At the National Conference of Black Mayors Annual Convention in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on May 5, Obama made the following remarks
But, rest assured, this veto is not the last word. If the president continues to stubbornly ignore the realities in Iraq, we intend to force our colleagues in the Senate and the House to take vote after vote after vote after vote after vote after vote until we finally overcome his veto or until he understands that he needs to change course. We need 16 Republican votes in the Senate to override a veto. Now, I'm not going to call out names, but there's a Republican right here in Louisiana who needs to vote to end this war. Tomorrow, I'll be in Iowa, and there's a Senator there who votes who needs to vote to end this war. I need the mayors and students here to call their Senators and their Congressmen too.
So, what do you think Senator Obama did when he got to Iowa the next day? Hint:
Chucky G was not smiling:
In a pair of low-key campaign events, Obama also took a swipe at Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, for not supporting a resolution that would withdraw troops from Iraq. The Democratic presidential candidate also talked about the need for education reform and promoted a forthcoming universal healthcare plan. He made no mention of his new security detail.
"We intend to force our colleagues in the Senate and House to take vote after vote until we overcome (the president's) veto," Obama told a crowd of about 200 at a middle school on Sunday morning. "I'm not going to name names, but there's at least one senator in Iowa who could be helpful."
That was a thinly veiled reference to Grassley, who has stood by President Bush's Iraq policy. Obama took a similar tact in Louisiana on Saturday when he criticized, but did not name, GOP Sen. David Vitter.
This was not the first time Obama had tweaked Chucky G, who predictably whined up a storm:
Earlier this week, Grassley said it was not "senatorial" for Obama to come into Iowa this past Sunday and make such a statement, but the Illinois Senator said it again in Indianola on Thursday night. "I talked to Chuck on the floor of the Senate and it's nothing personal. I think Chuck is a good and decent man. He and I have had a terrific relationship and we've worked together on a lot of things in the past," Obama said during an interview with Radio Iowa. "What I said in Waterloo, though, stands which is that if we want to bring this war to a close we need 16 votes in the Senate for a veto-proof majority...because this president doesn't seem to be willing to give any kind of definitive timeframe for bringing our troops home."
On Wednesday, Grassley accused Obama of lacking "political class" by coming into Iowa and issuing such a challenge to a fellow senator on his home turf.
Surely Obama, Mr. Bi-partisan get along, sellout, Lieberman, warm fuzzy, empty suit, would just backdown and apologize, right?
Wrong!!!
Obama said he has not overstepped his grounds, saying those senatorial traditions pale before the magnitude of the war.
"This isn't about Washington etiquette, it's about bringing our troops home," said Obama. "This is how real change happens in America. This isn't symbolic, this is real."
Obama cited recent reports that Republican members of Congress have conceded they're losing faith in the Iraq strategy. Democrats control Congress, but only narrowly, and Obama said Americans should pressure GOP lawmakers to oppose the war.
"It's already working," said Obama, who has also traveled to Louisiana and Virginia to urge voters to pressure their elected leaders. "That's why 11 Republican Congressmen went to the White House yesterday and demanded honesty and accountability from the president on Iraq."
Obama said he first spoke out against war in 2002, and he vowed to continue pressing on the issue.
"I'm making the same point wherever I go," said Obama. "This is how we're going to bring our troops home — by building a bipartisan coalition the president can't ignore."
This is Barack Obama's idea of bi-partisanship. I doubt Joe Lieberman would approve.
Obama also echoed Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and dismissed George W. Bush's talk of 'compromise'
In the on-going test of wills in the nation's capitol, President Bush said Thursday that he would accept an Iraq war spending plan that includes political and military goals for the Iraqi government. Obama says that seems like "empty" talk to him. "First of all, these benchmarks should have been in place two, three years ago. I don't know exactly what the administration's been telling the Iraqi government, but it is important for us to send a message that we're not going to be there forever," Obama says. "Without any consequences, though, benchmarks alone don't mean much."
During an interview with Radio Iowa on Thursday afternoon, New York Senator and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton labeled Bush's "benchmark" offer as evidence "the message may be getting through to Bush" that the country wants U.S. troops withdrawn from Iraq.
Now, if someone can tell me why EVERY Democrat on the campaign trail shouldn't be doing exactly this, I'd love to hear it.
Comments are closed on this story.