Craig Crawford’s Trail Mix: Obama’s Clinton Assault Misfires

By Craig Crawford Mon Oct 15, 12:15 PM ET

Barack Obama finally took aim at his Democratic presidential campaign rival Hillary Rodham Clinton, but his attack against her Senate vote defining the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist group looks more like a misfire than a direct hit.
ADVERTISEMENT

That’s because he was absent for the vote that he deemed so important, instead saying he would have voted the other way had he been there. And yet in Iowa on Friday the Illinois senator focused on last month’s non-binding resolution known as the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment for his most specific and pointed attack against Clinton so far in the Democratic race.

Obama said the New York senator’s vote for the amendment proves that there is “a real difference” between them. Sure, Clinton was the only Senate Democrat running for president who backed the amendment, making it a worthy debate among party hopefuls. But not bothering to cast a vote of his own takes the some of the punch out of Obama’s attack.

Contributing Editor Craig Crawford is a news analyst for NBC, MSNBC and CNBC. He can be reached at ccrawford@cq.com.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20071015/pl_cq_politics/craigcrawfordstrailmixobamasclintonassaultmisfires_1

Obama missed the vote because the date of the vote was changed. Harry Reid had said that the vote would not take place on the date it occurred. Obama left for New Hampshire under the belief there would be not vote, and then Reid changed the date. Although Obama could not make it back for the vote, he did state he would have voted against it.

In committee and on the floor...where was he as Hillary Clinton and Dick Durbin among others worked to get potential military references to it removed, where was he on the campaign trail speaking out against it before the vote...?

There are four United States Senators on the Democratic side running...three managed to make it there...

He was AWOL on the entire issue until after he decided he could use it as a campaign tactic...an effort so transparent as to be laughable...

But oh of course, several months ago he was singing a different tune...

and what about Obama's Voting YES for the S. 970: Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3610447#3610645

And Obama's "POOR" Senate rating for showing up to work?

So what's her excuse for that?
When you run for President, you're going to miss votes.

As far as S. 970, I'll provide you this list of people who also cosponsored S.970 and then voted against Kyl-Lieberman:

Barbara Boxer
Sherrod Brown
Maria Cantwell
Christopher Dodd
Daniel Inouye
Edward Kennedy
John Kerry
Amy Klobuchar
Blanche Lincoln
Jon Tester

Are they all flip-floppers?

flip-flopping is what republicans call it

It's just that they are 2 very different bills.

so they both could be used by * as an excuse to start a war.

The idea that Kyl/Lieberman was a move towards war is illogical. To suggest that we shouldn't do something just because * could lie about it to start a war is to suggest that we do nothing at all. * could lie about ANYTHING.

Maybe we shouldn't pass that resolution on the Armenian genocide, because * might lie about it and use it to start a war.

One was written in order to further diplomacy, the other written explicitly in order to send a strong warning to Iran.

That said, I do agree that some have gone overboard in trying to compare this vote to the IWR or calling it a blank check for war. That's just hyperbole.

Obama doesn't criticize Kyle/Lieberman's intentions. He criticizes it because he claims it can be used by * to start a war. On DU, it's pointed out time and time again that the provisions that mentioned military action were deleted and a provision calling for diplomacy was inserted, showing that the intention of Kyle/Lieberman was to promote diplomacy and not war.

The response from the Obama camp is to quote the part about naming the RG a terrorist organization, and claim that * could use that as a pretext for war.

The guy's a poor excuse for a journalist

First I got so sick of hearing him say that if he were in the Senate when the Iraq resolution was passed, he would not have voted for it. Then when this Iran resolution was up, he did not even debate or vote on it. I don't know.......

He should take a few days off and regroup. And when he goes back out, he needs to deliver a speech without notes or stammering! I'm rooting for Obama but he needs to do better next time.

get over it.