Obama Camp To McCain: Thank You For Highlighting My Leadership On Nukes
The Obama campaign is hitting back at McCain's speech today attacking Republicans and Democrats for failing on nuke proliferation.
Camp Obama's response is kind of fun: They're basically thanking McCain for, in effect, highlighting Obama's record on nukes by speaking out on the issue. From Obama spokesperson Bill Burton's statement...
"By embracing many aspects of Barack Obama's non-proliferation agenda today, John McCain highlighted Obama's leadership on nuclear weapons throughout this campaign, and his bipartisan work with Richard Lugar in the Senate. No speech by John McCain can change the fact that he has not led on non-proliferation issues when he had the chance in the Senate, and that his support for a war against Iraq -- which had no active nuclear program -- diverted us from our efforts to secure loose nuclear materials, hampered our ability to pressure countries like North Korea and Iran, and sets back our ability to lead the world against the threat of nuclear weapons."
The Obama camp has compiled a bunch of past quotes from him on the topic that it claims show McCain's more a follower than a leader here. View them after the jump.
The McCain camp responds:
The Obama campaign insists that their candidate has 'led the fight in the U.S. Senate for arms control.' But the record should be clear: Sen. Obama, after he entered the Senate in 2005, joined Sen. Lugar and the many other members who have supported the Nunn-Lugar program and other nonproliferation programs for years. His campaign points as evidence of his leadership to a bill so non-controversial that it passed the Senate by unanimous consent. There was no 'fight' for Sen. Obama to lead.
NUCLEAR-FREE WORLDMcCain: "A quarter of a century ago, President Ronald Reagan declared, "our dream is to see the day when nuclear weapons will be banished from the face of the Earth." That is my dream, too. It is a distant and difficult goal. And we must proceed toward it prudently and pragmatically, and with a focused concern for our security and the security of allies who depend on us. But the Cold War ended almost twenty years ago, and the time has come to take further measures to reduce dramatically the number of nuclear weapons in the world's arsenals."
Obama on 10/2/07: "But we need to do much more. We need to change our nuclear policy and our posture, which is still focused on deterring the Soviet Union - a country that doesn't exist. Meanwhile, India and Pakistan and North Korea have joined the club of nuclear-armed nations, and Iran is knocking on the door. More nuclear weapons and more nuclear-armed nations mean more danger to us all. Here's what I'll say as President: America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons."
Non-Proliferation Treaty
McCain: "In 2010, an international conference will meet to review the Non-Proliferation Treaty. If I am President, I will seize that opportunity to strengthen and enhance all aspects of the non-proliferation regime."
Obama on 10/2/07: "As we do this, we'll be in a better position to lead the world in enforcing the rules of the road if we firmly abide by those rules. It's time to stop giving countries like Iran and North Korea an excuse. It's time for America to lead. When I'm President, we'll strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so that nations that don't comply will automatically face strong international sanctions."
REDUCING ARSENALS
McCain: "While working closely with allies who rely on our nuclear umbrella for their security, I would ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff to engage in a comprehensive review of all aspects of our nuclear strategy and policy. I would keep an open mind on all responsible proposals. At the same time, we must continue to deploy a safe and reliable nuclear deterrent, robust missile defenses and superior conventional forces that are capable of defending the United States and our allies. But I will seek to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal to the lowest number possible consistent with our security requirements and global commitments."
Obama on 10/2/07: "We will not pursue unilateral disarmament. As long as nuclear weapons exist, we'll retain a strong nuclear deterrent. But we'll keep our commitment under the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty on the long road towards eliminating nuclear weapons. We'll work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair-trigger alert, and to dramatically reduce the stockpiles of our nuclear weapons and material. We'll start by seeking a global ban on the production of fissile material for weapons. And we'll set a goal to expand the U.S.-Russian ban on intermediate-range missiles so that the agreement is global."
NUCLEAR FUEL SUPPLYMcCain: "To persuade countries to forego enrichment and reprocessing, I would support international guarantees of nuclear fuel supply to countries that renounce enrichment and reprocessing, as well as the establishment of multinational nuclear enrichment centers in which they can participate. Nations that seek nuclear fuel for legitimate civilian purposes will be able to acquire what they need under international supervision. This is one suggestion Russia and others have made to Iran. Unfortunately, the Iranian government has so far rejected this idea. Perhaps with enough outside pressure and encouragement, they can be persuaded to change their minds before it is too late."
Obama on 4/23/07: "Countries should not be able to build a weapons program under the auspices of developing peaceful nuclear power. That's why we should create an international fuel bank to back up commercial fuel supplies so there's an assured supply and no more excuses for nations like Iran to build their own enrichment plants. It's encouraging that the Nuclear Threat Initiative, backed by Warren Buffett, has already offered funding for this fuel bank, if matched two to one. But on an issue of this importance, the United States should not leave the solution to private philanthropies. It should be a central component of our national security, and that's why we should provide $50 million to get this fuel bank started and urge other nations, starting with Russia, to join us.
LOOSE NUKES
McCain: "And we need to increase funding for our own non-proliferation efforts, including the Cooperative Threat Reduction programs established by the landmark Nunn-Lugar legislation, and ensure the highest possible standards of security for existing nuclear materials."
Obama on 8/01/07: "That is why I worked in the Senate with Dick Lugar to pass a law that would help the United States and our allies detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction. That is why I am introducing a bill with Chuck Hagel that seeks to prevent nuclear terrorism, reduce global nuclear arsenals, and stop the spread of nuclear weapons. And that is why, as President, I will lead a global effort to secure all nuclear weapons and material at vulnerable sites within four years. While we work to secure existing stockpiles, we should also negotiate a verifiable global ban on the production of new nuclear weapons material."

Oooo - I do love this campaign style where they use the opponent's own words against them.
I just love it. It's deadly.
May 27, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah, a very canny ploy.
May 27, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's some words to use against him then...
"It's time for America to lead. When I'm President, we'll strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so that nations that don't comply will automatically face strong international sanctions."...but during the first year of my administration I'll gladly meet with their leaders without any preconditions...
May 27, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude, Mike Mullen on Line 1. He says you're supposed to be apolitical now ...
May 27, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great Riposte!
May 28, 2008 8:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry, I'm retired. But good looking out.
June 3, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are you our first McCain troll?
Welcome!
May 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, c'mon, give props to Gotnolife! He holds that honorary title.
May 27, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought gotalife is a passionate Hillary supporter. When did s/he become a McCain supporter?
Jeeez!
I guess I need to come into Election Central more often, instead of hanging out at the Cafe.
May 27, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, McCitizen popped up a few weeks ago. Posts now and then, always couched in sort of a concern troll kinda way.
Not to take anything away from SFCWallace but my memory is that McCitizen was the first true McCain troll.
gotalife has too many personalities for me to figure out if s/he is a Clinton troll, a McCain troll, or both.
May 27, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hiya CT Voter!
Thanks for the heads-up.
May 27, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tuxedo cats hang together!
May 27, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
:)
Yeah!
May 27, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, a troll is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages. My comments are on point and only "controversial" in the sense that most of you disagree with them.
June 3, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
And being willing to talk to leaders of countries who we have disagreements (even sanctions) with is bad because?
Kennedy wasn't afriad to talk to the Soviet Union when they were hours away from launching nuclear msisles, what are you and McCain so afriad of that you refuse to have direct talks with other countires?
Why are you guys so chicken-shit?
May 27, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
yet another bush policy innovation that mcsame wants to continue...
May 27, 2008 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, some would say it was that meeting, without any preconditions, in June of 61 that brought us to the brink of nuclear war. The Cuban missle crisis came 15 months later and they weren't "talking" 3 hours away from launching, they were threatening mutual destruction...You and Obama should do a little research.
June 3, 2008 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Biting humor can be very effective.
May 27, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
These guys are good. Their judgment has been almost impeccable throughout this campaign and underscores the idea that "experience" doesn't mean much when you don't exercise sound judgment based on what you have learned.
May 27, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who defined insanity as repeating the same actions over and over again, hoping for different results? Reminds me of the current govt!
May 27, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe Albert Einstein is credited with this quote.
May 27, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Debg
And this is the same thinking that applies to the knuckleheads who are consistently looking at the electoral map IN the SAME way as a path to the Presidency despite what we learned in 2000 and '04. Democrats have to RE-draw the electoral map...and Obama has the visison to do it, just as he has done with his strategic thinking when it came to fundraising and winning caucuses and primaries.
This man is a thinker and he learns not just from his own errors but from those who came before him.
May 27, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen. That was, in fact, the quote that jumped to my mind when I read Josh's front-page post a few moments ago. Which is truly riskier - making a play to expand the map and build a new winning formula, or using the exact same game plan as the last two losers*?
* For purposes of this comment, "losers" also include those who win yet have a margin of victory so small that the win can be stolen with the help of the Republican machine and the U.S. Supreme Court.
May 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you're talking about the analysis of the trip West that Obama is engaged in, I completely agree with you.
David Kurtz sounded very much like the typical Democratic analyst, in a Washington office. Imagine winning without Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania???? Scratch the "typical Democratic analyst". He sounded like Lanny Davis or Mark Penn.
The Dems have been tryingn that same route to victory for years at this point, and it just worked in 92, didn't work at all in 2000 or 2004. So we go back to that, why?
It's sort of like hiring Bob Schrum (sp?) over and over and over again, when he hasn't run a successful campaign for a significant office, ever.
Why?
May 27, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
And we had a little help from a big eared fella back in '92 to get the job done...
May 27, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
And this year we have an assist by the House manager for the impeachment of one William Jefferson Clinton!
May 28, 2008 8:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, o god yes.
Yes yes yes.
May 27, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is what's known as "poking them with the soft pillows" (as opposed to "hitting them with the chair"). It's all very civil and well-mannered, which you just know is gonna piss off Grandpa Simpson.
May 27, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope Obama pushes McWar's temper some more.
May 27, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I immensely suspect that anger provocation is a major goal of the Obama campaign.
May 27, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
THey should court many more over-the-top responses like the one McCain gave over that Webb bill. His response made him look like a red faced old man screaming at passers-by.
May 27, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Most assuredly. Recall, Obama did the same thing to Bill Clinton. He would talk about building a bridge to the 21st century not back to the 20th century. All the time knowing that is the hallmark quote on the Clinton Library. That got under Bill's craw. Obama also said that Reagan has transformative politics and Clinton didn't. That ticked off Bill too. Obama hits Bill Clinton where it hurts...his legacy.
Bill has been on a tear every since and it will not be long before McCain comes similiarly unglued.
Neither one of those grayheads beleive they should have to tolerate this young 'inexperienced' upstart.
lol lol...go Obama...yes. we. can.
May 27, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeap.. McCain is losing his bearings.
(wry grin)
May 27, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes he hates the condescending stuff, hah
May 27, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really can't wait for these debates.
May 27, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
O you and me both.
May 27, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
You may want to re think the debate thing until your guy decides what he really thinks:
On Sunday,in Pendleton, Ore., he said Iran and others "don't pose a serious threat to us."
The next day in Billings, Mont.: "I've made it clear for years that the threat from Iran is grave."
I guess as long as he doesn't have a position switch right in the middle of answering a question y'all probably won't even notice.
May 27, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you have links to those speeches, or are you paraphrasing Obama's words?
Links, please?
May 27, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Never mind. Paraphrasing it is. Thanks, Dorn76 for the links!
SFCWallace? I think you've been busted!
May 27, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clearly paraphrasing...clearly a Hillary troll.
Thankgoodness that role will come to an end for all those paid to post and blast her talkingpoints on boards all over the net.
I have not forgotten how TPMcafe was swarmed with them at the end of Dec.
Ugh
May 27, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
S/His page says s/he's a Republican.
May 27, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would've guessed Republican, yeah. Trying out the old "he's a flip-flopper!" strategy, I guess.
May 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
He...his
June 3, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Y'all are way too "politically correct" sometimes.
June 3, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Context is a bitch, ain't it?
In Pendleton, he was comparing the current threat from Iran with that of the Soviet Union in the days of the Cold War. To say that it is comparatively "tiny" is perfectly accurate when you consider the number of missiles the USSR kept pointed at us. And that comment also does not run counter to Obama's later statement in Billings that the threat from Iran is grave. Those two statements are not mutually exclusive.
And a friendly warning, Dude: An overdose of Krauthammer can be an ugly thing.
May 27, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are leaving out the context. No surprise there. He has said Iran is not the threat the soviets were when making his argument to engage Iran diplomaticly. And they aren't. Their pursuit of a nuclear weapon is a "grave threat", although not to us.
May 27, 2008 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
SFC Wallace: Did you cut and paste your post the "Powerline" blog?
Here's the link:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/05/020554.php
You should really attribute the material you pilfer so as to not appear as a plagiarist.
Cheers,
Chris
May 28, 2008 8:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, can we get an edit feature please? Pretty please...
May 28, 2008 8:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually no. I'm sure I wasn't the only one to read the paper that day.
June 3, 2008 2:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lame and weak.
May 27, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Explain.
May 27, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
You might as well ask a pig to juggle.
May 27, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please refrain from insulting the dexterity of our swine friends!
May 27, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
both of you! (Aubie84)
May 27, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me too!
For the first time in my career of attempting to combine blog commentation with graceful English, I feel congruent with the times to say I was RIMCLOL (Rolling In My Chair LOL) with their comments.
May 28, 2008 3:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, McCain is pretty lame and weak. See what a leader Obama is?
May 27, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply |