Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

On the heels of his "playing chicken with the troops" comment, which implied that Democrats who supported defunding the war were playing a game, Obama did it again.

Yesterday on CNN, the Senator said:

"I am not yet at the point where I am prepared to say that I am going to cut off funding, partly because I spent a lot of time in Iowa, in Illinois, in small communities where every town hall meeting I have I meet with a mother whose son or daughter is in Iraq and they are concerned not only about getting them home but also concerned about getting them home safely and making sure they've got the night vision goggles and the armor and so forth," he told Wolf Blitzer.

What Senator Obama is saying is that it is irresponsible to withdraw funding for the war.  He is implying that Democrats who support defunding are not giving proper body armor and equipment to the soldiers on the ground.

The story can be found here: http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Obama_take s_heat_for_remarks_on_0411.html

Dennis Kucinich, a true anti-war candidate who actually is the lone Democrat running who voted against the war in 2002, had this to say about Obama:

"He's voted to fund the war at least ten times, each time, it's like reauthorizing it all over again. If they keep voting to fund the war, it's not credible to say they are for peace."

So, do you agree with Kucinich?  Is voting to fund the war the same as reauthorizing it?  And can an office-holder vote to continue war and credibly call themselves anti-war?

Tags: Barack Obama, Election 2008 (all tags)

Comments

87 Comments

Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Joe Biden: I don't think John Edwards knows what the heck he's talking about.
by pmb 2007-04-12 07:26PM | 0 recs
Democrats Hate the Troops

That's a nice quote, but just what does it have to do with the issue of funding?  Even Biden supports defunding I think.

by Vox Populi 2007-04-12 07:30PM | 0 recs
Here's the full quote and link...


Mr. Biden seemed to reserve a special scorn for Mr. Edwards, who suffered from a perceived lack of depth in foreign policy in the Presidential election of 2004.

"I don't think John Edwards knows what the heck he is talking about," Mr. Biden said, when asked about Mr. Edwards' advocacy of the immediate withdrawal of about 40,000 American troops from Iraq.

"John Edwards wants you and all the Democrats to think, `I want us out of there,' but when you come back and you say, `O.K., John'"--here, the word "John" became an accusatory, mocking refrain--"`what about the chaos that will ensue? Do we have any interest, John, left in the region?' Well, John will have to answer yes or no. If he says yes, what are they? What are those interests, John? How do you protect those interests, John, if you are completely withdrawn? Are you withdrawn from the region, John? Are you withdrawn from Iraq, John? In what period? So all this stuff is like so much Fluffernutter out there. So for me, what I think you have to do is have a strategic notion. And they may have it--they are just smart enough not to enunciate it."

http://www.observer.com/20070205/2007020 5_Jason_Horowitz_pageone_newsstory1.html

And no, Biden does not support defunding.

by rashomon 2007-04-12 09:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

Biden has been suffering from an addiction to CW for many years.

by jallen 2007-04-12 10:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

So Biden wants to stay in Iraq like Hilary.  So what.  Biden is as relevant as Gravel.

A recurring problem is Barack Obama's reinforcement of Bush's framing of issues.  Obama probably will not support Reid-Feingold.

Barack Obama is not really an antiwar candidate.

The Moveon vote shows folks are getting hip to him.  The 2002 speech is not enough.  He voted with Clinton on all key votes. Agaisnt Kerry Feingold in 2006.  For the Republican Gregg Bill in March 2007.

Just say no to Barack Obama's refusal to defund this war.

by littafi 2007-04-12 10:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

Just say no to the simple-minded belief that defunding the war equals ending the war. I have no doubt that if Democrats vote to immediately defund the troops Bush will NOT pull them out. He will 'find' some money somewhere in the massive Pentagon budget (but it won't be enough) and then (probabaly successfully) blame the Dems for the surge in troop casualities that results.

Edwards is, unfortunately, little more than a yes-man for an overly simplistic constituency who believe that suddenly cutting off the funds will have anything other than catastrophic results. He voted for the war when that seemed politically advantageous. He apologized for his vote when that seemed politically advantageous. And now is calling for instant defunding because that seems politically advantageous.

Obama has been consistent in his opposition to the war, and consistently intelligent in understanding you can't just quickly jerk the rug out from under the troops and expect that to be good for anyone.

by Mystylplx 2007-04-13 07:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

I agree with the first paragraph.  Im a huge Edwards supporter, but also believe cutting off funding is not going to stop the war.  

The only thing I have against Obama making statements like this is that it hurts the Democratic leadership's effort to negotiate w/ Bush from strength.  Obama, and all the candidates, should just concentrate of the present effort to tie funding to a troop withdrawal.

Again, as an Edwards supporter, I think the tying of Obama's statement with saying, or implying, that the Dems who disagree with him hate the troops.  This is a subject that, in my opinion, honorable people can disagree.  Disagree with Obama's statement if you like, but dont make more of it then what's there.  

by Andy Katz 2007-04-13 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

I don't see how an honerable person can interpret anything Obama said as being anywhere close to saying "Democrats hate the troops."

That is hyperboly of the worst kind.

by Mystylplx 2007-04-13 08:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

My third paragraph wasnt very clear.  I meant to say that I disagree with the original post's effort to say OBama's statement was tantamount to Democrats who disagree with me hate the troops.  

by Andy Katz 2007-04-13 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

Obama was right about the war in 2002--Edwards was wrong. Obama today is right about not instantly defunding the troops--Edwards (and Kucinich) are wrong.

It's a question of judgement--Obama has it, Edwards doesn't.

by Mystylplx 2007-04-13 08:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

Except that John is framing it as Bush's fault if the troops don't get funded (which is the gods honest truth, we've already passed a funding bill that Bush will veto).  He is doing it right.

by jallen 2007-04-13 09:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

So is Obama.

by Mystylplx 2007-04-13 10:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

No, he's not.  Saying something doesn't make it true.

In Obama's words, you hear distinctly a reinforcement of the 'winger frame on the war, and on military aggression.

by Peter from WI 2007-04-13 11:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

sans the aggression part.

by jallen 2007-04-13 11:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

Obama IS doing it right.

I know there's a big difference between looking at this in a purely political one-upsmanship sort of way, and desiring to frame Bush's veto as 'de-funding the troops' just as the Cons are threatening to do if Dems don't pass a funding bill, and Obamas perspective which is to ask what's best for the country and the troops.

Look, what happens to our troops and this country if we do get into this giant game of chicken? (that's exactly what it would be.) So we say that Bush's veto is what's de-funding the troops and not the Democratic Congress--true enough from a purely political gamesmanship perspective, but what's the outcome?

Bush either immediately begins the pull-out (unlikely I'd say) and the Iraqi Gov. falls apart due to an overly precipitous withdrawal. There is chaos in the region and the Democrats get blamed.

Or... (more likely)

Bush keeps the troops there and continues to demand Congress pass a funding bill as the news media goes crazy with stories of soldiers dying for lack of body armor and such... and the Congress suddenly (including Edwards and Kucinich)find they've changed their minds and get a funding bill passed fast enough.

The thing is that playing political chicken with a guy like Bush is a losing proposition--He's stubborn as a mule, he's a lame duck who has nothing to lose, and he doesn't give a f*ck about anything right now other than his legacy. You can argue all day long about whose 'fault' it would be, but that's the course of political gamesmanship which is not the best course for the country.

Obama is more the type to look down the road and see where such a course would end us up. Even if Democrats could win politically from such a confrontation (I think it's just barely possible) it doesn't matter--such a course could not help but result in catastrophy for Iraq and would make the disaster that has been this war even more disastrous.

We need to get the troops home, but we need to do it in a measured gradual way so the Iraqi forces can slowly flow in and fill the gaps. Either likely outcome of this game of chicken will not result in anything good for our country, even IF Democrats score political points.

After all, if nothing else we owe the Iraqis that much. We assumed that responsibility the day we invaded. They didn't attack us--we attacked them.

by Mystylplx 2007-04-13 12:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Here's the full quote and link...

Just a brief P.S. before I take off for the weekend--

I'd only like to point out how Barack Obama repeatedly fights against the currents of political gamesmanship... and repeatedly is proven to have been right. He opposed the Iraq war at a time when Bush's approval ratings were in the stratosphere and most Americans were in favor of the war.

Now he opposes a too-fast pull out when most of the Democratic base only wants to hear 'the troops are coming home tomorrow!'

Edwards is the exact opposite. He supported the war when it was popular, changed his mind when the public did, and now supports cutting off funding when THAT is popular.

Think about it.

by Mystylplx 2007-04-13 01:14PM | 0 recs
What is wrong with this picture?

For all of Biden's flaws, foreign policy is not one of his problems.  Some here, do not see the forest...

Obama refuses to go on record as defunding thr troops.  Many of you think this is wrong...and I understand because you cannot out-progressive me.  Remember when Obama, on cnn, referred to avoiding (the horrific) footage of Americans and their supporters being rescued at zero moment from rooftops?  

Reality:  democrats were successfully tagged for this humiliation and it's been reinforced to our detriment .  

Obama's position:  against the war (and I implore progressives to search their fairness meters} but WE WILL humiliate republicans by going on record repeatedly, while supporting the troops unequivocally.  Who do you think will win the general election?  I don't know, however: I see a frightenly absence of national security issues seriously discussed here.  I hope this will be rectified; I find this a major dearth in our blogosphere discussion.

by pamelabrown 2007-04-13 10:46AM | 0 recs
Re: What is wrong with this picture?

What a horrible post!! Please disregard, all hell was breaking out in my house and I posted half-assed comments.  Sorry to waste your time.

by pamelabrown 2007-04-13 10:50AM | 0 recs
Kucinich on Obama.

The reaction of one of his challengers to this position showed that some Democrats will continue criticizing Senator Obama as failing to take a strong enough stance against the war.

"That's not a surprise, the degree to which people are surprised is the degree to which they've been sleeping," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, who voted against authorizing the Iraq War in 2002 and is running for president for the second time. "He's voted to fund the war at least ten times, each time, it's like reauthorizing it all over again. If they keep voting to fund the war, it's not credible to say they are for peace."

Kucinich also questioned Obama's approach of proposing a timeline for withdrawal.

"Yeah, I have a timetable, it's called now," he quipped. "There's no reason why Democrats should give the president any money, they have the power to end the war now."

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Obama_take s_heat_for_remarks_on_0411.html

by littafi 2007-04-12 10:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Kucinich on Obama.

That's just because Kucinich is self-righteous.  And he's running against the party, just like Harold Ford and Joe Lieberman.

by jallen 2007-04-12 10:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Kucinich on Obama.

Kucinich may be self-righteous, but he is right, and he has been right all along.

Maybe he does not believe that one speech is quite enough to justify one to make his own self-righteous claims about others, yet to act in nonconformity therewith in the present.

Obama will hear Kucinich in the debates, that's for sure.  Will he call Kucinich self-righeous?

by citizen53 2007-04-12 10:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Kucinich on Obama.

That was from an Edwards supporter

by faithfull 2007-04-13 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Are you incapable of orginal thought, or do you just think that post the same comment in different threads repeatedly is acceptable behavior?

by ManfromMiddletown 2007-04-12 09:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Hello Kettle, this is ManFromMiddletown... you're black.

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-12 09:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

You're one to talk about hypocrisy.

by ManfromMiddletown 2007-04-13 06:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Joe Biden: Yes I plagarized that speech.

Joe Biden: You can't walk into a 7-11 without seeing an Indian behind the counter.

Joe Biden: Obama's really articulate.

Joe Biden: I'm proud to sponsor the Bankruptcy Bill.

by adamterando 2007-04-12 09:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it

"I need to be the best Biden that I can be."

by jallen 2007-04-12 09:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

That comment is a diversion from the topic.

by pamelabrown 2007-04-13 10:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

No it's not! It's discrediting the witness. He/she used Joe Biden's quote that Edwards doesn't know what he's talking about. I used other phrases that Biden has said to show that perhaps we should take what he says with a grain of salt, especially when it comes to something that directly affects his own political prospects (he is running for president after all).

by adamterando 2007-04-13 11:22AM | 0 recs
That was in the same

interview in which he referred to another candidate, you know that articulate one. I think Biden was drunk.

by david mizner 2007-04-13 07:05AM | 0 recs
Need better source than Biden

I'm not sure what the context was for Biden's comment, but on the whole, I wouldn't take his judgement on much of anything.

Insulting Edwards, Obama or Clinton is just about the only way he can get press nowadays.  And we know how much Joe likes getting press.

by Rob Thorne 2007-04-12 07:29PM | 0 recs
Well..

he is chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.  And has been in the Senate for 30 years.  That's not nothing.

by rashomon 2007-04-12 09:58PM | 0 recs
Clearly, for Biden, It Isn't Everything

Yeah, he's been there a while.

Some ripen with age.  Some just go soft and runny.

by Rob Thorne 2007-04-13 01:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

To me, all of the arguments from people supporting Barack about how John's vote for the war was made out of political considerations, and that, therefore, he is a man of little character, fall apart when defunding comes up.  Barack thinks he is taking the politically popular position.  Why in the hell else would someone who wants to end a war continue to fund it?

by jallen 2007-04-12 07:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Because they are genuinely concerned that our troll of a President will ACTUALLY put the troops in harms way without the money to actually support them.  Bush has proven he will break the law repeatedly and he will continue to keep the troops in Iraq and take as much illegal money as he can from wherever, until we impeach him or the next President is sworn in.  

You may not agree and that's cool, but it is a valid concern.  

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-12 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Then why isn't he framing it that way- the way that John Edwards is- that if the troops don't get what they need, it is Bush's fault?

by jallen 2007-04-12 08:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

I have seen him say he doesn't trust the president and that is why he isn't sold on Defunding.  Not a direct quote, but the crux of it.

DOes he say it all the time?  No, and maybe he should.  He is not always good about repeating the same point over and over and it is something i hope he improves upon.

But Vox, as usual, takes a lot of liberties with his "interpretations" of Obama's quotes.  

You have seen me post enough to know I will admit fully if Obama fucked up.  This quote is NOT Obama fucking up but this diary is taking a lot of liberties with the quote.

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-12 08:57PM | 0 recs
There might be

a morsel of legitimacy to Obama's position; Webb, I think, holds a similar view. The problem for Obama, and for progressives, is that he's essentially saying that Feingold, Kennedy, Edwards, and all the other people who support some sort of defunding are taking a corse of action that would end up hurting the troops. It's political poison; it's a direct repeating of the GOP line, and it derives from fear--fear of what Bush might do. The Audacity of Hope? Ha! He should stake out a strong position and stir up support and force Bush to follow.

Why is he so afraid of a man with 30 % approval ratings, who's on the wrong side of political opinion on the war.

by david mizner 2007-04-13 07:10AM | 0 recs
Re: There might be

Why is he so afraid of a man with 30 % approval ratings? He's not afraid -- he recognizes that the man is the president of the United States, and that he can stop whatever Congress does as long as enough GOP members continue to stick with him (and there's no evidence that they won't, at the moment).

However much we dislike those facts, they remain facts, and we need to keep them in mind if we're going to live in the reality-based community.

by KCinDC 2007-04-13 07:21AM | 0 recs
Re: There might be

KC, everything you just wrote is true. Still, there's no need to say, or imply, that defunding the war will hurt the troops.

by clarkent 2007-04-13 07:27AM | 0 recs
Re: There might be

I think this is right (that he might have a point, and even Biden has a legitimate concern).  Anyone who can say with 100% certainty that they know the absolutely right answer is misleading themselves and whomever they are talking to.  On this topic particularly, you can know what you believe but charting a certain course in Iraq is like trying to pick winners all the way through in the NCAA Tourney.

The right question is what is the right bet / position.  If as a community we have staked out a position that defunding is the right thing to do, that you can defund the war AND protect our troops, then you have to say that Obama's position does not square with this at all.  He could be right, but let's not delude ourselves that his comments are open to interpretation like some Oracle or that we are not being inconsistent in our own position.

I thought Chris Bowers and Jerome have done excellent jobs writing about the substance on this.

We need more talk of this kind of substance and detail and less of the tactics and money horserace.

by Orlando 2007-04-13 07:25AM | 0 recs
The same reason he had to double-check with his...

...handlers about whether he disagreed with Gen. Pace that homosexuality is immoral.

by MeanBoneII 2007-04-13 01:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Because he doesn't favor withdrawal until 3-31-08, which is the most politically popular position. In fact, its the one the Senate is using.

by faithfull 2007-04-13 05:56AM | 0 recs
"Politically Popular"

I don't get this.  Obama's running in a Democratic primary.  The politically popular move, based on the polling highlighted here today and the obvious netroots feeling, is to defund the war.  If Obama doesn't do that, how is that politically popular again?

by rashomon 2007-04-13 09:24AM | 0 recs
Re: "Politically Popular"

He isn't running as a Democrat, if you've been paying attention you should have noticed that he is running on nonideological bipartisanship.  He is positioning himself for the general, because he thinks he would be pilloried if he voted for defunding when he is running against the Republicans.  That's a possibility that you should consider.

by jallen 2007-04-13 09:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Great, another generally substance-less diary by an Edwards supporter attacking Obama.

This is going to be a long primary season...

by PsiFighter37 2007-04-12 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

It's not pointless.

I went to see Cindy Sheehan speak tonight, and she made the point that when they voted for another $100 billion for Iraq they're voting for the war.  

She was saying that we can end the war if we want to too.

by ManfromMiddletown 2007-04-12 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

How?  Tell us how?  

Lets say Defunding and troop withdrawals pass with veto proof margins.  At that point, Bush puts a signing statement on the bill that says he is Commander in Chief and in time of war he can take the money from Social Programs, the pentagon, or somewhere else.  Or worse yet, he keeps the troops in Iraq with no funding, and casulties mount... Bush has proven time and again, human life is not important to him... look at Iraq and New Orleans for proof of that (not that any of us need convincing).

The big mistake here is thinking we are dealing with a rational human being.  Clinton, Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, even Nixon would back down with a bill that is Veto proof.  W has proven he won't.  He's not a rational human being, He's a monster and at this point, there really doesn't appear to be a way to end this war until either he and Cheney are impeached (and maybe if they violate a bill like this they would be but the way the Wing nuts are I'm sure they would still support him) or the next president is sworn in, even if a withdrawal or defunding bill is passed.  

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-12 08:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

If Bush does that then he gets impeached. To say defunding ought be off the table due to fear of what Bush would do extralegally is to give up any chance of ending the war unless Bush wants to. That doesn't seem terribly likely.

by Quinton 2007-04-12 09:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

I'm not saying it should be off the table.  I'm saying it won't work.  There is a big difference.

And yes BUSH SHOULD be impeached if he defies congress... but Not enough GOPers have the balls to do it, so he won't be.  

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-12 09:43PM | 0 recs
Impeachment Math

There's only 9 Senate votes difference between a veto-proof majority to a big enough majority to remove the little asshole.

We have a hard time getting to a filibuster-proof majority.

60 = Filibuster-proof.  We pass any bill we want.
66 = Veto-proof.  We can make it stick.
75 = Removal on Impeachment.  President Pelosi

We ain't there yet.  The only thing we can do right now is make Brand GOP repulsive.  Obama needs to get with that program.

Play Chicken!  Bullies like Bush and Cheney always back down when poked in the mouth.

by Mark Adams 2007-04-12 10:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Impeachment Math

Despite the fact that he rarely has backed down in 7 years unless the entire GOP is after him as well, and even then (like in the 9-11 commission) he ignores what happens.  

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-13 05:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Impeachment Math

You "only" need two-thirds to convict on a bill of impeachment, not three-quarters.

Article 1, Section 3:
When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

by taliesin 2007-04-13 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops
Wow, I didn't Realize Vox was ACTUALLY BARACK OBAMA himself, or had done some sort of Vulcan Mind Meld with him to have the audacity of actually telling us that Obama's crystal clear quote ACTUALLY means something completely different that what is said.  
 
by yitbos96bb 2007-04-12 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops
Check out Crooks and Liars. Fox took Obama's quote and completely chopped it up for their agenda. We
need a better netroots network, guys.
by Cismontane 2007-04-12 09:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

So do you guys plan on arguing like this for the next 10 months?! I mean what is the point of very strong Edwards supporters arguing with very strong Obama supporters on a liberal blog that is only read by people who are strongly in favor of one candidate or another. Who are you trying to convince? I'm a strong Edwards supporter with Obama being my second choice if something happens to Edwards. That's not going to change. I would assume most of you are the same way. So what is the purpose other than really enjoying talking shit to other people or about fellow Democrats. It seems pointless to me.

by rbrianj 2007-04-13 12:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Actually my experience here with Edwards supporters has made think that I will probably support HRC as my second choice rather than Edwards.  

by aiko 2007-04-13 05:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again:

Don't let us poison him for you.  He shouldn't be held responsible for us.

by jallen 2007-04-13 05:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again:

Agreed and vice versa with Obama.  Frankly there are HRC supporters on here just as bad as the hardcore Obama and Edwards supporters... and a couple of Clark Supporters as well.  

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-13 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again:

I haven't heard a Clark supporter in ages.

He'll make a great VP with John Edwards.

by Peter from WI 2007-04-13 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

That's the problem with doing this 9 months before the primary. We are all going to cannibalize and hate each other's candidates by the time we have a winner. All we do here is point out the hypocrisy of us all.

by rbrianj 2007-04-13 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again

yitbos raises and excellent point regarding Bush's use of 'signing statements' to flout the law, and the likelihood that he would use another to continue his current policy of endless war in Iraq.  However, that does not change our need to frame this issue properly.  

The Democratic Congress is funding the troops.  The funds are being cut off by Bush's veto!

With all respect to Senator Obama, he really needs to get with that program, as do the other candidates.  In the unlikely event that a veto-proof majority for a date-certain withdrawal emerges in Congress (at least I see it as unlikely), and Bush employs a signing statement, THEN we can modify the narrative.

by CLLGADEM 2007-04-13 02:15AM | 0 recs
It is bad framing though

He needs to say clearly that Bush, not Congress, would be the one not giving body armor, etc because Bush would ignore the will of Congress.

by okamichan13 2007-04-13 03:09AM | 0 recs
Re: It is bad framing though

I was going to stay out of this but i'll jump in

He Did say that but Vox cut that part of his appearance off.

here is the next sentence after Vox stopped the quote

"I am not yet at the point where I am prepared to say that I am going to cut off funding, partly because I spent a lot of time in Iowa, in Illinois, in small communities where every town hall meeting I have I meet with a mother whose son or daughter is in Iraq and they are concerned not only about getting them home but also concerned about getting them home safely and making sure they've got the night vision goggles and the armor and so forth.

Now I think Harry Reid is exactly right that if anybody is putting troops at risk, it is this administration who is now calling up troops that aren't properly trained, sending them over there on rotations that are too frequent and too long and that the Democrats have acted in a very responsible fashion."

You wonder why obama supporters get pissed. Vox purposefully ignored the next sentence so he could claim Obama was blaming dems.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/04/ sweet_blog_special_obama_on_cn.html

by dpg220 2007-04-13 07:34AM | 0 recs
No true!

I was going to stay out of this but i'll jump in

Obama Did say that it was bush's fault, Vox cut that part off convienently.

here is the full answer:

"I am not yet at the point where I am prepared to say that I am going to cut off funding, partly because I spent a lot of time in Iowa, in Illinois, in small communities where every town hall meeting I have I meet with a mother whose son or daughter is in Iraq and they are concerned not only about getting them home but also concerned about getting them home safely and making sure they've got the night vision goggles and the armor and so forth."

"Now I think Harry Reid is exactly right that if anybody is putting troops at risk, it is this administration who is now calling up troops that aren't properly trained, sending them over there on rotations that are too frequent and too long and that the Democrats have acted in a very responsible fashion."

You wonder why obama supporters get pissed. Vox purposefully ignored the next sentence so he could claim Obama was blaming dems.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/04/ sweet_blog_special_obama_on_cn.html

by dpg220 2007-04-13 07:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

I am glad I have seen only smears about Obama given reccomendations here.  

One thing I do hope is Obama supporters don't engage in the same smearing of edwards.  

Not that substantative criticisms shouldn't be leveled, but obviously this is not one of those.  

If you have to parse someone's words to make a criticism you are focusing way too much on utterly trivial things.

by sterra 2007-04-13 04:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Just like armchair generals on the right, the left who wants the funds cut now as the only way to be against the war and to hell with whether the troops suffer or the parents worry, are no different.
And the candidate who wants to do this responsible and make sure the troops don't suffer, does not make them no less anti war.
Because a candidate puts the concerns of the parents before those with no relatives in Iraq, first does not make him less anti war.  Being responsible is not anti war.  geez.
This is a situation where all options are terrible and the candidates are the ones who are trying to figure the best of bad choices.  It is so easy to criticize from your computer.
by vwcat 2007-04-13 04:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops
I have decided that for every smear article on Barack Obama on mydd, I will donate money to his campaign.  It could be anything from 5 - 25.
And concidering the amount of smear artlicles on here about Obama, I suspect my budget is going to take a major hit.  But, it is the principle.  It has gotten out of hand and the spinning of everything the man says and does is like Fox.
by vwcat 2007-04-13 05:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again:

You've gotten out of hand.  You threw a hornets nest of a diary on us last night and didn't even stick around to comment.

by jallen 2007-04-13 05:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again:

Which one?

by yitbos96bb 2007-04-13 06:02AM | 0 recs
Elizabeth

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/4/12/2238 22/066

If you're going to call people out and say they're part of a cult of personality, at least stick around for the discussion.

by jallen 2007-04-13 06:05AM | 0 recs
Im in

Im gonna have to go with $10/smear diary. im young :)

If you'd like to help me reach my fundraising goal for Senator Obama, please consider donating here - http://my.barackobama.com/page/outreach/ view/main/jwrandolph

Thanks!
peace,
jw

by faithfull 2007-04-13 05:50AM | 0 recs
Get a job. :-)

More power to you.  Contribute all you want.

However, this is not a hit diary.  Talking about Senator Obama's positions on issues is what a primary is about.

He is harming the antiwar movement and prolonging the war with his comments at this point.  It is very unfortunate.

by littafi 2007-04-13 06:44AM | 0 recs
Love my job

give to lots of organizations.

but quoting Obama as saying "Democrats hate the troops" in the title of a diary is bullshit. thats not "talking about Obama's position" and not many of the Obama-haters on here are interested in discussion. They are interested in slandering Obama to promote Edwards.

by faithfull 2007-04-13 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Love my job

Now you are "slandering" folks in two ways: (1) calling them "Obama haters" without any evidence and (2) saying some Edwards supporters are interested in "slandering Obama to promote Edwards."  

Should we ignore Obama's words and positions?

by littafi 2007-04-13 08:14AM | 0 recs
Feel free...

to crictique Obama's statements.  Cherry-picking them out of context to make a point is lame.

by rashomon 2007-04-13 09:26AM | 0 recs
Bullshit

Im not slandering anybody. Many of the Edwards supporters on this site do hate Obama, and will use any stupid fraction of a quote taken out of context to say that Obama says that Democrats hate  the troops. Making up a lie, and such is the entire context of this diary, in order to promote Edwards is slander. The fact that anyone would do such a thing as write a diary called "Obama: Democrats hate the troops", snip a quote, and then take it out of context, shows that they hate Obama.

I don't want you to ignore Obama's words and positions. Quite the opposite. I want you to pay attention to them. Write down all the words. Examine the entire position, and stop promoting bullshit diaries like this one onto the recommended list at what is a very respectable site.

by faithfull 2007-04-13 10:31AM | 0 recs
Elizabeth Edwards commented in

your hit diary on her.  You should have revised it based on her comment, Vcat.

by littafi 2007-04-13 06:42AM | 0 recs
Liar

Where does Obama say Democrats hate the troops?

The accusations from some Edwards supports (many of whom I have a great deal of respect for) are getting rediculous!

Not ONCE does he even say the word Democrat. And the troops do need the funds, which the Republican congress failed to provide, for proper equipment and training. Seems straightforward.

Do I wish, as an Obama supporter that he would take tougher stand? Of course. I wish they all would. I wish Edwards hadn't voted to start the damn thing. I wish Kucinich was a better messenger. But quoting Obama as saying Democrats hate the troops is downright slanderous.

by faithfull 2007-04-13 05:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Liar

see my reply above.

he specifically says in his next sentence that it is bush's fault.

by dpg220 2007-04-13 07:41AM | 0 recs
Well about the Fox thing..

no diary this time, but it turns out...

Obama did do the Fox interview after all, as confirmed by the Obama campaign:

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/ electioncentral/2007/apr/13/yes_obama_di d_an_interview_with_fox_0

So think of that what you will. A pretty big deal was made of his freezeout by the netroots in general and his supporters and this seems to be a change in direction.

by okamichan13 2007-04-13 08:11AM | 0 recs
I Really Like Both Edwards and Obama

I know that my header is off topic, but I just thought Id throw that in there.  I think because Edwards and Obama's positions on so many things are so close and are fighting over the same supporters, the postings get a little heated.  So Im just gonna say it again.  I am a huge Edwards person and will be until he wins the election, but I like and admire Obama too.

by Andy Katz 2007-04-13 08:15AM | 0 recs
Peace...Be Civil

Edwards and Obama supporters, there are assuredly differences between the two candidates.  And yes, they use different framing language when describing their positions.  This diary raises the issue of Obama's "framing" of the defunding issue. Considering how we progressives have come to believe that framing is VERY important to winning, I think that framing is a legitimate thing for all of us to discuss.  What do we think of Obama's framing?  Clinton's framing?  Edwards framing?

True, there does seem to be a habit of choosing controversial headlines for diaries that are sometimes more incendiary than entirely accurate, and perhaps this diary follows this peculiar, but I guess, somehwat understandable tradition.  A fair criticism.  But the framing issue itself deserves disscussion.

Bottom line:  I think we can discuss these differences and remain civil...and friends.   :)  

by Demo37 2007-04-13 08:51AM | 0 recs
Before anyone can talk about framing

they have to prove that defunding won't actually limit resources for the troops.

one thing framing expert bloggers rarely discuss is the reality of the policy.  i know we're all in awe of rove's talents, it appears repugs can frame anything to distort the truth, but i don't think that's good for dems.

so before we can talk about framing, we have to consider the real consequences of these policies.

the truth ALWAYS catches up with the frame, so even if we won the frame war now on this issue, we'll pay the price later on.

this is what's happening to repugs right now.  they framed away the truth, but now it's caught up with them and they face the next 20 years as minority status.

so.  lets discuss the truthful consequences of the policies first.  then think about framing.

lastly.  sorry.  but maybe kucinich'd like to consider the fact that his stupid pontificating on the topic also applies to feingold insofar as feingold voted for the 87 billion.  i guess that's what feingold was doing when he did that, AUTHORIZING the war.

by Stewieeeee 2007-04-13 09:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Obama (moveon.org): "That funding authority's still the most powerful check we have. If congress is willing to use it.

We haven't even got agreement for a withdrawal plan "to get them home" with or without funding.

We don't need to pressure Bush as Hills worthless petition is trying to do, but to petition and push the senators on both sides to push them for a withdrawal plan, and achievable benchmarks.

by SandThroughTheEyeGlass 2007-04-13 10:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

Yaaay for slamming Democratic candidates.  The last thing we'd want is one of these guys actually getting into the White House in 2008.  

by JeremiahTheMessiah 2007-04-13 11:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama Does it Again: Democrats Hate the Troops

There are democrats and then there are democrats... coz remember we are all one big happy 'big tent' family... :sarcasm:

by SandThroughTheEyeGlass 2007-04-13 11:04AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads