Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha Powers Memo

He must have some polling that tells him he's on to something 'caus he just keeps swinging and whatever your opinion of him, he's not stupid.  If he was hurting himself, he'd leave it alone, but that is definitely NOT what he's doing and he has to be encouraged by the recent Iowa poll.  Now is the time to make his move and he's going for it.  He's laid the ground work, he's got the money, and people are just now starting to even think about paying attention to the primaries.

I could not figure out why Hillary went after Obama with the naive, irresponsible comment after the debate.  She had scored during the debate, why go after him again.  I think they must have seen something they didn't like in the early states polling and decided they had to do something.  Whatever it was, provided Obamba with his opening and he's making the most of it.

link to Powers Memo below:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2 007/08/03/303197.aspx

In the memo, Obama adviser Samantha Power -- the founding executive director of Harvard University's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy -- writes: "Over the last few weeks, Barack Obama has once again taken positions that challenge Washington's conventional wisdom on foreign policy. And once again, pundits and politicians have leveled charges that are now bankrupt of credibility and devoid of the new ideas that the American people desperately want."

"On each point in the last few weeks, Barack Obama has called for a break from a broken way of doing things. On each point, he has brought fresh strategic thinking and common sense that break with the very conventional wisdom that has led us into Iraq."

Another take on it at tpmcafe: http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/aug/03/obama_memo_hes_the_real_change_agent

Tags: foreign policy, memo, obama, Samantha Powers, substantive (all tags)

Comments

111 Comments

Re: Obama is really pushing the point...

seize the day!!

by jg40 2007-08-03 12:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...

Obama does not need polling numbers in order to come to a decision.  That is Hillarys style.  

by allmiview 2007-08-03 12:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...

Yes. The trends in the national polls this week clearly show that Obama is not paying any attention to them in devising his campaign strategy.

by hwc 2007-08-03 01:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...

Hillary Clinton has no Foreign Policy. She has no plans. She has no vision. She has no brain. All she has is

"Vote for me. I was married to the man who caused the Democrats to lose Congress and every Presidential election since he held office"

"Vote For me because I can't even get a Health Care Plan passed in Congress!"

"Vote for me because I know how to play the victim even when it turns out I lied. There was no VRWC, my husband really was sleeping around"

"Vote for me. I'm polling great nationally. Seriously. 500 people nationwide say I'm great"

by BlueDiamond 2007-08-03 05:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...

How many times are you going to post the same comment?  All you do is make your own candidate look like he has immature supporters.

by Steve M 2007-08-03 05:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...
Obama is clearly not thinking of the ramifications of his "tough" remarks or how they have resonated in Pakistan either.
Thanks - but I prefer John Edwards tact and diplomatic language toward other countries - not the red meat Obama and Hillary are throwing to Republicans and Dem hawks.
by annefrank 2007-08-04 09:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...

Do you mean the ones showing him gaining ground in Iowa, NH and SC?

by commoncents 2007-08-05 06:27AM | 0 recs
You sure?

he sure spent a heck of a lot of money on polling

by okamichan13 2007-08-04 02:00PM | 0 recs
Obama's Press Agent To The Rescue

Once again, Obama's press agents need to rescue him from having stepped into a big pile of his own making.

What's so terribly difficult about putting out a press release?

The fact remains that in the debates and interviews, when he is without a prepared text, he doesn't seem to know what he thinks and is unable to give a cogent answer.

by BigBoyBlue 2007-08-03 12:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Press Agent To The Rescue

I hate posts like this.

Your stated opinion of Obama's performance in debates and interviews does not jibe with reality.  The level of hyperbole is frankly obnoxious.  

If you feel he has been unclear it is fari to say so, but painting any of our Demcratic candidates as anything less than the impressive people they are diminishes all of us.

by AdamSmithsHand 2007-08-03 12:35PM | 0 recs
I agree,

the comment by that poster is ridiculous.

by iamready 2007-08-03 02:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Press Agent To The Rescue

What are you talking about anyway?  Samantha Power isn't a press agent, she's a foreign policy expert.

by psericks 2007-08-03 02:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Press Agent To The Rescue

well you're ugly. take that.

by leewesley 2007-08-04 10:13AM | 0 recs
Good diary.

These last couple of weeks seems to be working out like 2002 when Obama also bucked conventional Washington wisdom when he opposed the invasion of Iraq.

by lovingj 2007-08-03 12:35PM | 0 recs
memo

Looks like a rescue mission.

by areyouready 2007-08-03 12:42PM | 0 recs
Re: memo

Does it?  Seems like the editorial staff of MSNBC felt it was worth front paging.  The link is to a major news outlet, not the candidate's website.  This is good for Obama whatever your opinion on the issues.  I don't see Hillary's positions on the subject, for what they are worth, getting the same kind of traction.  Old news ain't news, is it?

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 01:17PM | 0 recs
I disagree,

Senator Obama is clearly making his point that he is a "change" candidate.  And drawing a line of the differences between he and his opponents.

by iamready 2007-08-03 02:48PM | 0 recs
Re: memo

Maybe, maybe not. I think the Obama people have seen they just can't win by acting like "Hillary lite." The race has been so consistant for so long that they must figure its go time- carve out a very different space for him. I mean if he kept running the safe campaign he had been running up till now I see no reason to think he would gain 5 points on Hillary by January. I think it will hurt him short term and really help him longterm. All the talking heads I've seen (i don't have a TV so this may not be a complete picture) have seemed a little negative but not too bad considering. If only he could stop saying things like "scratch that." But I think he will get better in the next few months.  

by leewesley 2007-08-04 10:21AM | 0 recs
Re: memo

The only rescue mission here would be to ban you.  I truely belive you are a troll whose only mission is to disrupt intelligent discussions.  I do not say this lightly, however you are past the point, IMO, of being accorded any benefit of doubt.

We have great candidates and should debate their differences,but this person is TOXIC.

by pamelabrown 2007-08-05 11:00AM | 0 recs
Ban: areyouready

Just to be clear.

by pamelabrown 2007-08-05 11:03AM | 0 recs
Samantha Powers Memo

So, does this mean that Obama will no longer speak for himself on foreign policy? It seems weird for the Obama campaign to issue its foreign policy memos from someone other than the candidate.

by hwc 2007-08-03 01:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Samantha Powers Memo

This is not weird at all. Its pretty standard. A candidate articulates a position and a memo substantiating and deepening the position is circulated.

Standard practice.

by lafinur 2007-08-03 04:16PM | 0 recs
Remember when Hillary

charged Obama as being naive and irresponsible?  She immediately sent Albright and Holbrooke to defende her her.

The problem is that these 2 are parroting conventional wisdom and belong to the past (is our foreign policy working?), while Dr. Powers represents change--a break from CW.  

Major cohones for Obama, who knows how this will play out.

by pamelabrown 2007-08-05 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Samantha Powers Memo

Hillary Clinton has no Foreign Policy. She has no plans. She has no vision. She has no brain. All she has is

"Vote for me. I was married to the man who caused the Democrats to lose Congress and every Presidential election since he held office"

"Vote For me because I can't even get a Health Care Plan passed in Congress!"

"Vote for me because I know how to play the victim even when it turns out I lied. There was no VRWC, my husband really was sleeping around"

"Vote for me. I'm polling great nationally. Seriously. 500 people nationwide say I'm great"

by BlueDiamond 2007-08-03 05:03PM | 0 recs
Because There Are SO Many Smart Wars Out There

just begging to be fought.

Please adopt one.  And sacrifice your son or daughter.

by Paul Rosenberg 2007-08-03 05:21PM | 0 recs
That, Mr. Rosenberg,

is a disengenuous assertion.  Obama is not a warmonger, but he will get this country back on track by pursuing the real terrorists: OBLco.

by pamelabrown 2007-08-05 11:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Samantha Powers Memo

Those comments are asinine. Don't support her because she's a centrist- thats all. If you're a centrist, support her. You have "venomous, masochinistic, anti-hillary disease." Terminal unfortunately.

by leewesley 2007-08-04 10:24AM | 0 recs
Re: your commentsabout Hillary

Just go away, you don't make a relevant  argument.

by del 2007-08-04 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: do you really think this?

if this diverse an audience thinks you're a chump, thats not a good sign

by leewesley 2007-08-04 10:10PM | 0 recs
what an incredibly stupid comment...

it's amazing to me that hillary's supporters want to write off votes NOW, alienate progressive voters and then tell us how hillary can win.

i'd say that puts you in the class of the criminally stupid.  when hillary loses, you can look in the mirror and say, it's my fault...

by bored now 2007-08-06 07:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Samantha Powers Memo

As a fellow Obama supporter, I would have to kindly suggest that you stop posting this particular comment. It's just getting people irritated and will lead to a lot more "Obama supporters are ruining this site" arguments that I don't want to deal with. Also, it is patently unfair to say that Clinton "has no brain." She may not be your or my favorite candidate, but she is very smart.

by This Machine Kills Fascists 2007-08-05 01:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Well, as we now go into the fourth or fifth daily cycle with Obama as the news du jour I wonder if those of you who claimed he didn't have the nous to run against an old war-horse like Hillary are remembering the dismissive nature of your comments with a sense of ennui.  Has it occurred to any of you that the other Democratic candidates, the GOP, the media and now, of all people, the Pakistani government, are responding to him as a credible figure, indeed almost as if he were the front-runner in this campaign?

And isn't it amusing that the Pakistani government is using exactly the Hillary campaign 'irresponsible' meme, kind of puts her in the same boat with the noise machine of a duplicitous and somewhat doubtful ally.  No more guessing on who Musharraf wants to see elected, eh?

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 01:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Applause!!

Obama driveth the discourse, he's running the debate. And he'll keep running it.

by rapcetera 2007-08-03 01:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

The senator has hit a "nerve" that has made the Pakistani government "respond".  That is a good thing.

by iamready 2007-08-03 02:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

I agree, and good for Democrats, too.  The GOP noise machine was in a kerfuffle on this one and I bet their communications directors all quickly added a new entry to their lists of candidate talking points.  This is good for the brand.

I wonder if anyone has noticed that Senator Obama is already laying the groundwork for a very powerful campaign in the general election.  

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 02:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

"No more guessing on who Musharraf wants to see elected, eh?"

Other than the fact that you were discussing two Democratic candidates the way you framed this sounds exactly like something Karl Rove might have Bush say.

That the Pakistani government used the word irresponsible only demonstrates that they understand the meaning of English words. You on the other hand seem to define Obama's reckless position as responsible.

by DoIT 2007-08-03 03:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Ouch... Did we perhaps hit a teensy-weensy nerve with that remark?  Good.  Is anyone who disagrees with Hillary part of the vast right-wing conspiracy or is it just Rove and I?  

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 03:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

That you take glee in acting this way shows just what type of people support Obama.

by DoIT 2007-08-03 03:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

C'mon, it was your reaction which gave me such a beautiful opening, who could resist?  Rove, indeed.

If you wanted to discuss the point reasonably I would have been happy to do so.  And, in fact, my comment about Musharraf, and the Pakistani positioning around the 'irresponsible' meme was not just a throw-away line.  Frankly I think a communications director of a major campaign muttered something like 'Oh, sh*t...' under their breath when they saw that Pakistani press release and they're not working with Obama.  From a public perception point of view I am asserting that their use of the same talking point Hillary's campaign has been trying to pin on Obama since the debate is not a good look for her.  Do you disagree?

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 03:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Obama's comments were called "irresponsible and naive" and he confirms that impression immediately thereafter, and you laugh it off?   Get your Rolaids ready.  I suspect you will need it over these next 4 weeks, Shaun.

You don't consider as important the opinion of a fragile government of an ally that has helped us tremendously in the region and has no appetite to let someone as inexperienced and "ignorant" as Obama create unrest and turmoil in their country while creating an instant "enemy" for us where heretofore they were none?  

It is some sort of bizarre twisting of reality to consider having your comments called irresponsible (or similar) by the campaigns of Clinton, Edwards, Richardson, Biden, and Dodd a GOOD thing.  

You know, THEY know a winning issue to pounce on when they see one.  Yet, Obama supporters like to paint it (illogically) as "they must be thinking of Obama as the frontrunner."  

I call all of this "unhinged," and honestly, Shaun, you are probably the last person I thought would succumb to that.

by georgep 2007-08-03 10:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Gee, George, sorry to disappoint you.  I feel abashed.  Let's see, so far Obama has copped it from... the other candidates, yes, not to mention some of the Republican ones, too.  But he's competing with them, isn't he?  And the Foreign Minister of Pakistan, like John Howard before him weighed in, that's true.  Can't imagine that he would have any agendas worth discussing that might influence his perspective.  Oh... the right-wing nose machine thought it was 'naive and irresponsible' too.  The Bush administration took the trouble to mention they might attack Waziristan unilaterally like Obama said, come to think of it, but otherwise they were not very supportive.  And of course the usual cast of characters here at MyDD were not too impressed either.

Kool-aid yesterday, Rolaids today.  Love the Democratic party but wish they'd do something about the catering.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-04 02:48AM | 0 recs
again, i ask, what's the difference between bush..

and hillary?  this post could easily have been written by someone in the white house.  "a fragile ally?"  had you said a fragile leader, maybe.  but ally?

either you think osama bin laden is an enemy of this country or not.  CLEARLY YOU DO NOT.  what effort has pakistan made to deliver bin laden?  oh, yeah, that's right -- he's a fragile ally.  and you want to differentiate yourself from bush???  again, i ask, HOW?

i don't think it's clear that pakistan is an ally at all.  it doesn't appear to share our national security concerns or our national security goals.  perhaps you (and bush) have a difference definition of national security or ally, i don't know.  i just know that you've presented the bush frame, which, granted, is the hillary frame.

thankfully, obama is dispensing of the bush-clinton assumptions and thinking beyond the framework that has led us disasterously in the last 15 years...

by bored now 2007-08-05 07:20AM | 0 recs
another voter clinton shouldn't count on...

hillary's going to depend on stealing this election, right???

by bored now 2007-08-05 07:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Wow.  I know it is Friday night, but a bit much of that kool-aid, no?  

I guess in some minds being slammed as "irresponsible" and "ignorant" is a feather to hang in your cap.   To me it just looks like a correct phrasing of Obama's rather bizarre behavior over these last 7, 8 days.   This is not Don Quixote fighting imaginary windmills, you know.  

by georgep 2007-08-03 06:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Where did the 'ignorant' slam come from?  I missed that, or is that one of yours you just thought you could slip in while no-one was paying attention?

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 06:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Are you kidding?  With all your news feeds?  

Here you go:

Pakistan accused Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama of "sheer ignorance" for threatening to launch US military strikes against Al-Qaeda on Pakistani soil.

"Such statements are being made out of sheer ignorance," Pakistan's Minister of State for Information, Tariq Azeem, told AFP. "They are not fully apprised about the ground realities and not aware of the efforts by Pakistan."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis cuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address =102x2939178

Also:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio nworld/chi-obama_dorningaug04,1,2862205. story?track=rss&ctrack=1&cset=tr ue

A senior Pakistani government official Friday criticized as "irresponsible" a threat Obama made this week to launch unilateral American military strikes against Al Qaeda havens in a remote border region of the Muslim nation.

Obama's comments also stirred street protests in Pakistan and criticism from Pakistani-Americans living in the Chicago area.

"It's a very irresponsible statement, that's all I can say," Pakistan's Foreign Minister Khusheed Kasuri told AP Television News. "As the election campaign in America is heating up we would not like American candidates to fight their elections and contest elections at our expense."
....
But the threat against Pakistan is likely to damage views of Obama in global Islamic opinion, though perhaps not irrevocably, said Vali Nasr, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who studies political Islam and is author of "The Shia Revival."

"There is the Obama promise. There is the Obama message. And now there are the Obama words," Nasr said. "They are not consistent with each other."
....
Sensitive subject
Nasr said global Islamic opinion is particularly sensitive to treatment of Pakistan because its tensions with India make it the second major spot in the world in which Muslims are in conflict with a nation of a foreign religion. The other is the Israeli-Arab conflict.

"Ultimately, the tenor of Obama's argument is that he is going treat Pakistan as an enemy country," Nasr said.
....
In Chicago, several Pakistani-Americans who had donated to Obama said they would no longer support him. Dr. Murtaza Arain, an Oak Brook surgeon who has attended two Obama fundraisers and donated money to the campaign, said he planned to switch his support to Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.).

"I don't want him to be my president if he doesn't understand all the ground realities in Pakistan," said Arain, pointing to Pakistan's efforts to root out terrorists. "To say you'll act if they don't is suspecting an ally and putting that ally down."

--------------------------------------

This is serious business.  You treat it like a coup.  Even if it helped Obama with the rabid crowd (those who would rather see us smoke all Arabs) it would still be irresponsible.   Luckily, Democrats are not like that.   I think you will find a rather strong and broad rejection of the Obama comments especially from Democrats.      

by georgep 2007-08-03 09:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Sorry, George but I was thinking of domestic opinion.  I didn't realise you were citing foreign leadership in your campaign analysis.  You'll be quoting John Howard next.

But seriously, George, how much impact has Obama's comments really had?  The protests in Karachi and Waziristan, curiously, made the US press but barely a ripple overseas.  Funny, that.

Do you really think this is such a big deal as you are contriving it to be?  Did you actually read the bit from the Waziristan leaders?  They cordially invited the US, Pakistan, Obama and all our minions to go to hell together and leave them alone.  The more things change the more they remain the same.  Has it occurred to you that Obama's comments may have actually had a salutary effect on the situation in Pakistan?  The Bush administration leapt at the chance to let Pakistan know they reserved the right to have similar intentions themselves.  Doesn't that strike you as curious?  If Obama is so naive and irresponsible, as you suggest?

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-04 02:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Pakistan is an ally we need  strategically. But if you think that after putting up with Bush, they are suddenly going to throw a coup over Barack Obama the kool-aid has been passed around more than we all thought.

I don't think we should be taking Pakistan's advice on the way a "responisble" government acts.

by leewesley 2007-08-04 10:36AM | 0 recs
is pakistan an ally?

or is the dictator?  we made the same silly mistake in iran with the shah...

by bored now 2007-08-05 07:12AM | 0 recs
Re: is pakistan an ally?

doesn't matter, we need the pakistani government on our side.

by leewesley 2007-08-05 08:00AM | 0 recs
is there a pakistani government who wouldn't...

be "on our side?"

by bored now 2007-08-05 10:47AM | 0 recs
Re: is there a pakistani government who wouldn't..

an islamicist one.

by leewesley 2007-08-05 11:29AM | 0 recs
then i'd ask...

is there a pakistani government which isn't an islamist one?

by bored now 2007-08-06 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Hillary thinks that it is not right to talk to foreign leaders who might use the talks for propaganda. Hillary says it is not right to say you will go after bin Laden and al Queda whereever they hide but it is also wrong to say you won't use nuclear missiles to attack terrorists in a foreign country.

by BDM 2007-08-03 06:31PM | 0 recs
Re: He has had a disasturous week....

We'll see.  It's not like Hillary leading in the polls is something new, as any number of people will happily point out ad nauseum.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-04 02:53PM | 0 recs
The End of Kissinger

The reason Clinton, Biden, Dodd, and Richardson piled on Obama this week is that Obama challenges the
entire body of cold-war assumptions on which the power of these four candidates rests. Chief among these
assumptions is that the President must operate from behind a gnostic veil of secrecy and intrigue.

The fact is, with respect to how foreign policy and national security should be conducted, there is very little
that separates Clinton, Biden, Dodd, and Richardson from Henry Kissinger. It's the only way they know how
to operate.

Obama is saying that the Kissinger generation is over. Clinton, Biden, Dodd, and Richardson know he's right.

And that scares them shitless.

by horizonr 2007-08-03 01:34PM | 0 recs
Deep.

Good post.

by lovingj 2007-08-03 02:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Deep.

Cheers.

by horizonr 2007-08-03 02:30PM | 0 recs
Re: The End of Kissinger

Saying so doesn't make any of it so.  Sure, I wish it were too.
by killjoy 2007-08-03 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: The End of Kissinger

Nero saw Rome burning around him and continued to play the violin, too.    :-)

by georgep 2007-08-03 05:34PM | 0 recs
Re: The End of Kissinger

You'll have to unpack that one.

by horizonr 2007-08-03 05:59PM | 0 recs
Re: The End of Kissinger

Yeah.  So many violins, so many fires to stamp out.  

by georgep 2007-08-03 06:06PM | 0 recs
Re: The End of Kissinger

The only ones I hear sawing on their tuneless potshot violins are Clinton, Biden, Dodd, Richardson, Edwards, Bush,
the Foreign Minister of Pakistan, and their various bandwagon compatriots in the media.

The only candidate presenting a thoughtful, detailed, and comprehensive plan for putting out the fire is Barack Obama.

One need only look at John Edwards's counter-terrorism "strategy" to see how disingenuous all the finger wagging is.
The "strategy" starts with a quote from Edwards (emphases mine):

"There is no question we must confront terrorists with the full force of our military might.
As commander-in-chief, I will never hesitate to do everything in my power...to root out
terrorist cells, and to strike swiftly and strongly against those who would do us harm.

And we must stay on the offensive against both terrorism and its root causes."

As president, Senator John Edwards will employ a more effective strategy to hunt down those
who would threaten us, including Islamic extremists,
and to shut down terrorism where
it starts -- in weak and failing states, which breed instability and radicalism
...Al Qaeda has
recently been expanding across Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and even Europe.

. . . . .

As president, Edwards will provide enough troops...to deploy in Afghanistan and any other
trouble spots
.

"Shut down terrorism...in weak and failing states"? "Provide enough troops...to deploy in Afghanistan and any other trouble spots"?

Good God, Edwards even mentions Pakistan by name.

You're as much of a joker as Edwards is, if you believe that Edwards, Clinton, or any of Obama's other Democratic competitors
would govern on terrorism according to fundamentally different principles than Obama laid out last week.

The difference is, Obama is leading on the issue -- and he's leading with depth and transparency, rather than with talking points
and intrigue.

Clinton et al. know this is a winner. You want to talk about "the Democratic brand"? Obama understands that real power comes
from trusting the American people with the truth. That's why he deals from transparency. And that's what makes him a real Democrat --
and, more important, a real democrat.

Clinton et al. don't deal from transparency. They deal from secrecy and intrigue. Why? Because (1) secrecy and intrigue is the "language"
that sustains the crumbling cold-war systems of power to which they owe their own positions -- and in which they now are stocking their
own, and America's, future; and because (2) they don't have the strength to break their addictions to these systems, however fragile the
systems are.

Does Obama's position as a national political figure depend in part on these same systems. To a degree. But Obama understands that
whatever influence he gets from these systems is illusory -- that this is not the power that counts. He understands that real American
power always begins and ends the American people, and that this power -- democratic power -- requires that the electorate be well-informed.

Obama's statements of the last week signal his determination to empower the American people by speaking directly to them with a forthrightness
and candor that they have not seen coming out of the Oval Office for decades.

Rather than empower the country by trusting and empowering the people with information, Clinton et al. prefer to enhance their own power by
sharing even the most basic foreign policy goals only with those who, like them, have a key to the clubhouse. They arrogantly -- and mistakenly --
assume that American power is a function of their own power.

But the fact that Clinton, Biden, Dodd, Richardson, and Edwards all were pelting Obama last week from the same post on the clubhouse ramparts just
proves that it is not they who control the power but the power -- or, rather, the idea of power which the clubhouse symbolizes -- that controls them.

These people are addicts, and -- sooner or later -- addicts always operate out of desperation and fear.

But with every desperate, tsk-tsk-ing "Shame on you, Barack," Clinton, Biden, Dodd, Richardson, and Edwards reveal their own impotence on the
issue of terrorism and declare aloud to the American people that Barack Obama is the candidate with substance here.

Whine on, I say. Whine on.

by horizonr 2007-08-04 11:20AM | 0 recs
Re: The End of Kissinger

...real American power always begins and ends with the American people....

by horizonr 2007-08-04 11:26AM | 0 recs
foreign policy

To think Obama has any grasp and understanding of foreign policies is just laughable. LOL. This guy is a complete empty suit.

by areyouready 2007-08-03 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: foreign policy

Hillary Clinton has no Foreign Policy. She has no plans. She has no vision. She has no brain. All she has is

"Vote for me. I was married to the man who caused the Democrats to lose Congress and every Presidential election since he held office"

"Vote For me because I can't even get a Health Care Plan passed in Congress!"

"Vote for me because I know how to play the victim even when it turns out I lied. There was no VRWC, my husband really was sleeping around"

"Vote for me. I'm polling great nationally. Seriously. 500 people nationwide say I'm great"

by BlueDiamond 2007-08-03 05:01PM | 0 recs
Re: foreign policy

I'm glad you substantiated your laughable claim by then laughing. CASE IN POINT!

by leewesley 2007-08-04 10:38AM | 0 recs
you're extremely ill-informed...

barack has given numerous, substantial, well-considered speeches on u.s. foreign policy and national security policy.

i can't think of similar cohesive, comprehensive efforts by hillary...

by bored now 2007-08-05 07:11AM | 0 recs
Is that your "final answer"?

OK. Another flip-flop from Obama's camp.

MSNBC Hardball had the actual audio tape of Obama's nuke statement this week. First he said that he would not use nukes, threw in about three "uhs" and "umms", then added "when civilians are involved".

But, what the AP story conveniently left out was that he then immediately said:

"Let me scratch ALL OF that." He obviously meant to cancel his entire statement and replace with, "There have been no discussions of nukes. That's not on the table".

Fine. So Obama's statement for the record is that he's had no discussions of nukes.

So now, his confused spokeswomen issues a memo that says:

When asked whether he would use nuclear weapons to take out terrorist targets in Pakistan and Afghanistan, Barack Obama gave the sensible answer that nuclear force was not necessary, and would kill too many civilians.

Huh? That sounds like the answer Obama scratched. So which is it? I feel like a TV game show. Senator Obama, is that your "final answer"?

He did the same thing with his willingness to meet with Fidel Castro. First there were conditions, then no preconditions, then his spokesman says there would be preconditions. And finally Obama pops up on the campaign trail saying he really meant no preconditions.

Stick to a story, dude.

by hwc 2007-08-03 05:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

Yep, Obama clearly said "Let me scratch ALL OF THAT."  

by georgep 2007-08-03 05:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

I heard it too.  And the context was his previous statement of using US military force in Waziristan.  And I would suggest that his use of the options on/off the table framing, which has been the metaphor for nuclear responses or pre-emption throughout the last six months in regard to Iran, was quite clear.  He would not use nuclear weapons in a US strike against 'stateless' enemies in Pakistan.

Gotta' admit he stuttered.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 05:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

So, why the three page "clarifications"?

It seems to me that Obama's campaign just digs his hole deeper every time they try to clarify something.

He needs to learn:

a) That he doesn't have to answer every question from every two-bit reporter cornering him in a hallway.

b) When he does answer questions, he needs to engage his brain first and give concise clear answers.

c) Stop with the clarifications that attempt to turn every imprecise answer into some kind of revolutionary "new" politics.

by hwc 2007-08-03 06:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

We did all this yesterday, didn't we?  To no effect, apparently.  The only new news was the actual audio of the comment and we pretty much covered that.

by Shaun Appleby 2007-08-03 06:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

Hillary thinks that it is not right to talk to foreign leaders who might use the talks for propaganda. Hillary says it is not right to say you will go after bin Laden and al Queda whereever they hide but it is also wrong to say you won't use nuclear missiles to attack terrorists in a foreign country.

That pretty much sum's up her foreign policy. The problem I have is I cannot tell the difference in her policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan from Bush's.

by BDM 2007-08-03 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

C'mon now, he said SCRATCH ALL OF THAT because he knew what he said came out wrong. What he was clearly trying to say was that nuclear attacks against terrorist targets in Pakistan or Afghanistan would be overkill and counterproductive to the larger struggle against terrorism. All of which is true of course. However, it came out a little wrong and now everyone is piling on him.

by End game 2007-08-04 05:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

Yeah. That's usually what happens in a big league presidential race when you say something a little wrong. These aren't part-time politicians like statehouse reps, these are full-time championship contender professionals who have spent years under the glare of the national spotlight preparing themselves for presidential run.

The history of presidential campaigning is littered with candidates who couldn't handle the heat or were derailed by a seemingly inconsequential gaffe.

by hwc 2007-08-04 06:54AM | 0 recs
sure....

and hillary's learned to hide behind canned responses.  we have no idea what she's really thinking -- and voters are picking up on this.  sure, probably not democrats, who might make up 38% of the electorate.  she'll get her 87% of that group.  it's the rest of the electorate who think she's swarmy with her canned responses.

we're going to need obama in 2012.  12 years of republican rule is about all anyone can handle...

by bored now 2007-08-06 03:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Is that your "final answer"?

Yeah I completely agree, he's been correct every time but then he makes himself seem unsure and uninformed instead of standing strong and pushing back.

by leewesley 2007-08-04 10:40AM | 0 recs
Re:

This seems like desperation to me, not the overused "polls must be telling him something."  

He has bad advisors, hence he gets bad advice, hence he FOLLOWS bad advice.  It is as simple as that.   This is just more proof of that.  I figured that trusting the likes of Axelrod and Gibbs would put Obama into a tailspin, and it clearly has.  

Now, there is still plenty of time to right the ship (Iowa is about 4 months away) but righting it Obama must.  

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics /2007/08/08_notes_3.html

by georgep 2007-08-03 05:31PM | 0 recs
Re:

Most of his foreign policy team comes from the Clinton administration, plus Richard Clark.

I guess the Clinton administration had some real foreighn policy loser's.

by BDM 2007-08-03 06:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point

I agree with hwc.  Obama is all over the map on his foreign policy positioning.  I seriously have begun to question the man's intelligence.

And that is a very scary thing indeed.  

by samueldem 2007-08-03 05:34PM | 0 recs
It's not his intelligence

It's his lack of big league experience.

You can't stand up to the plate against major league pitch and think, "hmmm, does that look like a fastball or a curveball". By the time you think that, it's a called strike. Big league hitters just instantly know it's a curveball, because they've developed instincts.

Obama doesn't have the instincts to recognize a curveball. He just came up from the minors and he's never faced a big league curveball. When an experienced presidential candidate hears the words "nuclear weapons", alarm bells start ringing instantly. DANGER! DANGER! DANGER! Those alarms keep them from walking into traps.

Obama will figure it out. Hopefully in time for the 2016 election.

by hwc 2007-08-03 06:10PM | 0 recs
Re: It's not his intelligence

Are you saying he lacks the experience to be president?

Why, 7% of Iowa voters disagree with you.  :-)

by georgep 2007-08-03 09:42PM | 0 recs
Re: It's not his intelligence

Nice way to distort the poll.

It was about the candidate with the best experience, not a person has any.

by psericks 2007-08-04 12:57AM | 0 recs
Re: It's not his intelligence

The exact question was:

"Which candidate has the best experience to be president?"

50% picked Clinton, 7% picked Obama.  

Nothing to distort, just simple matter of fact.  

by georgep 2007-08-04 08:06AM | 0 recs
Re: It's not his intelligence

Then why is she not ahead in this poll but tied. The poll also said by 50-39% that they perfer change over experience.

by BDM 2007-08-04 09:47AM | 0 recs
they got to know her???

they don't buy her "three point responses?"  they had a gut check?

pick 'em...

by bored now 2007-08-06 03:55AM | 0 recs
Re: It's not his intelligence

It's an obvious distortion to claim, as you did, that only 7% of Iowans believe Obama has the experience to be president.

Frankly I only think Clinton scores so highly in these polls because her campaign has made it their mission to throw out the word "experience" in every other sentence.

I can't think of a candidate whose experience has been greater inflated in the course of this campaign than hers.

by psericks 2007-08-04 03:23PM | 0 recs
no, she has experience...

experience in justifying war, in justifying secrecy and justifying deceit of the american people...

by bored now 2007-08-06 03:56AM | 0 recs
Re: It's not his intelligence

By the afternoon, Clinton (N.Y.) had responded with an implicit rebuke. "Presidents should be careful at all times in discussing the use and nonuse of nuclear weapons," she said, adding that she would not answer hypothetical questions about the use of nuclear force.

"Presidents since the Cold War have used nuclear deterrents to keep the peace, and I don't believe any president should make blanket statements with the regard to use or nonuse," Clinton said.

So what is she saying? Is she saying that Obama shouldn't make blanket statements even when he's ruling out the use of nukes in such a manner that would practically be a war crime? Or is she saying that she herself would not rule out using nukes because she actually would use nukes?

There's no stretch to either implication, as she doesn't make clear exactly what she means. What's the point of criticizing Obama if she herself wouldn't use them? To show that she buys into some ridiculous deterrent rationale that doesn't even work on terrorists?

To me it's clear that Obama comes off better here. Anybody who supports the use of nukes in Pakistan is a moron or a lunatic, and it's not damaging to to Obama's campaign for him to reject such a position, except in the mind of Beltway pundits.

by BDM 2007-08-04 09:48AM | 0 recs
thanks god he doesn't have the experience...

to lead us into an immoral war, or design an entirely new health care system IN SECRET, or hide his billing records in a closet, hoping the whole thing would go away.

here's what we know about hillary: when it comes to big things, she makes the wrong decisions, whether it's war, or transparency in government, ot personal character...

by bored now 2007-08-06 03:54AM | 0 recs
The Barking-Mad Option


Any POTUS who ever uses a nuke to take out a single terrorist cell would be judged barking mad, after the fact.  To suggest that he is wet behind the ears for not taking the barking-mad option off the table, before the fact, is just nuts.

I have no clue what the hell Hillary thinks she's doing on this particular issue.  At best, she is taking to heart Adlai Stevenson's rueful observation that you can't win the presidency by capturing the vote of every thinking person -- you need a majority.

-- TP

by Rethymniotis 2007-08-03 06:36PM | 0 recs
Powers 08?

Is Samantha Powers running for President or is Obama?  

by BigBoyBlue 2007-08-04 02:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Powers 08?

Both are losers.

by areyouready 2007-08-04 06:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Powers 08?

i just lost the game

by leewesley 2007-08-04 09:51PM | 0 recs
thanks for giving us the republican position...

by bored now 2007-08-06 04:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

I fear that Democrats are falling for the Bush Administration's tricks in their playbook. They seem shook about Al-Qaeda and these terrorists that they start sounding republican on the issue. It is hard for me to believe that Al-Qaeda is strong in Pakistan and are rebuilding. It sounds like something the Bush Administration is doing to put fear into people and the Democrats are falling for it. I do not see Al-Qaeda much of a threat towards the U.S.  

by PROfess PROgress 2007-08-04 10:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

why is that hard for you to believe?

by leewesley 2007-08-05 08:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point...Samantha P

Cause this al-qaeda bullshit and terrorist plots were made up by the bush administration. So when I hear things about terrorists how am I supposed to believe that it is true?

by PROfess PROgress 2007-08-06 07:36PM | 0 recs
Is Samantha The New Condoleeza?

Some women will do anything for their man....er Work Husband. Samantha Powers' disingenous memo puts her less than adequate foreign policy skills to spin Obama's errors as brilliant unconventional thinking. To make a silk purse for Obama, Powers' throws Democratic foreign policy under the bus along with George Bush. Her merge and purge exercise lumps the Democratic foreign policy inheritance that includes George F. Kennan, Breszinski, Holbrooke, with the thuggish abberation of George Bush. All are blurred under the keywords of old, establishment. The stakes are high for Barack but are they worth burning down the Democratic family's house of foreign policy?

Of course the tip off that this was spin, was that Powers, who is not a foreign policy expert, and who made her name on Dafur, was volunteered for this yeoman's task. If you don't know anything you can say anything. Classic George Bush little helpers tactic. Why not Susan Rice, an African-American woman and an Obama foreign policy advisor who has had concrete and high level foreign policy experience in the Clinton Administration?
"Barack Obama's judgment is right; the conventional wisdom is wrong." --Samantha Powers

Some women will do anything for their Work Husband. Samantha Powers' disingenous memo puts her less than adequate foreign policy skills the test to spin Obama's recent errors as brilliant unconventional thinking. To make a silk purse for Obama, Powers' throws Democratic foreign policy under the bus along with George Bush and his crowd. Samantha's merge and purge exercise lumps the Democratic foreign policy inheritance that includes stars such as George F. Kennan, Breszinski, Holbrooke, with the thuggish abberation of George W. Bush and his gang. Democrats are blurred and tarnished under the keywords of old, establishment without distinguishing individual achievements. I know the stakes are high for Barack but are they worth burning down the Democratic family's house of foreign policy so that Barack can enter as the conquering hero?

Of course the tip off that this was spin, was that Powers, who is not a foreign policy expert, and who made her name off of Dafur, was volunteered for this yeoman's task. If you don't know anything you can say anything meaningful but you can effectively slur and slander. This was of course George Bush's little helpers tactic, which the non-foreign policy expert Samantha employs with gusto. But of course it should be evident by now that Barack does not care for experts. If he did, why not draw on the advice of Susan Rice, an African-American woman and an Obama foreign policy advisor who actually has concrete and high level foreign policy experience in the Clinton Administration?

Is the Samantha Powers memo shades of things to come if there is an Obama adminstration? Will the cool kids burn down the foreign policy library, erase the Democratic foreign policy memory disks and send out snotty missives to dissenters? Are you with Obama or against Obama? Unfortunately as the saying goes, history repeats itself the first time as a tragedy, the second time as a farce. Rock on Obama!

by superetendar 2007-08-05 06:34AM | 0 recs
it's hard to know if your ignorant of the history.

of foreign affairs or just throwing mud and hope it sticks.  bill clinton undercut our fifty year old foreign policy principles by DOING NOTHING when pakistan and india went nuclear.

well, at least he kept us in oil.

george bush has done similar things, and perhaps you can argue that the clinton-bush's have simply struggled with the post-cold war conundrum.  but lets not pretend obama's valiant attempts to build a post-cold war consensus is breaking a 50 year old tradition.  we've already done that.  humpty dumpty fell off that wall.  the choice is do you pretend he's still there like clinton or bush, or do we put him back together again...

by bored now 2007-08-06 07:36PM | 0 recs
Is Samantha The New Condoleeza?

Some women will do anything for their man....er Work Husband. Samantha Powers' disingenous memo puts her less than adequate foreign policy skills to spin Obama's errors as brilliant unconventional thinking. To make a silk purse for Obama, Powers' throws Democratic foreign policy under the bus along with George Bush. Her merge and purge exercise lumps the Democratic foreign policy inheritance that includes George F. Kennan, Breszinski, Holbrooke, with the thuggish abberation of George Bush. All are blurred under the keywords of old, establishment. The stakes are high for Barack but are they worth burning down the Democratic family's house of foreign policy?

Of course the tip off that this was spin, was that Powers, who is not a foreign policy expert, and who made her name on Dafur, was volunteered for this yeoman's task. If you don't know anything you can say anything. Classic George Bush little helpers tactic. Why not Susan Rice, an African-American woman and an Obama foreign policy advisor who has had concrete and high level foreign policy experience in the Clinton Administration?
"Barack Obama's judgment is right; the conventional wisdom is wrong." --Samantha Powers

Some women will do anything for their Work Husband. Samantha Powers' disingenous memo puts her less than adequate foreign policy skills the test to spin Obama's recent errors as brilliant unconventional thinking. To make a silk purse for Obama, Powers' throws Democratic foreign policy under the bus along with George Bush and his crowd. Samantha's merge and purge exercise lumps the Democratic foreign policy inheritance that includes stars such as George F. Kennan, Breszinski, Holbrooke, with the thuggish abberation of George W. Bush and his gang. Democrats are blurred and tarnished under the keywords of old, establishment without distinguishing individual achievements. I know the stakes are high for Barack but are they worth burning down the Democratic family's house of foreign policy so that Barack can enter as the conquering hero?

Of course the tip off that this was spin, was that Powers, who is not a foreign policy expert, and who made her name off of Dafur, was volunteered for this yeoman's task. If you don't know anything you can say anything meaningful but you can effectively slur and slander. This was of course George Bush's little helpers tactic, which the non-foreign policy expert Samantha employs with gusto. But of course it should be evident by now that Barack does not care for experts. If he did, why not draw on the advice of Susan Rice, an African-American woman and an Obama foreign policy advisor who actually has concrete and high level foreign policy experience in the Clinton Administration?

Is the Samantha Powers memo shades of things to come if there is an Obama adminstration? Will the cool kids burn down the foreign policy library, erase the Democratic foreign policy memory disks and send out snotty missives to dissenters? Are you with Obama or against Obama? Unfortunately as the saying goes, history repeats itself the first time as a tragedy, the second time as a farce. Rock on Obama!

by superetendar 2007-08-05 06:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Is Samantha The New Condoleeza?

"If he did, why not draw on the advice of Susan Rice, an African-American woman and an Obama foreign policy advisor who actually has concrete and high level foreign policy experience in the Clinton Administration?"

I don't understand what you are saying here.  Susan Rice, is one of several foreign policy experts on his team.  He already draws on her advice.  

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/05/ sweet_column_inside_look_at_ob_1.html

"Besides Lippert, the core Obama group consists of three people who worked in President Bill Clinton's administration: former National Security Adviser Anthony Lake and former senior State Department officials Susan Rice and Gregory Craig. They meet regularly in Washington. Lake was the NSA adviser during Clinton's first term. Rice was the senior adviser on national security affairs for the Kerry-Edwards campaign in 2004, an assistant secretary of state for African affairs and a special assistant to the president at the National Security Council at the Clinton White House."
__
The Power memo was a statement meant to reflect Obama's overall 'vision' re: foreign policy in contrast to the Washington CW that led us into Iraq, consequently...

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2007/05/ sweet_column_inside_look_at_ob_1.html

"When it comes to ideas and vision, Obama has on tap Samantha Power. Early on his tenure as senator, Obama reached out to a variety of people in the foreign policy community and one was Power, the Pulitzer Prize winning author of A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide. She is a professor of foreign policy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

After she met with Obama, she decided she wanted to work for him and spent part of 2005-2006 in his Senate office. While Lippert is an expert at nailing down details, Power provides big-picture advice for Obama with her deep background in human rights, failing states and genocide prevention."
_
__
Powers issued the memo because of all the FP experts he as advising him including Dr.  Susan Rice, her role is to help shape the big picture. This was a big picture memo.  You may not like the big picture, but that's what this memo was issued to reflect.

by jg40 2007-08-05 07:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Is Samantha The New Condoleeza?

Apologies first for the double post. I just think it is telling that the memo, as far as I can  make out, is the handiwork of Samantha Powers. It did not appear to be a joint statement signed or including the names of Susan Rice and the rest of his Washington foreign policy team, which would rather ruin the point of the anti-Washington foreign policy tone of the memo. In other words the memo is a political campaigning document masquerading as an"important" foreign policy memo.

You're right though, I am troubled by the big picture painted in the Samantha Powers memo, mainly because the real historic achievements of Post-War Democratic foreign policy earnestly carried out by George Kennan, Brezinski, Holbrooke and many other well-meaning Democrats are discarded like old trash to help Barack seem new and bright. I think it is dishonest and a disservice to Democrats. I also resent the fact that Obama's errors are being passed off as fresh new ideas. To me its a bit like going to a restaurant promising fresh produce while good old Samantha is working overtime microwaving frozen vegetables arranged on trendy modern white plates and given some new name fancy name.  Obama should ironically use his Washington establishment advisors like Susan Rice to promote his ideas in public instead of trying to hide them behind Samantha. Ironically, Susan Rice actually has experience and is an old State Department hand. But I guess that does not fit the new image.

by superetendar 2007-08-05 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Is Samantha The New Condoleeza?

You sound like you are Susan Rice's agent or something.  Is she upset that she's not getting more publicity? Does she want more TV face time or a higher profile in the campaign?  What difference does it make who writes which memo?  THEY ARE ALL WORKING TOWARD THE SAME OBJECTIVE, which, presumably is to help the guy they are working FOR to get ELECTED... which is ultimately a POLITICAL EXERCISE.  

Neither Powers or any of the others on his team, whatever role they play, are there to prop up  "the real historic achievements of Post-War Democratic foreign policy" or to add to their own PR.  They have been hired to do a job which at the end of the day is supposed to get Barack Obama the nomination and ultimately elected president. If Ms. Rice or Ms. Powers or anyone else working with the campaign has some agenda other than  getting their candidate to the White House, they perhaps need to get their ticket punched somewhere else.

At then end of the day, their efforts may not be successful, but none of them and none of us should be confused about the ulitmate goal of ANY of these candidates.  THEY ALL want to be POTUS and EVERYTHING any of them do or say during the course of this campaign, is ultimately aimed toward that goal.

The only dishonest thing is the feigned outrage sometimes on display here and elsewhere ....

by jg40 2007-08-05 08:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Is Samantha The New Condoleeza?


"Barack Obama's judgment is right; the conventional wisdom is wrong." --Samantha Powers

(LOL) I'm not Susan Rice's agent, just an observer amused by the absurd Kremlinology of the Obama campaign. You know, hide the real Washington foreign policy experts with experience because they don't quite mesh with the new anti-Washington, anti-convention message of change.

But even more disturbing sign is Obama's willingness to lump all Democrats in the same boat as the Bush crowd when it comes to foreign policy. Its the slash and burn, torch everyone ahistoricity of the Obama memo that I'm not particularly fond of. Its a shame to have Democratic conventional wisdom of foreign policy makers like Kennan, Galbraith, Brezinski and others distorted and cut down to Bush's size to help Obama stand tall. I'd be very wary of anyone who would use and abuse the Democratic brand with such ease and abandon to serve their goals.

by superetendar 2007-08-05 11:45AM | 0 recs
not going to post it again???

might make sense if we read it a third, fourth or fifth time...

by bored now 2007-08-06 03:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point

Ahhh, i get it now....more if the 'he's destroying the Democratic brand' BS...I tell ya what, if the CW of the Democratic foreign policy makers you seem to hold in such high regard is what led Hillary, Edwards, Kerry and too many other Democrats to vote for the IWR and in the case of Edwards actually co-sponser the g-d-mn bill, then I would suggest that THEY have done WAY MORE to harm the 'Democratic brand' than Obama EVER has or ever could...I respectfully suggest that your wariness should be reserved for those who actually voted for this war when they f--king knew better!

by jg40 2007-08-05 12:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point

Frankly I don't understand this masochistic self-flagellating streak Democrats have. The blame for the Iraq war rests solely and completely with the Bush Administration and the Republicans. I'm not really keen on Democratic circular firing squads either.

by superetendar 2007-08-05 01:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point

I'll put my gun away when you do the same...

by jg40 2007-08-05 02:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Obama is really pushing the point

by jg40 2007-08-05 02:36PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads