One of Senator Obama's biggest critics was Senator Hillary Clinton. According to an article (Clinton Discussed Use of Nukes Last Year) in the Washington Post, she should have remembered that people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
"I would certainly take nuclear weapons off the table," she said in April 2006 [during a Bloomberg Television interview].Senator Clinton had then as now, criticized her opponent, Senator Obama, as too inexperienced for the job of Commander In Chief. "
I have said publicly no option should be off the table, but I would certainly take nuclear weapons off the table," Clinton said. "This administration has been very willing to talk about using nuclear weapons in a way we haven't seen since the dawn of a nuclear age. I think that's a terrible mistake."However, her views have changed from then to now.
Her campaign spokesman, Phil Singer, said the circumstances for her remarks last year were different than the situation Obama faced.I just don't see that much difference. And neither did another Democrat running for the Presidential Nomination.
"She was asked to respond to specific reports that the Bush-Cheney administration was actively considering nuclear strikes on Iran even as it refused to engage diplomatically," he said. "She wasn't talking about a broad hypothetical nor was she speaking as a presidential candidate. Given the saber-rattling that was coming from the Bush White House at the time, it was totally appropriate and necessary to respond to that report and call it the wrong policy."
"If nothing else, these kinds of careless statements expose the difference in the candidates' depth of experience and understanding when it comes to the complex world of foreign policy and military affairs," said the Connecticut senator [Chris Dodd].Apparently Senator Dodd is also calling them both too inexperienced and lacking depth of understanding to be elected President.