"Name one..."

A prominent Texas state senator had literally no response to this question when asked it by Chris Matthews on MSNBC.

Can you answer it?

See for yourself:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/19/chris-matthews-humiliates_n_87493.html

Friday, February 15, 2008

Judgment

Judgment, along with the fact that experience has not proven useful (Vietnam, Iraq) would obviously be Obama's first reply to his thin resume.

But on the central issue of the campaign, Iraq, Obama's record in the Senate pretty much resembles that of Hillary Clinton (Obama joined after the Military Authorization in Iraq bill). He has in fact stated that he may have voted for the war had he known what senators like Clinton knew -- they were privy to Senate Intelligence reports. In 2004, Obama also claimed that his post-war stance (the strategy for occupation) resembled that of George W. Bush.

Indeed, Obama opposed the war in a speech in 2002, but since then he has wavered significantly -- in an almost John Kerry-esque fashion. Iraq is a tricky issue, and while Hillary Clinton has faced intense scrutiny for her statements on it, Obama has gotten off easily despite a series of conflicting statements and positions. For specifics, please see this great article in The New Republic entitled "Cinderalla Story":

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aaad0724-dd13-4ffa-810b-d5d3220ff055&p=1

Look, there's no question Barack Obama is a great orator and that he voiced his displeasure, and yes, opposition to the Iraq War in 2002.

But there is a double-standard. He is not the stalwort anti-war hero he is made out to be. His position on Iraq, as the above article displays, is as nuanced as that of John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.


Why does he deserve a free pass?

Any time Hillary Clinton brings the Iraq issue up, and Obama's wavering on it, the media pounces on her. Can someone ask Senator Obama to explain himself?

Hope is great.

But questions needs answers. Just like problems need solutions.