Now we’ll have to listen to them make the rounds claiming to support the troops – while denying them the funds they need to fight.
Courting the anti-war constituency, Democratic presidential rivals Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama both voted against legislation that pays for the Iraq war but lacks a timeline for troop withdrawal.
“I fully support our troops” but the measure “fails to compel the president to give our troops a new strategy in Iraq,” said Clinton, a New York senator.
“Enough is enough,” Obama, an Illinois senator, declared, adding that President Bush should not get “a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path.”
Their votes Thursday night continued a shift in position for the two presidential hopefuls, both of whom began the year shunning a deadline for a troop withdrawal.
Senator Biden got it right:
Of the four Democratic hopefuls in the Senate, only Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware supported the bill. He said he did so reluctantly because he viewed the measure as flawed. But he added: “As long as we have troops on the front lines, it is our shared responsibility to give them the equipment and protection they need.”
These two are going to get blasted for trying to pull the rug out from under the troops and emboldening the enemy – and they deserve it. But their actions also reveal a critical naivete (or selfishness) which renders them both unfit to hold the office they seek. They either don’t fully comprehend the seriousness of the threat we face or they’re willing to undermine our defenses in the face of that threat to fight their own petty political battles. Islamic fascism wins either way. Put one of these reckless egomaniacs in the driver’s seat and the danger level will rise considerably.
There are post-vote statements from both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
Bloggers React:
Roger L. Simon
By voting against the military appropriations bill for Iraq today, Hillary, even more than the other Democratic presidential aspirants who voted against it, showed herself to be venal and cowardly. Why more? Because she more than any of them, I strongly suspect, was motivated entirely by political pandering. Obama etc. on some level believe (absurd as it is) the pseudo-pacifist drivel promulgated by the neo-isolationist left. I doubt Hillary does for one minute. She was governed by fear in her vote and acting out of a slavish need to be elected. In these times, someone like that has no business in the Oval Office.
Right Wing News
No big surprise that Obama and Clinton voted “no” to bow to their moonbat base. They had to do something to compete with Edwards’ claim that the war against terrorism is just a bumper sticker slogan.
Faithful Progressive
Bush didn’t just win this–he gave up a lot and must recognize that this is the last Iraq supplemental that will be approved. This bill represents progress, not the end to the war that many of us are hoping for–but progress nonetheless.
The Strata-Sphere
The votes to support the troops and the war effort were crushing defeats for the Dems and the left. In the House it was two-to-one in support of Bush, in the Senate even more crushing.
MyDD
As expected, Obama uses the Bush veto as a pivot to turn to voting against funding of the war, laying the blame on Bush. Nothing from Clinton yet. The Obama camapign also used twitter to send out his response, “In DC voting No”, texting, “We should not give the President a blank check to continue down this same, disastrous path.”
One Response
Readers are solely responsible for the comments they post. Comments do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of Blogs of War or John Little.
July 22nd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
When I was a child I played army. I played with play guns. I had toy soldiers. I loved playing army
but, I grew up
When I grew up and became a man I realized our military murdered walking-talking-living children. When I grew up I realized our army blew the heads off of children.
Please grow up