I really disagree with you on this one, alegre. To me, it's a sign of a good Democrat that Obama didn't want to undermine the party's nominees during the convention by calling them wrong on Iraq. It's like how Hillary obviously wasn't fond of Spitzer's plan, but said some nice things about it rather than throw a fellow Democrat under the bus.
Iraq was a divisive issue for the Democratic Party in 2004 and Obama understood that we had to set those divisions aside for a brief while if we hoped to beat George Bush. I see nothing but a positive in this anecdote.
but he has no problem attacking hillary for doing the same thing when it comes to Spitzer and Rengel ... ho hum. Again, he's a hypocrite
Fine, he's a hypocrite, whatever, but that's completely different from the point of this diary.
If you agree with the principle that someone shouldn't be criticized for having the back of a fellow Dem - whether it's Obama defending Kerry's war vote, or Clinton defending Spitzer's plan - then you should disagree with this diary.
I disagree with the last few paragraphs where Alegre states that he basically back stabs his principles because of Kerry and Edwards on the ticket. I think it reflects well on Obama that he was willing to put the party before himself.
However, i think the diary brings to light important issues as well.
