Barack's Character Problem: A Follow Up

After posting a short article I wrote concerning Sen. Barack Obama and his inconsistency on several issues, I got slammed over at the Daily Kos website for twisting Sen. Obama's words and lying about his positions.  After I read those comments, I realized that indeed I should have given more substantial evidence to back up my claims.  So here is my evidence: quotes from Barack Obama himself, a top surrogate, and reliable, objective sources.

In 2004, Sen. Barack Obama said the following when asked on multiple occasions whether or not he would have voted for war in Iraq: 

"I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports.  What would I have done?  I don't know."

  -New York Times, July 26, 2004

"There's not much of a difference between my position (on Iraq) and George Bush's position at this stage."

  -Chicago Tribune, July 27, 2004

And then when questioned by Tim Russert about why he said the things above, Barack responded:

"(Those comments) were made during the convention when we had a nominee, both for President and Vice President, who had voted for the war.  It was probably the wrong time for me to be making a strong case against my party's nominee."

  -Meet the Press, November 11, 2007

That last quote, in my opinion, perfectly exemplifies the lack of leadership Sen. Obama exhibits.  He himself admitted that he essentially just went with the flow as to not upset the status quo.  I don't care what the circumstances are, a true leader stands up for what he believes in 100% of the time, regardless of what others, even his "elders" of "friends" may think of him.  Of course the case could be made that Barack did not exhibit poor leadership, but in fact truly didn't know whether he would have voted for or against the war.  So either a) Obama isn't a true leader as he claims, or b) Obama was telling the truth and in fact did agree with George Bush.  I'll let you decide which one is a more damning critique.

On Obama's healthcare plan:

"It's pretty much conventional wisdom that, without a mandate, a substantial portion of Americans would remain uninsured...15 million is an estimate...but at least a few well-respected authorities, none of them tied to one candidate, think it makes sense."

  -Jonathan Cohn, The New Republic, December 3, 2007

"(Obama's plan) does not include a mandate for adults, as Clinton's plan does. That likely means not as many people will be insured."

  -Kenneth Thorpe, professor of health policy and management at Emory University

"(When Sen. Clinton says Obama's plan leaves 15 million uninsured), Clinton is accurately quoting studies that estimate how many will be uninsured under Obama's plan."

  -St. Petersburg Times/ politifact.com

"What he may be saying is he supports the idea that everybody ought to have healthcare. He supports universal access."

 -Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), Obama surrogate, December 11, 2007 on Tucker

So basically what you get when you put these quotes, from reliable sources, on healthcare together, is that Sen. Obama likes the idea of everyone having health care, but at the same time won't mandate it, which experts estimate will leave 15 million uninsured.  

There is my evidence that backs up the claims I made in my article a few days ago.  (Click here for that article)  People can say what they want and think what they want, but the proof is all right here.  

The Rosetta Stone To The War In Iraq (Part II)

Click here for Part I

The most important piece of the Rosetta Stone to the Iraq War was the U.N inspectors who were on the ground in Iraq.  They were there 7 straight years after the 1991 Gulf War and they returned prior to the invasion in March 2003.  Why was that important?  Because after no WMD were found by our own inspectors, Mr. Kay and Mr. Duelfer, the Bush administration, the CIA, and many military officers, especially those who appeared on the cable networks, were telling the American people the reasons we were so wrong were because the U.S. had no humint (human intelligence) on the ground in Iraq. 

 

Well there was the U.N. humint on the ground in Iraq doing their job.  That humint on the ground in Iraq were not only experienced weapons inspectors, but one among them was Scott Ritter, an outspoken American Marine who was on the ground in Iraq from the beginning.  He wrote a book about the inspectors in Iraq after the Gulf War and pointed out that the CIA tried to manipulate the U.N. inspectors and were more interested in spying on Iraq than the hunt for WMD.

 

The U.N. weapons inspectors went back before the 2003 invasion and said over and over again, in public and before the U.N., that they disarmed Iraq, destroyed the weapons they found, and destroyed the equipment used in the manufacture of weapons.  Scott Ritter was on television almost every night in 2002 and 2003 telling the country over and over again that Iraq had no WMD.  The Bush administration along with the others who clamored for the war tried to discredit him and the U.N. inspectors.  Bush would have no part of their "human intelligence" on the ground.  It should also be pointed out that despite Bush's rhetoric about WMD, the CIA could not provide the U.N. inspectors any useful information on these WMD. (Of course we all know why.)

 

George Bush and Dick Cheney tried to undermine the U.N. inspectors and the job they were doing by putting any obstacle in the way they could think of.  Our own inspectors, Kay and Duelfel, proved the U.N. inspectors were right.  Bush knew if the U.N. inspectors were allowed to complete their job as Germany and France wanted them to, there would be no war.  So Bush ordered them out and started a war that the neocons said would be a cakewalk.

Mr. Bush and his neocon team were bent on going to war with Iraq from the very beginning of his administration.  Paul O'Neill, Mr. Bush's first Treasury Secretary pointed out in his book, "The Price of Loyalty", that just 10 days in office and all the talk was about Iraq.  Getting Saddam was clearly the administration's focus.  Condi Rice, the National Security Adviser at the time, said that Iraq might be the key to reshaping the entire region.  

 

Then, still very early in office, O'Neill was reading a document that CIA director Tenent passed out.  It laid out a plan of covert activity around the globe.  At its core was the enabling provision that there be virtually no civilian oversight.  The concept was tell us (CIA) how you want to look Mr. President and we'll handle the rest. 

 

That was an astounding un-American document.  It of course led to the ultimate lie: WMD that did not exist.  The cover up of the truth dealing with the war is still going.  We also know, from all the other scandals of this administration, that they have the ability to escape oversight and disclosure. 

 

I was born during the WWII generation, so I have seen a lot of wars and how our past Presidents acted during those wars.  However, the way Mr. Bush used our military power in starting an unnecessary war and occupation over WMD that did not exist is shameful.  His arrogance, lies, and distortion of the truth and the covert way he has run the White House, have defamed the Presidency and what our country is all about.  Worst of all, he put our men and women in uniform at risk when our national security was not in danger.

 

There was a time when Republicans and Democrats alike in Congress took a stand against President Nixon and told him he had to resign or be impeached.  Those members of Congress put their country first.  It is time for Republicans and Democrats who make up the present congress to draw the line, face their responsibilities as Americans, and inform Mr. Bush he has to go, one way or another.  One more year in office is much too long for this reckless President.  It's time that the current members of Congress put Americans and their country first.