I have watched an interesting pattern develop for some time now, that I know others have observed as well. When Hillary Clinton or any of her surrogates attempt to draw distinctions between herself and Barack Obama, they are accused of attacking Barack Obama personally. Yet, team Obama gets away with just about whatever they say about Clinton. That’s hypocrisy in my book. Here’s a prime example of an Obama surrogate calling foul on something voters have a right to look at:
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), the second-ranking party leader in the Senate, says President Bill Clinton’s comments about Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) are getting “too personal” and called on the former president to refrain from attacking Obama’s integrity.
“I’m really troubled by his questioning the sincerity of Barack Obama’s opposition to the war in Iraq,” Durbin said. “I really think it is unfortunate to question Barack’s sincerity on the war. He has been there from the start, opposing this war.”
If Barack Obama’s voting record on the Iraq war was consistent with his early stance against the war, no one would be questioning his “on the war.” But the fact is when Barack Obama had the opportunities to vote his conscience against the Iraq War once in the Senate he did not.
Dick Durbin, who was one of the 13 Senators to vote yes on the Kerry – Feingold amendment on June 22, 2006, knows damn well that Barack Obama was not among the 13. The Swamp has a piece from that day that points to the division between Durbin and Obama on the Kerry – Feingold amendment. Indeed, Obama who consistently attempts to paint himself as taking a differnet stance on the Iraq War than Clinton, “essentially the same position as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who praised the Levin-Reed amendment while criticizing Republicans for engaging in cynical politics for questioning the patriotism of war opponents.”
As Hillary Clinton rightly pointed out today on Meet The Press in discussing Obama’s record in the Senate on the Iraq War, “by 2005, 6, and 7, he was voting for $300 billion in funding for the war.”
Big Tent Democrat has more on Durbin’s “phony moralizing.” While I admire Barack Obama’s early stance against the Iraq War, I have long felt that he has not been consistent with that stance and furthermore his claims that he is are hyprocritical. On the other hand, while Clinton did cast her vote for the war and took a considerable amount of time to come around to what is now the consensus of the Democratic party, that we need to get out of Iraq, she’s been up front and honest about her position.
It’s easy to say I was against the war from the start, when you don’t have a voting record to back that up. I took issue with Dean using this tactic against Kerry in ’04 and I feel that Obama is using a similar tactic against Clinton. It’s hollow in my book.