Obama's critique of HRC's Iraq war vote suggests that she is disqualified to be Commander in Chief.
A deeper analysis of this charge suggests that BO's "new" type of politics is really nothing more than the same type of politics that has existed since the history of mankind.
I am a former undecided voter who leaned heavily towards Senator Obama for several weeks.
After much reflection, however, I am proud to support Hillary Rodham Clinton as the 44th President of the United States of America
This is my first diary. I have enjoyed reading Kos for quite some time and wanted to weigh in on the presidential race.
I am from Texas, a state which has a March primary and thus usually has no substantive role in helping to decide who the Democratic Nominee for President will be.
For several months, I have been undecided and began to lean towards Senator Obama after Christmas.
I have listened to Obama talk about a new kind of politics--the kind that will bring people together--that will not be based on tearing people apart. And I believe that he is sincere in this belief. I was drawn to his message of hope.
Over time, however, it appears that for all practical purposes, Senator Obama's "politics of hope" is really nothing more than windown dressing.
On balance, their views are pretty similiar. The one point that Obama continues to stress is HRC's vote on the Iraq resolution.
I have also listened to Obama pound away on HRC for months on her Iraq vote. In his judgment, anyone who voted for that amendment is ipso facto disqualified from being President.
That did it.
I really have had enough of this nonsense.
None of us support that damn war. That is not the issue.
This is how I would interrogate Senator Obama on this point:
Senator, do you believe that Senator John Kerry is qualified to be President of the United States?
Senator, do you believe that former Senator John Edwards who you praised so much last week--do you believe that Senator Edwards is qualified to be President of the US?
Senator, when John Kerry was nominated to be the Democratic Nominee for President four years ago, you spoke at the national convention, did you not?
You praised him with much enthusiasm at that time, did you not?
In your speech, you said the following regarding John Kerry:
"Now let me be clear. Let me be clear. We have real enemies in the world. These enemies must be found. They must be pursued — and they must be defeated. John Kerry knows this.
And just as Lieutenant Kerry did not hesitate to risk his life to protect the men who served with him in Vietnam, President Kerry will not hesitate one moment to use our military might to keep America safe and secure."
Senator, is it not true that when you made that statement at the convention praising John Kerry, his vote on the Iraq resolution was identical to Senator Clinton's?
Is not true that Senator Kerry explained the rationale for his vote in the same manner that HRC does?
The same holds true for the Vice Presidential nominee four years ago, John Edwards, is that not true.
With respect to the Levin Amendment, would you please read aloud the stated purpose of the amendment as it appears on the bill itself:
Statement of Purpose: To authorize the use of the United States Armed Forces, pursuant to a new resolution of the United Nations Security Council, to destroy, remove, or render harmless Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, nuclear weapons-usable material, long-range ballistic missiles, and related facilities, and for other purposes
Is it not true that Senator Kerry also voted nay on this amendment?
As did Edwards?
As did Biden?
Daschle?
Dodd?
Feingold?
Schumer?
Boxer?
In fact—if HRC’s judgment is "hopelessly flawed" and thus is not fit to be Commander in Chief, then you are also stating that this logically precludes each and every person outlined above from every being considered to be qualified as President of the United States?
Thank you Senator.
Oh-- by way way--have you ever--in public or private, ever told Senator Kerry that he is now hopelessly disqualified from ever being President based on his position on this resolution or on the Levin Amendment?
Thank you.
Pass the witness