The Globe ran this on the front page yesterday:
"Obama stance on Iraq shows evolving view"
"by Farah Stockman, Globe Staff | March 8, 2008
WASHINGTON - In July of 2004, the day after his speech at the Democratic convention catapulted him into the national spotlight, Barack Obama told a group of reporters in Boston that the United States had an "absolute obligation" to remain in Iraq long enough to make it a success.
"The failure of the Iraqi state would be a disaster," he said at a lunch sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, according to an audiotape of the session. "It would dishonor the 900-plus men and women who have already died. . . . It would be a betrayal of the promise that we made to the Iraqi people, and it would be hugely destabilizing from a national security perspective."
The statements are consistent with others Obama made at the time, emphasizing the need to stabilize Iraq despite his opposition to the US invasion. But they also represent perhaps his most forceful language in depicting withdrawal from crisis-ridden Iraq as a betrayal of the Iraqi people and a risk to national security.
Obama spoke out passionately against the war in 2002 as an Illinois state senator, while many in Congress were silent. But his thinking on how to resolve the crisis in Iraq evolved....
Now, Obama's views about the war have become a campaign issue.... Yesterday, news of an Obama adviser's comments that his promise to withdraw troops within 16 months represented only a "best-case scenario" further fanned questions about his Iraq views....Yeah, HIS VIEWS are an issue in the Zionist media.
Not the FABULOUSLY WRONG views of McCain and Clinton!!
Obama's core Iraq views, made public in a Sept. 12 speech: to bring home one to two combat brigades each month, with all brigades out in 16 months, and keep only a small number of troops in Iraq to protect US diplomats and launch limited, targeted strikes on Al Qaeda.
But this week, Obama adviser Samantha Power caused a stir when she told BBC's "Hard Talk" that Obama "will revisit" the plan when he becomes president.
"You can't make a commitment in March of 2008 about what circumstances are going to be like in January 2009," said Power, who resigned from the campaign yesterday over separate comments insulting Clinton. "He will, of course, not rely upon some plan that he has crafted as a presidential candidate or a US senator. He will rely upon an operational plan that he pulls together in consultation with people on the ground."
Obama insisted yesterday he would stick to his plan...."
"Obama adviser quits campaign over comments"
"by Susan Milligan, Globe Staff | March 8, 2008
WASHINGTON - An award-winning foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama resigned yesterday after her comments in a Scottish newspaper calling Hillary Clinton a "monster" were denounced by both presidential campaigns.
Samantha Power, a Harvard professor and Pulitzer Prize-winning author of a book on genocide... in an interview conducted Monday and published yesterday, Power told The Scotsman that Clinton "is a monster, too - that is off the record - she is stooping to anything" to win the nomination.
She had to step aside for TELLING the TRUTH?!?!
She APPROVED of this damn occupation that has cost millions of lives, right?
But the Clinton's can be as nasty as they wanna be?
The Clinton campaign speedily sent out a fund-raising appeal attached to the Power remarks. "A small contribution now - even as little as $5 - will show the Obama campaign that there is a price to this kind of attack politics," Terry McAuliffe, Clinton campaign chairman, said in an e-mail to potential donors.
They must REALLY BE IN TROUBLE if they are begging for $5!!!
Surprised that the Clintons STILL LIE, folks?
The Clinton campaign has used previous controversies to raise money; last year, the campaign based a fund-raising appeal on a
The Democratic nomination fight has grown testier since Tuesday's primaries, with Obama's camp raising questions about Clinton's tax returns and her records from when her husband was president - and Clinton's responding by saying Obama is "imitating Ken Starr," the independent prosecutor who led an investigation that sought to impeach Bill Clinton.
Asked the difference between calling someone a "monster" and comparing someone to Starr, Clinton at first said the media had made the Starr reference. Reminded that it was her spokesman who had done so, Clinton said, "One is an ad hominem attack, and one is a historical reference."Then she agreed with her surrogates slimy and sleazy suggestion.
Whitewater is how the Clintons laundered drug-money payoffs on flights from Central America in the 1980s during Iran-Contra, readers.
That's why it was never a campaign issue between George Sr. and Big Bill!
And, of course, the New York Times must do a Sunday morning, front-page hatchet job on him:
"Obama in Senate: Star Power, Minor Role"
Even though he WON WYOMING!!!
