Barack Knows His Stuff (major Obama gaffe on the war)

Right on the Right ^ | March 03, 2008 | Staff

[jdm]

Rush Limbaugh and others are calling for Republicans to vote for Hillary Clinton in tomorrow's Ohio and Texas Primaries, to keep the race going. As if we needed more evidence to support the idea that infighting is hurting the Democrats, Barack Obama made yet another gaffe while criticizing Hillary Clinton. FOX News has the story and Hillary Clinton is of course trying to slam the future Democrat nominee with it:

He (Obama) said that Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a fellow Democrat from neighboring West Virginia, had read the intelligence estimate as a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and after a brief pause said the then-chairman had voted against the war resolution.

However, Rockefeller was not the chair at the time and voted in favor of the war authorization. Sen. Bob Graham of Florida was the intelligence committee chair in 2002 and voted against the resolution. Obama did not mention Graham’s name in the passage.

“She didn’t read the National Intelligence Estimates. Jay Rockefeller read it. But she didn’t read it. I don’t know what all that experience got her because I have enough experience to know that if you have a National Intelligence Estimate and the chairman of the national, um, Senate Intelligence Committee says you should read this, this is why I’m voting against the war, that you should probably read it. I don’t know how much experience you need for that.”

Barack is the candidate that made the educated decision on Iraq and he doesn't even know which lead Democrats opposed the war. He's clinging to the anti-war issue simply because he didn't have to vote on Iraq. He was busy helping the liberal majority in Illinois pass bad legislation. Barack isn't the educated choice, he's the liberal choice.

[jdm]

Oops.

[roses of sharon]

Statement of Senator John D. Rockefeller IV on the Senate Floor On the Iraq Resolution

October 10, 2002

There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.

snip

But this isn’t just a future threat. Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.

snip

There has been some debate over how “imminent” a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!

[mbraynard]

Really, pretty minor, but people are going to play it up into something so much more.

Sure hope this doesn't derail him from getting the nomination.

[SE Mom]

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Always Right]

I trust Angelina Jolie’s judgment more than Obama’s.

[Always Right]

There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years.

Which was always the case for the war, not that Saddam already had them, as the media implies when it calls Bush a liar.

[notbuyingit2]

You mean he is saying he didn’t vote for the war authorization but he WASN’T EVEN in Congress at the time the vote was taken? I didn’t realize he wasn’t in Congress until 2004. The vote was taken in Oct. 2002! INTERESTING!!!! I remember hearing one of his ads implying that he was the only one who had the “courage” to oppose the war. What a liar!

[indcons]

Hope the Islamic sleeper cell “community organizer” does NOT get the nomination. Juan McAmnesty doesn’t stand a chance against Hussein.

[Tut]

In Obama's anti-war speech he made in October 2002 he also said the following....

Obama October 2002: Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

Seeing the rest of his speech, I guess he meant that the sorted history of Saddam and from what Obama understood, Saddam had WMDs.... in his point of view, that was acceptable.

http://www.lessig.org/blog/2008/01/barack_obamas_2002_speech.html

[jdm]

Good post. I had never heard the name “Barack Obama” until 2004.

[Blood of Tyrants]

I’m not so sure. Once people start to REALLY look at Obama on issues such as gun control, gutting the military, seizing 1/7 of the US economy through socialized medicine, etc., they will not like what they see.

[Enchante]

Obama, you MORON!! Rockefeller's actual position and statement of that time completely undermines what you are saying, and shows YOU, Obama Hussein, to be the squishy soft weasel opportunist that you are. Too bad that Rockefeller and other 'Rats could not keep their eye on the ball and ended up flip-flopping on the war..... they are also contemptible weasels.

Well said, Senator Rockefeller! Spoken like a true neo-con!! Thanks to Obama Hussein for reminding people (inadvertently) that in the fall of 2002 lots of leading Demagogues spoke strongly in favor of the Iraq War resolution and spoke strongly in favor of using force to remove Saddam if he did not cooperate with UN inspections (which he did not do). There was little difference between many Republicans and Democrats on Iraq issues until TREASONOUS 'Rats decided it was to their partisan political advantage to undermine the Bush administration. If everything had been as quick and (relatively) easy as the first 3 weeks, we never would have heard a peep out of most of these 'Rats. It was only when the going got tougher that weasels like Rockefeller showed what treason really is.

"There has been some debate over how “imminent” a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!"

[Miss Didi]

Angelina Jolie Makes More Sense Than the Democrats on Iraq

[BubbaBasher]

It isn’t what he said that matters. It’s what he meant to say. Right?

[freespirited]

You mean he is saying he didn’t vote for the war authorization but he WASN’T EVEN in Congress at the time the vote was taken? I didn’t realize he wasn’t in Congress until 2004.

He was elected in 2004. He didn't take office until 2005. IOW, he's been a US Senator for three years and one month, more than one year of which he has spent running for president.

[Kozak]

Hope the Islamic sleeper cell “community organizer” does NOT get the nomination. Juan McAmnesty doesn’t stand a chance against Hussein.

Beg to differ. This guy will sink in the general as fast as he rose in the primaries. "There is no there there", he's an empty suit with hard left tendencies he can't hide for the next 8 months. NOt every Rat will be insane come election day. Oh by the way I still despise McCain. Too bad a real conservative isn't in the running.

[roses of sharon]

Yes, and just imagine a nuke race between Iran and Saddam, yikes!

Hussein defense of Saddam and Sons is telling, but then he is a member of the UnAmerican Democrat Party.

[freekitty]

All I can do is laugh. This is ridiculous just as Obama and Oprah are being in the political business. Neither one of them should be involved.

[roses of sharon]

Great post Miss Didi! LOL

[Miss Didi]

Thanks, Doll!