FLASHBACK
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5138389.html
CAMPAIGN 2008 - Some Democrats rap depth of Obama’s anti - war stance - Critics contend position revised during campaign
Houston Chronicle (TX) - Sunday, September 16, 2007
Author: PERRY BACON JR., Washington Post
For anti - war Illinois Democrats, the speech that made them fall in love with Barack Obama was not the one he gave in Boston in 2004 at the Democratic National Convention, but one two years earlier at a hastily organized rally in Chicago on the eve of the congressional vote to authorize the Iraq war.
“I don’t oppose all wars,” Obama , then a state senator, said on Oct. 2, 2002. “ ... What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”
Last week, Obama quoted his own words in a speech on Iraq that chastised those who “took the president at his word instead of reading the intelligence for themselves.”
(snip)
Does anyone know of ANY congressional involvement in this adventure at all?
“I don’t oppose all wars,” Obama , then a state senator, said on Oct. 2, 2002. “ ... What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”
Good flashback, maggie.
Back at you Barry...
"What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Barry and other NWO commu-facists in this regime to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne” while bypassing Congress.
FUBO!