust in Hilary Clinton on foreign policy.  That is a testimony that what Hilary is claiming as her advantage on foreign policy is not supported by those who know her better.  Most of these people that worked for Bill Clinton and who are supporting Obama, also opposed the war in Iraq.
Love Obama, He gives us so much hope in the future of Our Great Nation.

LIKE EVERY OTHER RARE TALENT, MANY EXIST THAT WANTS TO SHOOT HIM DOWN. JFK was shoot, so was MLK, even Reagan.

I'm not suprised to see so many trying to shoot down this rare talent with their hateful, unthoughtful and fanatical spews.

They invoke, his kindergarten essays, admitted youthful indiscretions, attack his faith, whats next? His race?

( for the record Obama is a Christian and there are so many good muslims in this country)
Love Obama, He gives us so much hope in the future of Our Great Nation.

LIKE EVERY OTHER RARE TALENT, MANY EXIST THAT WANTS TO SHOOT HIM DOWN. JFK was shoot, so was MLK, even Reagan.

I'm not suprised to see so many trying to shoot down this rare talent with their hateful, unthoughtful and fanatical spews.

They invoke, his kindergarten essays, admitted youthful indiscretions, attack his faith, whats next? His race?

( for the record Obama is a Christian and there are so many good muslims in this country)
Obama will never be commander in cheif, at least not this year.  Even if he gets the nomination, the Republicans will tear him apart.  All the questions and rumors about experience and voting records, even the cocaine and muslim heritage, even the Obama/Osama trick.  Wether it's fair or not, he's going to get pounded day in and day out.  Chris Matthews will not be there to hold his hand and protect him from the big bad republicans either, he'll have to stand on his own and defend himself, something he has not done and has not had to do yet.
This man, plain and simple has not been vetted, has not been pressured, has not shown anyone in the Democratic party yet what he's made of under fire.  If you are a real Democrat and getting the Whitehouse is your main concern after 8 years of the crap we've been putting up with, then we need to send our strongest hardest hitting candidate in there this year.  If we send in Mr. Rodgers, Saint Obama into the meatgrinder the Republicans will be using this time, then we're going to lose.  WE ARE GOING TO LOSE.
Love Obama, He gives us so much hope in the future of Our Great Nation.

LIKE EVERY OTHER RARE TALENT, MANY EXIST THAT WANTS TO SHOOT HIM DOWN. JFK was shoot, so was MLK, even Reagan.

I'm not suprised to see so many trying to shoot down this rare talent with their hateful, unthoughtful and fanatical spews.

They invoke, his kindergarten essays, admitted youthful indiscretions, attack his faith, whats next? His race?

( for the record Obama is a Christian and there are so many good muslims in this country)
Could a real Presidential candidate please stand up.  I can't see how any of the loonies running from either party are going to do anything good for this country.  We'd be better off imitating corporate America: when nobody good applies for the job, eliminate the position and move on from there.
Mike,
check the latest poll matchups of Obama against the Republicans.
(Hint, he does the best of all the Dems against them!)
On him "not being vetted", ccooooome on.. he's been attacked SO MUCH on EVERYTHING by Clinton's Attack Machine, even on stuff that doesn't exist!  What more do you want from him?  Probably for him not to be black, right?  It can't be about experience, Obama has more experience in elected office then both Hillary and Edwards!   It can't be on his lack of foreign experience, he has A LOT more than Bill Clinton did!  Bill had no experience on the national or the international level.  He governed a rather small state of Arkansas.  If voting for Hillary can be justified by Bill, then Bill's record at the time of his election is fair game.  Hell, so many of Bill's former advisors jumped ship to Obama.  Do you ever wonder why?

Obama wins.
Domestic policy is more important than foreign policy. And Obama cant explain his "present votes" on a lot of issues. Watch him fumble and triangulate here.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4tV-e2npzNo

Talk about karma. Haha. His got a baggage and his fans know it will knock him out big time.
Right Mike, we definitely shouldn't send Obama into the general when according to the poll averages at RCP he runs better than Clinton against Giuliani (+1.5%), Huckabee (+4%) and Romney (+4%).  He definitely hasn't shown any toughness after having the kitchen sink thrown at him by the Clinton machine (including the Clinton News Network) and coming out stronger than ever.

Obama's opposition to the war has been strong since 2002.  He was opposed to the Iran bill that was passed both before and after, missing the vote because it was supposedly tabled before he left to campaign.  It's that kind of judgment that explains why he has the support of so many former Clinton foreign policy advisors, including the last national security advisor.
Nice link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSu0zXCR9sE

If Billary becomes the the candidate, you can COUNT on the Congress to lose to the Republicans b/c any Dem who aligns themselves and campaigns w/Billary during the '08 election WILL LOSE!

You do not want to be associated w/HRC otherwise you won't get elected!

Stop the Billary machine now!  She is COMPLETE UNELECTIBLE!

Experience?

http://jaydiatribe.blogspot.com/2007/03/barack-obamas-inexperience.html
 I heard Anne Coulter sat down with Bob Novak and they have decided to come out in support for Obama. Let's face it....Anne [C]oulter (with the C. standing simultaneously for "Cocaine, Caffeine and Cigarettes") knows personally what the ravages of too much hard living can do to a body (but she has figured out the combination helps keep you thin!) and the "Dark Lord" of political snuff-jobs is just waiting in the wings to get directly involved in outing all the Muslims in Obama's family tree. I believe Barak Obama is a wonderful man who represents hope and the future for this country (one day), but lets face it, the Republicans will have a FIELD DAY with the past drug use issue and a Muslim heritage. It just won't fly, unfortunately. Clinton can be nasty yes, and that is what the Democrats need “right now” to retake the White House. I am not saying I like that kind of politics, I am just a realist.  

I am so sick and tired of people saying 'wait till the republicans do this or that.  blah blah.
Fact is that anyone who goes up against and wins against the dirtiest campaign around - the Clinton machine- and comes away looking presidential, cool under fire and a winner while the feared Clinton machine is run off the tracks, is perfectly able to take care of themselves.
Besides, I am sick of democrats using the republicans the same way republicans use terror against the people - as a fear tactic.
The republicans are no different from democrats except they have a backbone while the democrats have lost theirs.
Any democrat who is elected to office has obviously run against republicans before and won.
Please either get a grip and a backbone or stop using the gop as a scare tactic.
Hillary voted for war.  Hillary did not read the NIE after it was urged that she do so.  Hillary held her finger to the wind to make her decision.
She has demonstrated time and time again she has very poor judgment and cannot lead.
Obama has demonstrated his fine sense of judgment and leadership abilites.
Just the other day Politico had a story on how well run his campaign was and how it was managed in a smooth style.  Compare that to the back biting and fighting going on in Hillary's camp.
Reading the comments I must say:

Barack Obama majored in International Affairs at Columbia.
Was the head of the Illinois state foreign affairs committee
Is on the US senate foreign affairs committee
Has gone to eastern europe with Lugar to secure loose nukes.
Has been to Iraq and Africa.
Is the favored candidate of the foreign policy community.

Hillary, on the Armed Services Committee.
Has voted for war every time.  

So, who is not experienced with foreign policy?
I suggest people do some homework and find out the real information and not just parrot talking points from the Hillary camp.
WAKE UP HILLARY SUPPORTERS AND YOUR ROCKSTAR PERVERT BILL   GO TO BILLS CLINTONS PARDONS.COM AND THROW UP AND HIDE YOUR FACE   GOD ARE YOU PEOPLE NUTS OR HAVE NO MORALS
If it was so silly for Senator Obama to raise the question as to why so many of Clinton's former foreign policy advisors are endorsing Senator Obama, then why did the Clintons respond with a list? (And one so vulnerable to be exposed as dishonest) The point is that so many now support Obama.
This is what you can expect from Hillary Clinton:
Hillary Clinton supported the reckless Kyl-Lieberman Iran bill.  By defining Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps, a core branch of the Iranian military, as a foreign terrorist organization, the bill put the U.S. Senate on record as vindicating the Bush-Cheney line that Iranian proxies are part of a global conspiracy, linking Al Qaeda, Iraqi insurgents, Hamas, Hezbollah, and any other enemy the administration wants to conjure up. It made a US attack on Iran just that much more possible and confirmed that she learned little from her earlier vote to authorize the Iraq war.  

U.S. Senator James Webb called it "Dick Cheney's fondest pipe dream." "It could be read as tantamount to a declaration of war," Webb concluded.  Once again Hillary Clinton empowered a recklessly belligerent administration in their efforts to go to war. A US attack is probably less likely since the National Intelligence estimate found that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons programs in 2003. But Clinton had no way of knowing this when she voted for Kyl-Lieberman, and Bush continues to talk confrontationally in the wake of the report.  Karl Loeb, Free Press, December, 2007.

Clinton continued to emphasize that the real debate for voters should be which candidate, and not which policy team, was most qualified. “We cannot predict every challenge and every crisis that will come to the attention of our president, and therefore it’s important to pick the person who can make the best decisions,” she said. “When the door closes, and you’re having to make those difficult decisions that presidents confront every day, ultimately there is no adviser you can count on. You have to make the decision and live with the consequences.”

Comment:  That's precisely why, Sen. Clinton, it's JUDGEMENT, not experience per se. Experience which leads to poor judgement is of no import.



“He wasn’t in the Congress at the time,” she said, “and when he was running for the Senate, he said that he basically agreed with George Bush’s policy and conduct of the war. When he came to the Senate he voted to support it. So I think that once you’re in a position of responsibility and you actually have to be counted by what you do or what you look for, his record is the same as many of us.”

Comment: IF, Obama said that he "basically agreed with George Bush's policy and conduct of the war" after that October 2002 speech, a delineation of the details   would be legitimate criticism.  What are they? When, where, why, under what circumstances, etc did he say that?  Further, once the fiasco was set in motion, there WERE no good solutions. It is, at best, for some, a cut-your-losses situation. That's why the initial JUDGEMENT was significant. It was not the time for crass political calculation, particularly if leadership is important.

NOW, of course, the experience vs. change construct seems to have become change vs. change. More political calculation.  Change? Really? ------ what's this: Attack on Obama, seemingly from Edwards, on behalf of Clinton?
As I read all these comments I see reddiculous comments attacking the one person who obviously has had so many years of experience and has the wisdom and the strength to lead this country. I think you all need to stop and think a bit. Mrs. Clinton is going to make an exceptional President, that is unless you continue to just lash out without using your heads!
Actually for Democrats building the Congress is the first priority. The thing is if Obama wins the nomination and comes up short in the general, the party will  hold The Congress and likely gain a veto proof majority in the Senate.
Why? Three reasons: First,  many folk will feel deep guilt about voting past Obama and compensate  by voting for all  Democrats in sight. Second, the vote will surge in core Democratic districts and spill over and up. Third, Obama draws independents and progressive Republicans, even partisans, don’t’ hate’ him, most  remarkably  have grudging respect.
.     The Congress is far  more important to the party and its constituents than the White House. As they say, ‘the president proposes the congress disposes’. It was held for fifty years until 1994 when a Democrat in the White Hose managed to lose it.  Then came kitchen sink.. welfare, Nafta impeachment, a growing security crisis and tragically 911.   It took a lot to get it back. Dean did well with the 50 state strategy. Today Nancy is doing fine and  Harry is OK,  Rummy is gone, Mr. Bush is pretty much under control and Condi is making some diplomatic progress. The surge is working because the Democrats in Congress are in charge and Sec. Gates is being held accountable for all to see.
     Folk are reasonably happy across the land because ‘their’ Congress people have the old familiar  power back and they are seeing change. Its also good for America around the world. If Obama wins the general election that’s gravy!
On the ticket he insures the Congress for a generation. This is the real issue and his true trump card
Since The Democrats lost it after fifty years under a Democratic administration. The issue is which candidate is going to work to excite and turn out the base, appeal to independents and progressive Republicans. Who will be able and inclined to run fifty state campaign?
I am so tired of this blame Bush,blame HRC,blame everyone that suported the Iraq war vote. People we as a country are so weak. Sen Clinton you voted yae because with the info you had it was the right thing to do. Grow some b****. Pres Bush thought it was the right thing, the majority of Sens and Reps thought it was right. Everyone has 20/20 hindsight, some think it was wrong, some think it was right. Being a leader means you make decisions, you live with the consequenses. What scares me with alot of the candidates that want to lead our country is the fact none of them have the courage to stand by a decision that they made. Sen Clinton why do you need someone to blame? Sen Obama you scare me, I dont think you will protect my family. A leader can not be all things to all people. You can make a mistake Sen Obama you seem to think that everyone loves you and they will America too just because of who you are. Guess what they wont. As long as we are free and wealthy we will be despised. Sen Clinton the worst of it is you are probably the best the Dems have. Quit apologizing for making a decision to protect my family!!!

  I am from Illinois and I have said before that Obama does not tell the truth.   I would like someone to ask Obama what he has done for Illinois since he has been in the Senate?  I will answer nothing except support illegals and big business.  

  I wouldn't vote for him.  I voted for him once.  I won't make that mistake twice.
"But it is true, he didn't vote for the war. HIllary flip-flopped so much about the license deal.  She was caught in a lie on National t.v. then tried to lie out of it. Both Edwards and Obama called her on it, then Bubba left the brothel long enough to try to defend her.
Flander Annapolis Albany, New York "

Actually let's be honest, you don't know the issue before and after, so do not use flip-flop words, too naive.

"Love Obama, He gives us so much hope in the future of Our Great Nation. "

Really ? Then name 3. Give us only 3 clear lists he give so much hope to our nation.  Pal, you truly don't know Obama. Instead of "inspired" by his speech, check his records, what has done. Ask people from his hometown to show you why Hope is hopeless.
HRC didn't think it was a SILLY QUESTION during the last DEBATE in Iowa. This is precisely the same question that was asked of Senator Obama.  As a matter of fact, she'd still be laughing right now if Senator Obama didn't respond with an anwser SHE CERTAINLY DIDN'T EXPECT. HRC----When are you going to learn that when your deeds are malicious, they WILL backfire?
How'd Hillary vote on the war way back when again?
In reply to mikeOH

I respectfully disagree with you about Obama if he gets the nomination will lead the democratic party to a lost.  Obama offers a clear message on where he stands... better than any democratic candidate in the field.  If, you, and several others want to reject him and nominate someone who can't give straight answers (HRC), then we'll lose.  Democracts only lose once they play politics.  If we do not say what we believe in, then it's the endgame for us.  But the most important thing to consider, if we remain cynical about our chances to getting back the white house by being true to ourselves, then we simply have lost the ideals of our founding fathers, America, and ourselves.  
Kyl-Lieberman and IWR----Clinton voted aye on both.
Kyl-Lieberman and IWR--Barack Obama was told the day before by Harry Reid(his son works for HClinton's campaign) that there would not be a vote anytime soon, then Reid pulled a fast one the next day. Biden had one of his own legislation coming up that day.
http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/did-obama-skip-the-iran-vote/
IWR--- Barack Obama spoke against the war in 2002. He was interviewed(day after JJ dinner) on Meet The Press. Tim left off this part of his statement: ''But, 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.''
Barack Obama has been consistent. Frankly, it would have been great if HClinton had stayed home instead of voting 'aye' BOTH times. Deception will be 'HER ROYAL SILLYNESS' downfall.
New poll out!
Sen. Barack Obama is the only Democratic presidential candidate who polled higher than all five of the top Republican contenders in its latest national survey of potential "general election matchups," Zogby International reported this morning.
Obama led:
• Rudy Giuliani, 48%-39%.
• Mike Huckabee, 47%-42%.
• Sen. John McCain, 47%-43%.
• Mitt Romney, 53%-35%.
• Fred Thompson, 52%-36%.

Edwards:
• Led Huckabee, 47%-41%.
• Led Romney, 50%-38%.
• Led Thompson, 51%-35%.
• Trailed Giuliani, 45%-44%.
• Trailed McCain, 46%-42%.

Clinton:
• Led Romney, 46%-44%.
• Led Thompson, 48%-42%.
• Trailed Giuliani, 46%-42%.
• Trailed Huckabee, 48%-43%.
• Trailed McCain, 49%-42%.
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1404
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2007/12/poll-obama-beats-any-and-all-gop-noms.php
Mrs. Clinton will never be president.

If she is nominated, it will galvanize and mobilize every republican, from sea to shining sea, to come out to vote against her.

Obama is absolutely more electable.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/12/zogby-obama-is.html


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=531516

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

More First Read

Recent Posts:


Archives:


Topics:

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google