Regardless of Hillary’s chances in the GE, it’s not fair to compare her vote with Obama’s

[AGirl]

Obama is the man who wasn't there. There's no comparison. Obama has no moral authority to say that he knows better.

[Windy]

1. Its fair to compare her vote to the many other senators who got the same info and voted NO!!!

she made a mistake in judgment. Yes, it should be held against her.

[AGirl]

3. But those senators aren't running for the presidency.

[DJ13]

6. "But those senators aren't running for the presidency. "

And they seem to have more sense than Hillary who thinks she should be President.

Was that your point?

[AGirl]

8. no, that wasn't my point. Figure it out what my point is.

[Joe the Revelator]

4. and the 1000's of activists who were begging her not to vote for the IWR

[billbuckhead]

2. It is ironic that the man who voted present over 100 times would chastize

[DJ13]

5. "Obama has no moral authority to say that he knows better."

Look up Obama's speech in Illinois just before the IWR before you pass judgement.

[AGirl]

7. wow, a speech. :roll my eyes:

[subsuelo]

9. where was HIllary's speech

[Blue-Jay]

10. Yes. A speech. (actually many statements)

He came out publicly against the IWR on many occasions, and has stood by that decision ever since. That MEANS something.

[never_get_over_it]

20. oh is that the one he removed from his website

when he was running for the Senate - yeah moral authority my ass....he would have voted yes to IWR too....

http://davidsirota.com/index.php/mr-obama-goes-to-washington/

"Then there is the Iraq War. Obama says that during his 2004 election campaign he “loudly and vigorously” opposed the war. As The New Yorker noted, “many had been drawn initially by Obama’s early opposition to the invasion.” But “when his speech at the antiwar rally in 2002 was quietly removed from his campaign Web site,” the magazine reported, “activists found that to be an ominous sign”–one that foreshadowed Obama’s first months in the Senate. Indeed, through much of 2005, Obama said little about Iraq, displaying a noticeable deference to Washington’s bipartisan foreign policy elite, which had pushed the war. One of Obama’s first votes as a senator was to confirm Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State despite her integral role in pushing the now-debunked propaganda about Iraq’s WMD"

[Unsane]

11. Um, yes it fucking is.

Obama spoke out against the IWR at the time of the vote. He, along with 21 other then-Senators saw through Bush's bullshit and opposed his war of choice.

[AGirl]

12. "state senator" right?

[Unsane]

13. He was prepping to run for US Senate. His butt was on the line. He took a stand.

Hillary SIDED WITH BUSH.

[Windy]

17. Great point. He was prepping to run for Senate and going to war was popular with the majority

of the american public back then. And yet he took a stand.

[Thrill]

14. He was against this before the vote

So your point makes no sense

[CreekDog]

15. It's totally fair. He actually took a position at the same time she was voting.

And if she had voted against it, he would not have it as an issue to use against her.

Too bad for Hillary, she blew a big decision that was partly in her hands.

[Dogmudgeon]

16. We need to look at both in more detail

<mode partisan=off wonk=on/>

Obama has made a number of smaller mistakes; Hillary has usually made the right decisions, but made a huge blunder that can not be waved off. She also over-explains it in a way that tells me she has never dealt with it well. To thine own self be true -- Hillary is still struggling with this, the worst mistake in her otherwise remarkable life.

It's not "fair" that she was put in a position Obama wasn't, but that's the way the cards were dealt. We can look at Obama's individual votes and statements since he became a Senator.

A lot of people are making simplistic decisions about the candidates, and it's just not the right thing to do. A detailed look at how HRC made her decision is vital to understanding not only her blunder, but to better "appreciate" the craven depravity of George Bush. To systematically deceive Congress about a matter of such gravity is unforgivable. And while I understand the desire to keep impeachment "off the table", it should stay on the table, and Bush should be held accountable after he leaves office, and if he leaves the jurisdiction of the USA.

But back to Hillary and Obama -- I think if we take any simplistic point of view, we miss the heart of the debate over who is a better leader. We have to consider leadership when it fails, too; it's when a leader confronts their own failings that really makes them a leader. Neither candidate can claim perfection; we will find our answer in the flaws.

Personally, it is my biggest disappointment with Hillary. There are now two people I will never see again because of the war. There is more to Hillary than the war vote -- but it is still a deep scar.

--p!

[AGirl]

18. I am sorry to hear that, It is really sad, indeed.

I agree Hillary has not been able to true with us about the Iraq vote, too bad.

[Dogmudgeon]

22. Actually, I *do* think she has been telling the truth

But the truth is that she is still coping with it. It's an open wound for her, as it is for the nation.

I do not hold it against her. But I still must consider it. To brush it aside would be as bad as blindly lashing out at her.

--p!

[Stephanie]

19. Okay, let's compare it with Ted Kennedy's vote.

[anamandujano]

21. Well said--"the man who wasn't there"

and who did not know how he would have voted if he had had a vote at the time.