Via Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times:Howie P.S.: Fair enough. But I'm a little confused why the headline only calls out Obama when the issue also touches "Clinton, Biden, and Edwards." Jerome Armstrong also points a finger at Obama but unlike georgia 10, he lets John Edwards off the hook on this, while completely ignoring Biden. I have no problem with that.
I asked Obama on Thursday to explain his comments [in a recent AP interview].
"What I said was it was unlikely we could generate the votes to override a veto. And I said that I don't believe any Democrat wants to play chicken with the troops, put them in a situation where they don't have the equipment they need to come home safely. That does not mean that our only alternative is to send a carte blanche to the president."
Obama said there are "options that we are looking at now" if there were a veto -- shortening the time frame for funding, for example -- that would keep "this administration on a shorter leash."
To Obama (and Clinton, Biden, and Edwards, for that matter), I ask this: how can we believe you words, your claims that you are the president who will end this war, when you refuse to take the one step that best evidences your dedication to that cause? Either you want the war to end in March 2008 (as so many of their bills claim), or you don't. It is fundamentally inconsistent--and frankly, disrespectful to the American voter--to on the one hand boldly proclaim that it should be the policy of the United States to have all or most troops out of Iraq by March 2008, but then refuse to sign on to legislation that would truly effectuate that policy.
So color me confused. Perhaps Obama can clarify this issue for voters as well.
Friday, April 13, 2007
"Obama Aims to Clarify AP Interview"
georgia 10 on Kos: