Did Obama campaign on voting against funding the war?

This is the first time I have heard this allegation. Is this true?

-snip-

Clinton said her husband's comments focused on the story line of Obama's campaign -- a speech he gave in 2002, as a state senator in Illinois, in which he opposed the war in Iraq. "He gave a very impassioned speech against it and consistently said that he was against the war, he would vote against the funding for the war," she said. "By 2003, that speech was off his Web site. By 2004, he was saying that he didn't really disagree with the way George Bush was conducting the war. And by 2005, 6, and 7, he was voting for $300 billion in funding for the war. The story of his campaign is really the story of that speech and his opposition to Iraq. I think it is fair to ask questions about it."

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/13/clinton_says_obama_playing_rac.html?hpid=topnews

but I would take anything from the Clinton campaign with a grain of salt.

I'm having definite trust issues with them.

On the other hand, given what has happened recently, would Hillary have the chutzpah to blatantly lie about Obama on this?

Hillary has chutzpah up the wazoo. She gets it from being around Bill "I did not have sex with that woman" Clinton.

Good job of emulating your candidate's tactics...

Might explain why you're constantly posting this stuff. If it's not true, stop starting threads that add to the disruption.

Where it can reach millions of voters. How many people read DU? The people here have their minds made up already anyway.

It is important to sift what is fact and fiction in Obama's record, especially when Hillary attacks him. It seems she was technically wrong on this but right on the spirit of the attack. Obama ran as an aggressive opponent of the war and then when he won he quietly acquiesced to funding the war and flip flopped on demanding a timetable until he flip flopped again recently.

This article seems to address the issue.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/01/6786_desperate_in_nh_1.html

(snip)
Did Obama actually vow, as Clinton said, to never vote for funds for the Iraq war? If he had, he would indeed be a major promise-breaker—and a fraud on a critical issue for Democratic voters. This was a powerful allegation.

I sent an email to a Clinton spokesperson who specializes in opposition research, asking for a citation to back up this charge. He quickly replied with a link for a page on a Clinton campaign website that contains a quote from a speech Obama delivered in November 2003, when he was running for Senate:

"Just this week, when I was asked, would I have voted for the $87 billion dollars , I said no. I said no unequivocally because, at a certain point, we have to say no to George Bush. If we keep on getting steamrolled, we are not going to stand a chance".

(snip)

More at link.

on edit: added quotation marks & fixed title.

-snip-

Obama challenged the Congress to 'stand up to the misplaced priorities of this Administration' by delaying the $87 billion for Iraq until the President provides a specific plan and timetable for ending the U.S. occupation, justifies each and every dollar to ensure it is not going to reward Bush political friends and contributors, and provides 'investment in our own schools, health care, economic development and job creation that is at least comparable' to what is going to Iraq. 'It's not just Iraq that needs rebuilding. It's America, too,' Obama said.

-snip-

Hillary was wrong on the particulars but right on the spirit. Obama ran on aggressive opposition to the war, even demanding a timetable for ending the war long before Murtha proposed it, yet when he won he quietly voted to fund the war each time and made no effort to attach strings. He was against a timetable, which he campaigned on, until recently.

Do you have a link for that?

He spoke out against it in 2005 and 2006. This is why he voted against Kerry-Feingold.

18 months=the time of Kerry/Feingold which Obama voted against.

-snip-

Sen. Obama waited 18 months to give his first speech on the Senate floor devoted to Iraq, in which he opposed a timeline for withdrawal. Obama said "I'm also acutely aware that a precipitous withdrawal of our troops, driven by Congressional edict rather than the realities on the ground, will not undo the mistakes made by this Administration. It could compound them."

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=5161

But it's difficult to finish them. And once you're in them, you have to fund them. What, should Obama have voted to cut off troops salaries? Cut off funding for armoring vehicles in Iraq when troops are being killed by roadside bombs?

This is why starting wars must be a last resort.

This is why Hillary was wrong to vote for the war when she wasn't convinced that there was justification for it.

Turns out it wasn't wrong once he got elected.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=2970930&page=2

Obama Changed Position on War Funding
Democratic Presidential Contender Opposed War Funding in 2003 but Has Voted Four Times for Funding in Senate

<edit>

In video obtained by ABC News of a Winnetka, Ill., Democratic event from Sunday, Nov. 16, 2003, then-state senator Obama told a cheering crowd that it was wrong to vote to fund the war.

"Just this week, when I was asked, would I have voted for the $87 billion dollars, I said 'No,'" Obama said to applause as he referred to a bill to fund troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I said no unequivocally because, at a certain point, we have to say 'No' to George Bush," Obama said. "If we keep on getting steamrolled, we are not going to stand a chance."

Obama's campaign says that he opposed the $87 billion war supplement because a portion of the funds were to be directed toward reconstruction of Iraq, which he feared would be distributed inappropriately.

"He was against this $20 billion in no-bid contracts that was forced into the bill for reconstruction for the country of Iraq with no accountability," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.

In a questionnaire he completed for the liberal group Council for a Livable World and in a 2003 press release he issued as a state senator, Obama suggested the Congress delay the $87 billion in funding "until the president provides a specific plan and timetable for ending the U.S. occupation, justifies each and every dollar to ensure it is not going to reward Bush political friends and contributors, and provides 'investment in our own schools, health care, economic development and job creation that is at least comparable' to what is going to Iraq."

But at the time, Obama's public statements suggested he opposed voting for the supplement as a way of opposing the president's overall strategy in Iraq, and not just the reconstruction funds.

Obama told the Chicago Sun Times in November 2003 that he opposed the funding because it "enables the Bush administration to continue on a flawed policy without being accountable to the American people."

more...