Taylor Marsh – TaylorMarsh.com – News, Opinion and Weblog on Progressive Politics

Here’s a clue. The blogger in question has a terminal case of Clinton Derangement Syndrome. I know, there are so many of them.

Clinton has taken a lot of heat from Obama supporters, but particularly from
the big Obama bloggers on her Iraq war vote.

Never mind that Senator Obama’s speech in 2002 was greeted by a yawn at the
time and wasn’t exactly a profile in courage considering his district. Via NPR:

… .. “There was nothing magic about it,” Andrade said, adding, “There was nothing about that speech that would have given anybody any sense that he was going places. We were just glad that he was one of those who was willing to step up at a time when very few people seemed to be willing to do that.” So, just how much attention did the speech attract? Bill Glauber, who covered the rally for the Chicago Tribune, says he didn’t even quote Obama. “I guess other media was there,” Glauber says, “but we didn’t quote Barack Obama at his famous anti-war speech. He was not the main guy.” … … .. Obama cites the speech as an example of his political courage, but David Mendell, author of Obama: From Promise to Power, says the address was not necessarily a risky move. “I still don’t think it was an inordinate risk here in Illinois, where you have a very blue-state crowd,” Mendell said, adding, “I might take issue with just how risky it was.”

So let’s take the time machine back to when John Kerry was running in 2004.
A lot was made about the Iraq war back then too. Here’s one of today’s Obama
bloggers coming to the aid of John Kerry back in 2004:

… .. In any case, all of this is merely a too-lengthy way of noting that giving the president the authority and the muscle to force the inspectors back into Iraq (i.e., giving him the authority to go to war if they were not allowed back in) simply cannot be equated with giving the president the go-ahead to game the process and go to war immediately even if they were allowed in. That doesn’t mean that Kerry is in the clear on any legitimate criticism. But ironically the best argument against Kerry’s position is one that is simply off-limits to the president — namely, that Kerry should have or perhaps did know that the president was lying when he said he needed the muscle of the resolution to force the inspectors back in and have some hope of settling the crisis short of war. The president was dishonest with the world and dishonest with the American people. He gamed the process and it blew up in his face — though with a long fuse. By any reasonable moral reckoning he deserves all the comeuppance of his bad faith. …

This one is a true classic.

I got a heads up on this via email. The answer was in the comment section
of one of Big Tent
Democrats’ posts over at Talk Left, which I already linked to. However,
I missed the comment by Mike Pridmore that revealed the blogger who supported
Kerry’s position back in 2004, but now thinks Clinton’s position on Iraq is, well, you know what the Obama blogs
think.

So, name that blogger. (If you can’t guess, here’s the answer, again, compliments of TalkLeft reader Mike Pridmore. More CDS from the same blogger here and here.)