Reply #89: Since you're a Clinton supporter you might want to consider this

[mtnsnake]

The problem I have with what Obama is doing is that on one hand he's differentiating himself as being the only candidate, with the exception of Kucinich, who's been opposed to the war from the start by virtue of the others having voted for the IWR...and on the other hand he's voting to fund the war now.

Not only is he differentiating himself but he's flaunting it all the time at rallies how he's been opposed to the war all along. That's the main problem I have with it. If he's going to insist he's the only one of the heavyweights who's anti-war from start to now, then he shouldn't be voting to fund it now.

It's not fair to Edwards and Clinton that Obama can campaign now as being the only one who's been anti-war from the beginning, yet he can vote to fund the war while he's flaunting himself to be the only one opposed to the war from start. If he's what he says, the only candidate of the big 3 that's opposed the war from the start, then I wish he'd vote "no" on the funding for sake of consistency. He's going to get throttled in the debates for this, and that's got me worried.