In 2006, John Kerry proposed a bill to withdraw all American troops from Iraq by June 2007. Senators Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton voted no.
Here is a link to a recent Time magazine article in which the author praises Senators Obama and Clinton for opposing the Kerry bill in June 2006
Time Article
More after the fold.
Here is a short comment from the article:
Both he and Clinton voted against John Kerry's proposal to withdraw all troops by July 2007, for reasons that still sound good today. "What is needed is a blueprint for an expeditious yet responsible exit from Iraq," Obama said on the Senate floor last June. "A hard and fast, arbitrary deadline for withdrawal offers our commanders in the field ... insufficient flexibility to implement that strategy."
...
Clinton remains opposed to timetables, but Obama decided to change his position and in January announced the March 2008 date. Aside from that, there isn't much practical difference between Obama and Clinton on the war: both oppose the surge, both support a phased withdrawal, neither of them would cut off funding. And when pressed, Obama concedes that his March 2008 deadline can be "adjusted," depending on events on the ground."
I imagine some Obama supporters will be upset and some may attack me for placing this here. His vote, however, is a matter of public record.
My question is what was the rationale for Obama voting "no" on the Kerry bill last year and what changed since then to cause Obama to change his position? I'm sure he has a reasoned basis for his changed positions. What is it?
What also changed, if anything, from the time of his speech in 2002 oppposing any invasion, his position in 2006 as expressed in his vote to oppose the Kerry bill, to his position now?
Update I: inevitability comments below that the Kerry bill was also sponsored by Senator Feingold, with cosponsorship by Senators Boxer and Leahy