Didnt see much news about Obama today, so I thought I would post a diary. ;). First of all, I will say I dont dislike John Edwards. I think he has done good work with poverty. However, I am for Obama for president. The main reason I am for Obama has to do with one word: Iraq.
First, Obama is the only viable candidate, currently in the race(sorry Gore supporters, not including him just yet) that opposed the war from the beginning. No, he wasnt in the Senate to cast a vote against it, but like Gore and Webb and Clark, he strongly voiced his opposition. Here are some of his comments from 2002.
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.
I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.
I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.
In 2002, Obama was prescient about the war. Sadly prescient. He clearly understood what would happen if we went to war.
John Edwards, on the other hand, not only voted for the war but also co-sponsored Joe Lieberman's Iraq War Resolution. And while I think his position on Iraq now is miles ahead of Hillary Clinton's, I dont think it is the best the Dems have to offer. You can bet the GOP will go after Edwards on his "flip-flopping", and I dont think his response is very strong. While he has said he was wrong, he still seems the need to justify his vote. Last week on Meet the Press, after Russert showed Edwards, Obama's remarks from 02, he said:
SEN. EDWARDS: Yeah, he—he’s correct. Now, I will say, he wasn’t burdened, like a lot of us with the information that we were receiving on the Intelligence Committee. And as members of the United States Senate, we were getting very intimate, detailed information about what was actually happening in Iraq. Senator Obama, I think, you—what’d you say?--was a state senator at the time. So he obviously wasn’t, wasn’t in the Congress and wasn’t part of the—of the decision making. But a lot of those predictions turned out to be true.
Again, Edwards rationale doesnt hold up. 23 Senators, including some members of the Intel commitee, did in fact vote "No" on the war.
So this is basically why I am for Obama. Are there other issues that are important besides Iraq? Yes. Is Iraq the #1 issue for 2008? I think yes. I am under no illusions when it comes to Obama and the GOP; they will certainly smear him, and they already have. And Obama is not perfect on Iraq. He voted against Kerry/Feingold(although he voted for Levin/Reed) and has been silent on the Kennedy bill. But he now has his own plan for Iraq, a pretty good one. And, as someone on this site noted, most importantly, Obama comes from a "position of strength" on Iraq. Unlike Clinton and Edwards, he doesnt have to waste time talking about his current position on the war, why he felt another way on the war, how he came to feel like this, is he flip-flopping, etc. While I appreciate Edwards's courage to apologize, I dont want my candidate to keep saying "I was wrong" on Iraq through an entire campaign. It's not good for his credibility on Iraq and hurts him on other issues too(like poverty) when he has to keep defe. If Obama makes it to the general, whether he faces Giuliani, McCain or Romney, on Iraq, the biggest issue of 08(I believe), the voters will have what they should have had in 04: a clear cut choice.