Obama’s Hollow “Judgment” and Empty Record

Read Joe Wilson: Obama’s Hollow “Judgment” and Empty Record. Needless to say, we all know Wilson speaks from experience on the lead up to Iraq:

Barack Obama argues that he deserves the Democratic nomination and Hillary Clinton doesn’t because he possesses superior “judgment,” as he calls it, on the key issues we face as a nation. As definitive proof he offers one speech he made in 2002 during a reelection campaign for an Illinois senate seat in the most liberal district in the state, so liberal that no other position would have been viable. When he made that speech, Obama was not privy to the briefings by, among others, Secretary of State Colin Powell, in support of the Authorization of Use of Military Force as a diplomatic tool to push the international community to impose intrusive inspections on Saddam Hussein. […]

Would Obama have acted differently had he been in Washington or had he had the benefit of the arguments and the intelligence that the administration was offering to the Congress debating that resolution? […]

I was involved in that debate in every step of the effort to prevent this senseless war and I profoundly resent Obama’s distortion of George Bush’s folly into Hillary Clinton’s responsibility. I was in the middle of the debate in Washington. Obama wasn’t there. I remember what was said and done. In fact, the administration lied in order to secure support for its war of choice, including cooking the intelligence and misleading Congress about the intent of the authorization. Senator Clinton’s position, stated in her floor speech, was in favor of allowing the United Nations weapons inspectors to complete their mission and to build a broad international coalition. Bush rejected her path. It was his war of choice.

There is no credible reason to conclude that Obama would have acted any differently in voting for the authorization had he been in the Senate at that time. Indeed, he has said as much. […]

There’s more

UPDATE: Damozel weighs in Joe Wilson’s piece on The Moderate Voice and Jeralyn weighs in on Talk Left.

Bookmark and Share

About Pamela Leavey

Pamela Leavey is the Editor in Chief, Owner/Publisher of The Democratic Daily as well as a freelance writer and photographer. Pamela holds a certificate in Contemporary Communications from UMass Lowell, a Journalism Certificate from UMass Amherst and a B.A. in Creative Writing and Digital Age Communications from UMass Amherst UWW.
Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Obama’s Hollow “Judgment” and Empty Record

  1. I’m sure Wilson will go from vaunted, sainted status, to scourge of the loony, anti-war left crowd after that post.

  2. Todd

    I would hope that everyone on th eanti-war left that is getting up in arms about Clinton supporters will chill out once the nominee is chosen.

  3. alrudder says:

    Obama may be saddled with Loony Left campaign supporters, but his policy shop is very serious and non-ideological. For anyone who cares to read an analysis, courtesy of The New Republic.

  4. I don’t know, I actually didn’t trust the stuff coming out of the Adminsitration at the time, but they were milking the combination of 9-11 and routine Respect For The Office for all they could get. It was close call, but I decided to bite my tongue, and I think that Collin Powell really was the deciding point for me.

  5. bjerryberg says:

    Joe Wilson is a good man and a skilled diplomat.. He knows why the right wing of the intell community/media has been so generous to Sen. Obama and why they won’t be much longer.

    A vote for Obama is a vote at this point for some combination of the late John McCain and Wall Streeter Bloomberg–who resembles Cheney a great deal. It’s all about the crash of the economy and who gets bailed out.

    The avalanche against Mr Hyde Park, Sen. Obama, has begun. For the good of the country Sen Clinton must stay in–regardless of media Psy-War and conventional wisdom





  6. This makes about as much sense as the “What would Regan do” on the Hennity/Colmbs Show. The Right, of course, considers Regan as their Savior. To them Regan could almost walk on water. So, at least weekly they run this segment. It, of course, is all hypothetical, as Regan is no longer with us. However, you guessed it, if Regan was still president he (per Hennity) would have made all of the correct decisions in todays world.
    So now the Hillary supporters are playing “What would Barack have done” game. Hillary supporters encourage the players to think that he would have followed her lead, IF he had been in the senate. I feel that these “what if” games are weak political fodder. Voters are suppose to have the ability to look into some type of crystal ball and come up with their best guess.
    This is equally ridiculous with Regan as it is with Obama. The fact of the matter is that Barack was in the distinct miniority with most politicans back in 2002. His stance on the war has been consistent since 2002, while Hillary’s has noticeably vacilated. It also should be noted that back in 2002 there were polticans at the national level that did doubt the validity of the bogus intelligence reports. A few were able to see through the Bush smoke screen. They knew that Bush had a vandetta against Sadam for the attempted assasination attempt on his father. They were suspicious by Bush’s continued insistance that “God” was directing his decisions. Most importantly, some realized that Afganistan, with pilots trained in Afganistan and born is Sudan, was the country that had attacked us—NOT IRAQ. So, please don’t believe that Obama was out there on a limb by himself in his opposition. We simply can’t play the “what if” game. The fact of the matter is that Obama opposed the war from it’s outset, and Hillary did not. Buzz

  7. Buzz

    Point blank — Obama’s has NOT been consistent with his anti-war stance. Think Kerry – Feingold. Obama voted against it.

    Look, Barack Obama was a state Senator in 2002, he DID NOT vote in the U.S. on the war because he WAS NOT a U.S. Senator.

    My thoughts on all of this are the same as they were in ’04 when Dean made similar claims that he didn’t vote for the war but Kerry did.

    Quite frankly, I think some of us have a lot of valid questions about what Barack would do that he hasn’t answered.