Obama and McCain trade jabs

| May 17, 2008

President Bush’s speech to the Israeli Knesset on Thursday has drawn battle lines between the Republican and Democrat presumptive nominees. What the President said that started this exchange was;

“Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.”

“We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history,” Bush added.

At first, Barak Obama, who wasn’t mentioned by name, but because he’s embarrassed that he’s an appeaser at heart, took offense and shot back at the President;

Barack Obama accused President Bush of “a false political attack” Thursday after Bush warned in Israel against appeasing terrorists — early salvos in a general election campaign that’s already blazing even as the Democratic front-runner tries to sew up his party’s nomination.

John McCain took up the fight yesterday according to the Wall Street Journal;

Sen. McCain picked up the ball and, at every opportunity since then, the likely Republican presidential nominee has raised the issue, saying he cannot understand what Sen. Obama and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would talk about, given Iran’s vow to destroy Israel, its support for militants in Iraq, and its past efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.

On Thursday, he declined to directly label the Illinois senator an appeaser, but said he would pursue the president’s line of reasoning.

“It does bring up an issue we’ll be discussing with the American people,” he told reporters. “Why does Sen. Obama want to sit down with a state sponsor of terrorism?”

Of course, Obama fell back on the standard Democrat line every time they find their collective ass hanging out when it comes to foreign policy (Washington Times link)

Mr. Obama, using his dust-up with the White House to rally Democrats, linked Mr. McCain to the unpopular President Bush, accusing them of “bluster,” and told South Dakota voters, “They are trying to scare you.”

The prohibitive frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination said the Republican campaign line that he would negotiate with terrorist groups is false.

“I have been adamant about not negotiating with Hamas, a terrorist organization that has vowed to destroy Israel and won’t recognize them,” Mr. Obama said, adding: “They are not telling the truth.”

Yeah, Republicans are always trying to scare voters. Iran’s not trying to scare voters. Hugo Chavez isn’t trying to scare voters, but Republicans are.

The Washington Post, while gushing embarrassingly over Obama, reports he continued on telling fans he’s “happy” to debate over foreign policy, while, charateristically avoiding any substantial debate over foreign policy;

An animated Obama, cheered on by a crowd gathered on the floor of a livestock arena, said he would be delighted if the presidential race turned into a conversation about which party is better suited to guide the nation’s foreign policy.

“If George Bush and John McCain want to have a debate about protecting the United States of America, that is a debate that I’m happy to have anytime, anyplace, and that is a debate I will win because George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for,” the Democratic front-runner said.

Yeah, while Obama himself only asks questions without providing us with details of his plan to stop terrorism – oh, except sending out minions who hint that just because Obama’s face is brown, terrorists will stop attacking us. John McCain shot back (Washington Times);

“Senator Obama claimed all I had to offer was the ‘naive and irresponsible belief’ that tough talk would cause Iran to give up its nuclear program,” the Arizona Republican said. “I have some news for Senator Obama: Talking, not even with soaring rhetoric, in unconditional meetings with the man who calls Israel a ‘stinking corpse’ and arms terrorist who kill Americans will not convince Iran to give up its nuclear program. It is reckless to suggest that unconditional meetings will advance our interests.”

He continued, “It would be a wonderful thing if we lived in a world where we don’t have enemies. But that is not the world we live in, and until Senator Obama understands that reality, the American people have every reason to doubt whether he has the strength, judgment, and determination to keep us safe.”

Sensing Obama weakness on the national security issue Joe Hairplugs Biden weighed in to defend Obama;

He brushed back on Mr. Gillespie’s assertion, saying the White House “long ago perfected the art of the political misrepresentation and innuendo masquerading as policy and stringing together sentences that seem unobjectionable when read in isolation, but send a very different message when read together.”

The old Democrat “well, you voters aren’t smart enough to understand like we Democrats understand”. That’s the difference between Democrats and Republicans on Foreign Policy and National Security – Republicans actually do stuff about our enemies while Democrats think talk is enough to keep us safe. I think Democrats intentionally do nothing hoping Republicans will fix their mistakes when they get in office.

Category: Foreign Policy, Politics

7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
trackback

[…] Obama and McCain trade jabs – This Ain’t Hell […]

Eddie Willers

I’m gonna be the long pole in the tent here…

1. Where’s your proof that Iran is supplying weapons that are killing our soldiers in Iraq? You’re article uses a lot of flamboyant kill-kill-kill! rhetoric but is devoid of any shred of proof.

Everything I’ve read points to (at best) circumstantial evidence of Iran supplying weapons that are killing Americans, and nothing more. In fact, last week officials had to cancel an unveiling of a cache of weapons they said were tied to Iranians…the reason? It turns out none of the weapons were made in Iran.

So who do you believe? Bill Kristol? Dick Cheney? George Bush? The CIA? Weren’t they the ones telling everyone that Saddam had WMDs, the war would be a six week cakewalk, and the war would be paid for with oil revenue? They’ve been wrong about EVERYTHING so far, and only a fool would subscribe to their crackpot theories regarding Iran.

Let me be frank: military suspicion and/or claims is NOT proof.

2. Regarding Israel. So what? We’re seeing Bush, McCain, and Obama go back and forth about a country that is more than capable of defending herself. Who cares if Iran wants to “wipe Israel off the map” (a claim that is patently false and invented, by the way) … if they want to fight, I say let em’ fight (but keep Americans out of it).

Somehow Israel always manages to paint herself as the defenseless victim regardless of circumstance, and our present crop of Presidential candidates have bought into that sentiment big time. Sad.

Jonn wrote: You must be writing about another article. I don’t see any “kill-kill-kill rhetoric” or where I said Iran provided weapons or any of the other ignorant shit you wrote. Are you on the right website? If you’re not going to read the piece I wrote, why bother commenting on it?

trackback

[…] heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an Ame source: Obama and McCain trade jabs, This aint Hell, but you can see it from […]

GM CASSEL AMH1(AW) USN RET

You negotiate with your adversary with your knee in his chest and your knife at his throat.

509th Bob

Jonn, you cannot TELL the truth to people who believe that they KNOW the truth. You are trying (valiantly) to refute Ultimate Fanaticism. When push comes to shove, the only solution is to shoot them.

Perhaps you SHOULD go back to Registered Commenters. If so, please register me.

And, yes, I DO think its 1939 again. The difference this time, is that it may be a combination of Civil War and Foreign War.

Eddie Willers

Jonn:

Fair enough. Perhaps I jumped to too much of a conclusion after reading “Republicans actually do something about our enemies.” Based on the rhetoric/exchange between Obama, Bush, and McCain regarding Israel, it seemed natural to draw Iran into the picture.

Regardless, my criticisms stand. The thinly-veiled threats and general attitude of folks on this site are “180 out” of where they need to be, especially on foreign policy.

The belief that this is 1939 all over again is sorely misguided. A re-reading of the events that led up to American involvement in WWII will reveal that it wasn’t the desire to negotiate with Hitler that led to his overrun of the bulk of Europe, but American re-arming of her enemies.

But we can’t do any research on that…not when the convenient “blame-the-Democrats” excuse is still en vogue.

Ray

Eddie,

I can’t imagine a better course than 180 degrees from yours. Your constant assumption that you are the only one who has ever read a book, or knows anything about history is becoming boring in the extreme. Please take your superior attitude, fold it into sharp corners, and place it where your head evidently already resides.