Obama To Respond Forcefully To Bush's Attacks Today
Obama foreign policy adviser Susan Rice vowed on MSNBC this morning that Obama will respond forcefully today to President Bush's claim yesterday that Democrats' willingness to negotiate with hostile foreign powers constitutes "appeasement."
"What you're going to hear is a very vigorous response to what was an outrageous, unprecedented, and divisive attack from President Bush yesterday," Rice said.
Of course, Bush never specifically mentioned Obama in his comments. But the Obama team has good reason to forcefully respond, anyway. It puts Obama on the same stage as the Republicans and the President himself, placing him in a back-and-forth over foreign policy with the man that he and John McCain both want to replace -- thus making Hillary and the Democratic Primary recede ever more quickly in the political world's rear-view mirror.
I'm told that Obama's remarks about Bush may come during today's town-hall meeting in Watertown, South Dakota, at noon eastern.
Isn't it ironic that Bush mentioned the Nazis? Bush's family fortune was built by trading with the nazis.
-
George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.
His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.
The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.
-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar
May 16, 2008 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it kind of amazed me too, a Bush pointing such fingers.
May 16, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
a very misleading selection from the whole article, which is itself a big stretch that reveals a lot of misunderstanding of how banking works.
May 16, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is it curious that the blatantly racist "Monkey for Obama/Dogzilla/Godzilla/Milla B/Milla" is the one trying to defend the Bush dynasty?
Hey Troll, don't look now but your GOP is showing.
Fuck off!
May 16, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
not only defending bushes but nazis. why am i not surprised?
May 16, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama faces off against two liars (bush and McShame).
May 16, 2008 9:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
We Iranians, as other Middle Easterns, are really worried of the continuation of war if Sen. Mc Cain gets elected. I have made a short clip about your presidential race from the perspective of an Iranian. Take a look and promote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuVYlGZmtYg
May 16, 2008 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for the video. You show that the Iranian people don't want war, either. How horrifying it must have been to hear McCain's scary little song parody. McCain behaves in the same sophomoric manner as Bush. This is absolutely unacceptable in someone who wants to lead our country.
May 16, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Welcome to the Big Leagues, Mr. Obama.
May 16, 2008 10:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
all, let me know if you're having problems posting comments, if you would
May 16, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have been all morning yes.
May 16, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
And I've had none. I'm on a Mac.
May 16, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can't allow you to imply that I might not be using a Mac.
May 16, 2008 10:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
well, I just had my comeuppance!
My Mac shakes hands with yours!
Let's have unity!
May 16, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
spoke too soon... tried to post. got error message!
May 16, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, can please go back to the good old days of the elitist latte sipping Mac users talking down to us average hard working PC users.
PS. No problem with comments this morning on a PC either (bearing in mind that it's most likely the server at TPM that's the problem.)
May 16, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
No problems right now.
Thank you for banning mila/godzilla/dogzilla. As much as you dislike the bs accusation of bias they pale in comparison to the out and out sexism and racism spouted by that knuckledragger.
May 16, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
He got banned? Sweet.
May 16, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think so, all his comments on the last thread were deleted.
May 16, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Banned and Erased! Wow!
May 16, 2008 10:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was having a hell of a time not responding to his posts. Glad he's gone back to whatever kkk site he crawled out of.
May 16, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is it fair to say that Godzilla/Milla has been Obliterated?
May 16, 2008 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Site's been wack since I got back here on Tuesday night.
I'm ever so sorry to say. Posting has been thorny.
May 16, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
since you got back....
♪♪♪ (couldn't resist)
May 16, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
No more than usual discomforts posting on the site
May 16, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
No more than usual discomforts posting on the site
May 16, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can post, obviously, but I don't seem to be able to edit my profile:
"Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request."
May 16, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Same thing happened to me when I tried to edit my profile.
May 16, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, Godzilla/mila/dogzilla changed its name to "A monkey for Obama."
Please re ban this inbred knuckledragger.
Thanks
May 16, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
I came to the same conclusion! Yes, it's disgusting!
May 16, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I keep getting knocked off, Greg, and I have to keep logging in. Other than that, no problems.
May 16, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
For the last two weeks or so, every page I go to view with my TREO on every TPM site results in two JavaScript Alerts:
"Handler could not be attached"
I filed this under "Sigh." but since you ask . . .
May 16, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Finally we're talking about real issues, instead of thinly veiled smears-by-association. And like the gax tax, Obama's argument should be easy because it's correct.
May 16, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope Obama will open his pushback remarks by noting that perhaps Bush would benefit from having a dictionary, since talking to someone isn't "appeasement".
May 16, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
He needs more than a dictionary! Conscience... and it's not gonna happen!
May 16, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Chris Matthews explained this surprisingly well last night on Hardball - all while making the Republican shill look like a complete and total moron.
May 16, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Chris, Chris, this is about appeasement, Chris, no, no, Chris, Obama wants appeasement, because this is just like - Chris, wait, no, appeasement!
May 16, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Possibly my favorite moment on TV ever!
Matthews can be a bit of an assclown from time to time, but other times he really kicks ass.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99BY4IBZGT4
May 16, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
The last 2 days on MSNBC have been EPIC.
Keith's devastating attack on Bush was classic.
Chris's total obliteration of the RW Tool James was a sight to behold...
...and again, Chris's argument against Pat Buchanan was refreshing and encouraging.
I know Chris Matthews gets a lot of flack from time to time, but he's very much my co-hero of the week (shared with Olbermann and John Edwards).
May 16, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I especially liked his use of a body language expert last night regarding the O'Liely Burnout 20 years ago. Classic!
May 16, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Delicious
May 16, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Chris was on fire with that asshole. And Mark Green piled on. Nice - the guy ended up looking like the biggest asshat ever! And the screaming - what a moron!
May 16, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
New super for Obama: Congressman from California, Pete Stark
http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/ci_9281004
May 16, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a huge open for Obama, and I'm glad he's taking it.
The Republicans, out of fear of losing, have fumbled the ball. Turning to tricks of 2004, which won't work this time. They know better, but they can't resist. McCain and Bush will continue to link to each other and this is exactly what we want.
Obama can ride this a long long way I think. I'm happy to see he's going to.
May 16, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
One thing I like about this whole thing with Bush, McCain and Obama is it places McCain and Bush squarely on the same side, arguing the same bogus point, and completely cementing in people's minds that Bush and McCain are together. They are on the same team. The are the same.
That is good for the election. Thank you Bush and McCain.
May 16, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
yep
May 16, 2008 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
It kind of reminds me of the gas tax, when Hillary and McSame had one position and Obama had another. This is better though, because as you point out, it ties Bush and McCain together at a time when McSame should be doing everything he can to seperate himself from Bush.
This would have been a winner for McSame if he had done the smart, ethical thing and slammed Bush for his comments. Instead McSame showed himself to be nothing more than old, crotchety extension of the Bush white house.
May 16, 2008 10:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
There are so many issues here to be exploited. I think this is going to be for Obama the gift that keeps on giving. If he can get as much mileage out of this as he did on mandates during primary season, it's going to be a long summer for McCain. It's good to be on a truly winning side for a change.
May 16, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, Bush is McCain's Reverend Wright, and then some.
And the thing is, McCain cannot throw Bush under the bus without alienating a large portion of Bush's wingnut base.
It is truly a good time to be a Dem - which is the real reason Hillary has fought so hard for this nomination.
May 16, 2008 11:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
For McCain, Bush = Wright x Ayers²
May 16, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
But does that mean that like Bush, McCain will steal the election?
May 16, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think anyone will ever top Keith Olbermann's special comment on golf and the war. I'm still dazed from watching the vid yesterday. But I can't wait to hear what Obama says.
Bush may not have mentioned him by name, but everyone knew exactly who he was talking about - and it was so incredibly inappropriate to stand up in the Knesset and say that that I'm half-dazed from that, too.
May 16, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed - it was Keith's best special comment ever. He just keeps getting better and better (I'll have to call my brother up and get that "meeting" going - my birthday is Monday LOL!!!) ;)
May 16, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Totally agree. To bring back slang from my youth, it was "rad". :)
May 16, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is a great opening for Obama. Not just for smacking down the idiot in chief, but to tie McCain to him.
This is where he's really going to shine.
And what the video of McCain saying we need to talk to Hamas if we're ever going to solve the Israeli/Palestinian conflict made me realize is that everything McCain uses to try and attack Obama probably has a video like this to ram down his throat.
And, Obama doesn't have one hand tied behind his back like he did with Clinton.
This is going to be fun.
May 16, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
O it is going to be fun - it already is.
:)
May 16, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's also a good oppurtunity, an occassion to begin uniting democratic party.
Bush propels like no one.
May 16, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not terribly worried about that - honestly I'm not.
I always believed that once the primary was settled and Bush/McWar became the focus, again, everyone would transfer their anger/disappointment back over to the Repugs. It only takes one 10 minute conversation to get everyone's attention back on Bush.
I think everyone can relax, calm down, get loose and maybe jokey - it's going to be alright, even if some of us still pop off about Hillary - no one is going to vote for McWar on that basis.
I absolutely guarantee and promise every last one of you that.
May 16, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama should depict it as attack against the entire democratic party not merely against him or his campaign. That wiil energize the base and that's where I see a opening to call for unity message.
May 16, 2008 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I bet the good people of Watertown, South Dakota will love being in the spotlight today! If there's ever any question about the American empire, consider how the campaign stretches from a South Dakota town meeting to the Israeli Knesset.
May 16, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
McCain Of The Panderosa.
More War Years! More War Years! More War Years!
A vote for The Maverick Of The Panderosa, is like a Vote for the Cowboy from Crawford that rounded him up and branded him.
More War Years! More War Years! More War Years!
May 16, 2008 10:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
More War Years! More War Years! More War Years!
You, dear Liam, are fucking brilliant!
nuff said
May 16, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've got the tivo set for all day just so I don't miss it. Also, by saying in advance that he is going to hit him hard, it sort of forces the press to televise the event live, thereby guaranteeing that the news goes even wider.
Well played by the Obama. He has proven to be a very good counterpuncher so today should be no exception.
And kudos to his team for their response to those asshole GOP folks in Tennessee.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/15/tennessee-gop-attacks-mic_n_101967.html
The last line of the Obama team response is pitch perfect. When they go after your family, you need to respond just like this:
"This is a shameful attempt to attack a woman who has repeatedly said she wouldn't be here without the opportunities and blessings of this nation. The Republican Party's pathetic attempts to use the same smear tactics to win elections have failed in Mississippi, failed in Louisiana, and will fail in November because the American people are looking for a positive vision of real change. And if the Tennessee Republican Party has a problem with Senator Obama, maybe next time they'll have the courage to address him directly instead of attacking his family."
May 16, 2008 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am excited that he decided to make a forceful response to Bush like this - it is an excellent play.
It places him squarely in everyone's mind as the nominee, for one thing. It also means he's going to hit back when hit. He did that through the primary and his team really handled that well. I loved the ju jitsu of using Bill's own words against Hillary's campaign. That was brilliant.
I love this campaign. I love it - and I think it mirrors pretty accurately the kind of president Obama is going to be. Shrewd, even-tempered, and most importantly - one step ahead.
May 16, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
well, once in law school I brought my pet monkey Thurgood with me to class, but I dressed him up in a little suit and tie. It was really cute : )
anyway, that same day famous Critical Race Studies "scholar" Derrick Bell was visiting the school. So about two dozen people come up and say "welcome Professor Bell." And when Thurgood would start jabbering away, it would take about two to three minutes before people realized, hey! That's not Derrick Bell, that a monkey in a suit!
May 16, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
You never went to law school. You work at Taco Bell, cleaning up after taco shits.
You are not fooling anyone.
May 16, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
sadly, I did, a complete waste of three years of my life. I've never met so many dullards and ignoramuses. Ivy educated and dumb as fucking bricks. actually, monkeys compare not unfavorably to law students, even the non-AA ones.
May 16, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Right, sure you did. That is why you have the grammer of a third grader and don't know how to use the "shift" key.
Tell me, what is it like living in your mothers basement?
May 16, 2008 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
oh man, I dated a prof at UT once. Sad to say, Austin is one of the nicer towns in America, that is to say, a dump filled with dumb hicks.
May 16, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh huh, sure you did.
If your date is inflatable it is not really a date.
Besides, for people like you, dating outside of the family is not allowed. Give your sister/wife a hug and a kiss and shut the fuck up.
May 16, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
oh brother, the oldest, lamest insult known to mankind.
You're Irish, right? So you must love it in the poop-chute.
Actually, the sad thing about the Irish is the British weren't there long enough to finish civilizing you.
May 16, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
What on earth makes you think I'm Irish?
And really, for you, being inbred is a compliment. It explains a lot about your posting on this site. You see, nobody can hate someone who is mentally defective because of birth defects caused by hundreds of years of sister shagging.
If you weren't inbred, well, there would be no excuse for your mental (and most likely physical) deficiencies. As it is, I feel sorry for you.
Now, little monkey, why don't you fuck off to whatever Klan site it is you call home and let the adults talk?
May 16, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, monkey, next time you're in Tulsa, let me know. I'm a lover, not a fighter, but I'll make an exception for you, you dim-witted gobshite.
May 16, 2008 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Stop feeding the troll.
May 16, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
heeeeee's baaaaaaack
May 16, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Aw Greg, I hate to bother you ;) but the racist spammer is still around and honest to god - do we have to put up with it?
It's threadlice - can we please kill it?
May 16, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Greg has already killed him once today.
The guy is like herpes, he just keeps coming back.
May 16, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
God, this asshole is nothing if not persistent. Doesn't he have anything better to do with his time? What a waste of life, really. Greg, sorry to ask again, but he's baaaaaack...
May 16, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
your facial expression, and how you express yourself, suggest that you like it in the poop-chute.
Am I right?
May 16, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your grammer shows that you like it in the poop shute.
Am I right?
May 16, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
not very original there, Ned.
However, Carol here apparently likes it, and I bet you'd love to give it to her. I'm sure you can work something out. Just be careful, I bet she's get one hell of a spincter-muscle!
May 16, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who are you to be talking about originality? You spam racist bullshit on a progressive blog.
That hardly makes you original.
May 16, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think TPM monitors these threads in with any regularity; report the troll via email to talk@talkingpointsmemo.com
May 16, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think we're headed in the direction of monitors. That's my suggestion.
May 16, 2008 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
We Iranians, as other Middle Easterns, are really worried of the continuation of war if Sen. Mc Cain gets elected. I have made a short clip about your presidential race from the perspective of an Iranian. Take a look and promote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuVYlGZmtYg
May 16, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
We can't block IP addresses?
May 16, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Eh, I travel very frequently, in London one day, Frankfurt the next, Kiev, Moscow, Riga, Prague, etc. You'll have to shut off pretty access from anywhere in the world except the US and Africa.
May 16, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh huh, you are a rich lawyer with the intelligence of a retarded monkey.
Who do you think you are fooling?
Generally speaking sexist bigots are the dumbest segment of our society, and amongst them you appear to be three standard deviations below the mean.
May 16, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Will you please stop feeding this thing??
May 16, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
MAC address (Media Access Control, not Macintosh for anyone wondering) monitoring/blocking would better isolate it - IPs are by and large dynamic at user level. MAC addresses can still be spoofed, but sequence matching usually bears it out pretty easily.
Treat it as intrusion management rather than a user-level thing.
May 16, 2008 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo.
May 16, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh my.
May 16, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Got my Tivo cued up for Obama's presidential bitch-slap (woo).
btw, trolls (even knuckle-dragging ones) hate to be ignored. Troll, what troll?
May 16, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
I still don't understand the ham-fisted response by the Democrats on this. Bush says "appeasement is bad" and the Dems scream and yell that it's an attack on them.
If you're not an appeaser, why would you claim it's an attack on you? Why be in such a hurry to get that label associated with you by making a big deal out of it? I think their reaction to this has been really idiotic. Now when people mention appeasement they'll think of Obama.
If Bush had said "Serial murderers are bad" would Obama have released a statement saying "I reject this attack on me"? Of course not, because he's not a serial murderer. So why for the love of Pete would he respond to a speech about appeasers by denouncing it as an attack on him?
Democrats need to be a lot more careful about how they frame the argument. This was not a good day for them.
And ol' Shrub has to be loving this.
May 16, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
I completely disagree. The opposite argument is equally valid, O stays silent therefore he is an appeaser. Hitting it head on is the only way to counter such falsehoods. John Kerry assumed that people wouldn't believe the smears because they were untrue, bad strategy!
May 16, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but Dems came out of the woodwork and threw a very public fit. Now they'll be associated with appeasement by the less educated. This would've been a minor blurb in the papers, but it's the Dems who made a big deal out of it! All I'm saying is it could've been handled better. They need to be much more careful with their responses. Measured and forceful is better than angry and hysterical.
May 16, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, the Dems will be associated with calling out Bush as a moron. That is a very good association right now.
May 16, 2008 11:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great to see another gooner in the house. Shame Obama is a West Ham supporter.Maybe we can work on Michelle?
May 16, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cheers Lawton! We'll win some silverware soon!
Didn't know that O is a hammers fan, well at least it's not spurs ;)
May 16, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Raw meat to the audience in Israel, which wouldn't exist as a nation if the Nazis hadn't tried to exterminate all Jews in their war of world domination.
Bush said it in his typical straw-man attack. "Some say..."
Maybe he thinks it gives him plausible deniability when the obvious target calls him out on it.
Bush is the ultimate straw man. Stuffed with flammable material, no brain.
May 16, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
But why are they so eager to step up and be that "obvious target"? I don't see any political gain here, just the stigma of being labeled as an appeaser.
May 16, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point Voltaire. Ignoring the douche troll is probably the best strategy, but I do love reading nisleib's responses, brilliant.
Oh, btw, looks like the monkey got an atlas for his birthday!
May 16, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point Voltaire. Ignoring the douche troll is probably the best strategy, but I do love reading nisleib's responses, brilliant.
Oh, btw, looks like the monkey got an atlas for his birthday!
May 16, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice. This is the kind of responsiveness we need to see from the campaign! (I hope it's good).
May 16, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Watching MSNBC last night, I wanted to just mute it when McCain spoke. He gives the most droning, boring address........I thought Bush was bad (well, horrible, he cannot pronounce half the English language) but McCain is just awful!!
May 16, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope it really is a forceful repsonse a la Olberman instead of the usual weak, DC Democratic complaining about the mean Republicans and how they shouldn't do that awful stuff. It ought to be a direct condemnation of the incompetence and corruption of Bush and his followers---particularly John McCain who is also incompetent and who consorts with every corrupt business lobbyist in Washington.
May 16, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Heh... MiddleChild,
You think McCain's bad, try to stay awake while Lieberman speaks. He was intolerable to listen to even back when he had a 'D' by his title.
Imagine if Lieberman was the VP nom with McCain. The two of them would verbally bore the country to death, literally.
May 16, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, big deal.
He's had his 'people' furiously deliberating on it for the last 24 hours, just the right thing their candidate should say, etc.,
It won't be genuine or truthful.
The TRUTH is, Obama has already told us how he would handle thugs like the Iranaian pres. & the rest. He would go have lunch with them and discuss why they should stop threatening Israel & US over a nice cup of tea.
LOLOLOLLOL>
Like I said, you shoulda voted for Hillary!
Hillary still may be the nominee anyways.
Rae
May 16, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fuck off, Republican slime.
May 16, 2008 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your looking more and more like the Black Knight in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail."
"It's just a flesh wound!"
May 16, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with the blood sucking vampire - if we've learned anything over the last 8 years - it's that oblitteration WORKS!
I think Rake would agree with me that we need MORE OBLITTERATION. What good are bombs when you don't use them?
Read your history (!)
May 16, 2008 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that the threat - the REAL threat - of obliteration which is what Hillary spoke of - is what is needed to deal with these crazies. Not sitting down to tea with them or holding hands with them which is what obama and his crowd seem to want to try.
Rae
May 16, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
May 16, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Obama team has good reason to respond because Bush's unidentified strawman attack trick has been SOP for GOP slime jobs for 8 years now
But not this time
May 16, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
At the very least, Bush owes the nation an apology for taking a family fight overseas. Absolutely reprehensible behavior, but a completely uncivilized boor.
May 16, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
from--not but. Slow down, junior...
May 16, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
In the spirit of uniting as a party, I offer to Obama the right answer to the question courtesy of HRC:
"Well, I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous diplomatic effort because I think it is not that you promise a meeting at that high a level before you know what the intentions are. I don't want to be used for propaganda purposes. I don't want to make a situation even worse. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy, which has been turned into a bad word by this administration."
May 16, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama didn't "promise" anything. Hillary is a goddamned liar.
May 16, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
No it was Obama who lied about Hillary's position saying that she favored continuing Bush's policy of disengagement and did not want to have diplomacy with our enemies. Everything Hillary has said on the issue disproves that.
Obama said he would be willing to meet on a personal lel without preconditions with the wrost dictoators/enemies of the US in his first year. Then his campaign spokesman directly after the debate clarified and said OF COURSE he didn't mean direct meetings and there was no guarantee in the first year. Then the Obama campaign attacked again and said Hilalry not promising to personally meet with these leaders without preconditions was a continuation of Bush's disengagement. Some consistency will be nice in the general election.
May 16, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right. That's precisely what he said. And Hillary intentionally and dishonestly warped his statement of willingness into an absolute promise. Because she's a goddamned liar.
May 16, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/hillary_vs_barack_on_meeting_w.html
Hillary may have forced Barack to clarify his original position that he would be willing to meet these leaders under preconditions. His original response was incomplete.
His statement that Hillary does not want to have diplomatic engagement is a flat out indefensible lie.
May 16, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
She didn't force him to "clarify" anything. She forced him to remind her what the question was. She forced him to point out that he had answered the question that was asked--directly, and without trying to spin it--while she had answered a question that was NEVER ASKED. Because she's a goddamned liar.
May 16, 2008 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's answer was the correct answer. Hillary's answer was pure bullshit.
May 16, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have IQs just dropped sharply? WWII - Stalin. Nixon - China. Reagan, HW Bush - Soviet Union. When has the willingness to talk to dictators become a bad thing? Oh, yeah rigth around the neocons received an ounce of power. I'm not saying we should work with them, but come on. Channels should remain open within certain guidlines and conditions. Seriously.....
History is important. Apparently the Republicans have forgotten this or would just like to rewrite it. Revisionist history. Apparently what No Child Left Behind is teaching our kids isn't good enough.
May 16, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Woops, just a general comment. But I guess it works here too.
May 16, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
It works really well here because you clearly know the difference between the word "willing" and the word "promise."
May 16, 2008 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh my, you obama supporters have such class!
hahahahahha
typical obamamite supporter. he gets all the trash behind him.
lololol
May 16, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary wanted to get back to diplomacy. So does Obama.
We're on the same side, here.
May 16, 2008 11:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
True, but somewhere in a fundraising letter in April, the Obama campaign was still implying that Hillary not promising to meet directly with the world leaders was following Bush's policy of disengagement. This obviously was an appeal to the move-on crowd. That's not going to fly in the general election. Clarify that you have no intentions of promising to meet personally with the worst dictators in the world in your first year of office. Yes, it means that your previous attacks on Hillary are proven to be false, but her original position was the right one on principle.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/04/in_fundraising_letter_obama_at.php
May 16, 2008 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary has said on several occasions that there would have to be preconditions. I think that the statement is indicative of US policy and is the reason why others get upset with us. The position is a position of arrogance and power. It is the position an adult would take with a child. It is not the position two adults should take. If we continue acting as if we're the adult and countries that are the homes of people of color are the children we will continue to be viewed as the enemy - and we will continue to be less safe.
May 16, 2008 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barack Obama would be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of his administration, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.
GUESS WHAT? Preparation is a precndition and Obama himself has advocated meeting with "enemies" only under certain conditions:
"Under certain conditions, I always believe in talking," Obama told the Miami Herald’s Andres Oppenheimer. "Sometimes it’s more important to talk to your enemies than to your friends." Granted this was in Miami where people are less friendly to hearing about high level presidential meetings with Castro.
Hillary has NEVER lied about his positon. She forced him to clarify back to his original position in that interview which lo and behold is identical to hers. For him to come out months later LYING in that mailer about her position implies that he stands by his original statement of meeting with no preconditions at all.
I will not meet or talk to you unless you capitulate to my demands (or you are in possession of an actual nuclear bomb) - GWB.
I will engage in vigorous diplomacy and contacts, but I will not promise a presidential meeting in my first year in office with no preconditions - Hillary (and Obama perhaps accepting the clarification that no meeting could occur without heavy diplomatic legwork?)
I would be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of his administration, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea - (Is this where he still stands? If so, we are F&!%$@ in the general election. Move on positions rock in the democratic primary, but you can't honestly be peddling that as a valid position in the general election)
May 16, 2008 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama wants to be seen confronting Bush, given his >30 approval rating. He wants to make this a fight between Bush, Cheney and Co and then have McCain chirping in defending/echoing Bush to further connect Bush and McCain for the General. If McCain doesn't defend, he's alienating the hardcore base that represents the 30% who still approve of Bush and his policies.
May 16, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
From the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7403386.stm
May 16, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Holy crap, I'm finding myself once again agreeing with a Peggy Noonan column. What's the world coming to? But she's no fool, and her pessimism makes me feel more grounded in my sudden optimism.
http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html
May 16, 2008 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
the Harvard physics department. 62 faculty, of which:
women: 4
AAs: 0
http://www.physics.harvard.edu/people/faculty.html
May 16, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ban this racist troll.
May 16, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't feed the troll.
May 16, 2008 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
May 16, 2008 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haven't been able to post for several days.
May 16, 2008 12:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gotalife? Gotalife where are you?
I can't do this on my own buddy!
May 16, 2008 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now here is a case where Obama is actually responding to an attack, unlike many of his "responses" to Hillary in which he was actually attacking, but blaming it on her. I hope he doesn't play up the victim role too much. That gets really old.
May 16, 2008 12:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
May 16, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Link to the Sioux Falls CBS affiliate's live coverage of Obama's speech in Watertown, South Dakota, today: http://www.keloland.com/NewsDetail6162.cfm?Id=0,69561
May 16, 2008 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
mm..unimpressive speech. Didn't drive any significant points home and the delivery was weak.
May 16, 2008 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um... he's still speaking right now. How did you manage to see the entire thing and evaluate it already? Time-travel machine?
May 16, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The setting was all wrong for a "forceful" rebuttal and it didn't come across too well. It didn't help that he wasn't comfortable with the speech to the point he was glancing down and reading every couple of words.
That wasn't forceful. Biden was forceful.
May 16, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
First he's "too smooth" a talker. Now he's not smooth enough. Strangely, it's almost like nothing he does will satisfy some people. If only he could do that one thing that would let them support him, but gosh darnit, he just can't quite ever get there.
May 16, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe it's his campaign setting him up to disappoint, however much like "Taking the fight to Fox News", this at best was a case of false advertising by the campaign. If that is "forceful" then I don't want him meeting with foreign leaders for crying out loud. Imagine him in face-to-face discussions with Iranian, or Russian leaders, or Chinese leaders - Obama doesn't have and weight behind his words. He thinks he's too cool, too slick, too smart for his own good sometimes.
Hillary Clinton would have smashed McCain over this.
May 16, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barack said hillary would continue the Bush-Cheney policy of not talking to leaders we don't like. HE, to use your parlance, is a fucking liar.
Hillary QUESTIONED what Obama meant when he said that he would be willing to meet with forgeign leaders with no preconditions. She asked him to clarify - she did not say that he advocated that position. And Obama did clarify and once he did, their positions were pretty much identical... until he started up with more LIES in this campiagn mailer. Which raise the question if he sees Hillary's position as nonengagement, what does he see as engagement? That question has yet to be answered if you defend his attacks on Hillary.
May 16, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink