Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Obama Setting the Pace on Iraq

By

Obama is looking better and better to me.

From today’s NYT:

The notion of Democratic leaders embracing a timetable to leave Iraq had ramifications beyond Congress, particularly in the presidential race. The Senate plan sets a goal for troops to be removed by March 31, 2008, similar to a proposal by Senator Barack Obama, Democrat of Illinois.

A chief rival, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, has advocated a phased withdrawal of troops, but has not proposed setting a specific date.

The story also illustrates the disadvantage Edwards faces as a candidate without an existing office to use as a platform: he can shout all he wants about Iraq and it doesn’t make a bit of practical difference.

If Hillary keeps trying to triangulate Iraq, I suspect she will lose. The Democratic candidate tried that approach in 2004, and it didn’t work out very well then either.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. That’s what Dr Laura always said you should insist on.  I think if she just pulls some date out of thin air to rival Obama date it’ll just be silly.  How about March 28, 2008, so she can beat Obama by three whole days?  That’s better, right?  Or maybe she should pick April 12th, so show her conservative credentials, like she’s not afraid to stay two weeks longer.  Maybe she should just tell us how many soldiers she wants to die before the rest are allowed to come home?  I mean, don’t play politics with a date and a ring.

  2. The House announced their own plan. today.  Haven’t had time to review either for similarities, but at least the House version will be tacked onto the bill authorizing the next chunk of change for the Bush Follies.  Havn’t heard whether the House bill will be free range, or an amendment also to something Bush can’t say no to.

    <

    p>
    Bob, good point about Edwards.  Sort of the same boat as most of his serious Repub rivals.  How did Bill Clinton handle that problem in the run up to 1992 elections?  I can’t remember.  He was sucessful tho, obviously.

    • It will be neither, as it will not see the light of day in the Senate and would be subject to veto anyway.

  3. …”moderately interesting” because it isn’t likely going to go anywhere*, but I’m just wondering.  Was the title of the post

    <

    p>
    Obama Setting the Pace on Iraq

    <

    p>
    intended to be a play on the name of the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?

    <

    p>
    *It isn’t going to go anywhere, because it will be irrelevant unless Congress pulls funding from the war on Iraq.  They could do that via the Defense Department’s appropriation bill by not including line items that are necessary for the continuation of the war.  They wouldn’t have to do it explicitly.  Congress isn’t going to do that, of course, so, as far as I’m concerned, this is pretty much a charade, sound and fury signifying pretty much nothing except for a bit of chest beating.

  4. …between Clinton, Obama and Edwards on this issue.  I’m getting the feeling that some of us good Democrats are trying to split hairs here.

    <

    p>
    We have an embarassment of riches as far as our field of Democratic candidates go.  There are several excellent candidates for the Presidency, including Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and Richardson.  Any one of these candidates, in my mind, would be good for the country, particularly when you keep in mind what we’ve had for the past six years.  I don’t agree with any one of them on every single issue, but come on…let’s not fall into the trap of eating our own.

    <

    p>
    Clinton and Edwards both (unfortunately) voted to authorize the President to go to war.  Obama wasn’t in the Senate at the time, so he couldn’t vote.  He says he would have voted against it, but that’s easy to say…he wasn’t there.

    <

    p>
    Clinton and Edwards both say they would have done things differently…Edwards “apologized” for his vote and Clinton said she wouldn’t have voted the way she did if she knew then what she knows now.  She hasn’t used the word “apologize”, but as far as I am concerned, who cares?  It’s semantics…they both think it was a bad vote.

    <

    p>
    Obama, Edwards and Clinton all want to get us out of Iraq.  Some, like Obama, are setting a timetable.  That’s great…but let’s not start sniping at the other candidates because they haven’t set a specific date for withdrawal.  They all want to end the war, they are all good candidates, and I, for one, am glad to have such a difficult choice to make this time around. 

  5. Last June in the debate on the Kerry/Feingold vs. Levin Amendment, Sen. Obama said that he could not support a timetable, calling the phased redeployment of the troops away from Iraq a ‘precipitous withdrawal’ plan, which it wasn’t.

    <

    p>
    Sen Obama on 6/21/06

    <

    p>

    “America and the American people have paid a high price for the decision to invade Iraq and myriad mistakes that followed. I believe that history will not judge the authors of this war kindly.

      For all these reasons, I would like nothing more than to support the Kerry amendment; to bring our brave troops home on a date certain, and spare the American people more pain, suffering and sorrow.

      But having visited Iraq, I am also acutely aware that a precipitous withdrawal of our troops, driven by congressional edict rather than the realities on the ground, will not undo the mistakes made by this administration. It could compound them.

      It could compound them by plunging Iraq into an even deeper and, perhaps, irreparable crisis. “

    <

    p>
    Sen Obama changed his mind and filed his bill in Jan of ’07, after he decided to run for President. He was no great firebrand for ending the war after his election to the Senate and voted with the more moderate faction on every vote that came up.  He has hardly been a profile in courage on the war.

Archives