Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior White House Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories.
RECENT POSTS
- Obama Attempts to Ease Governors' Economic Worries
- Charlie's Interview with President Bush
- Oh, That Joe! (No. 45 in a Series): The Loquacious Blue Hen is Gracious to the Spunky Maverick
- Louis Caldera to be Director of White House Military Office
- Obama Sits Down with State Guvs to Stem Economic Slowdown
- The Spectre of a Senator Chris Matthews (D-Penn.)
- Clinton On the Case
- The Unit
- Obama's National Security Team
- The Handmaid's Employer's Tale
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Iran Complains to UN About Clinton Comments
May 02, 2008 8:19 AM
"75% Off Giuliani and Romney"
…or so says a sign atop a basket of buttons in the sundry shop at The Westin Indianapolis.
Buttons for Clinton, McCain and Obama remain sold at regular price; the GOP also-ran pins are priced-to-move.
**
It's tough to poll in Indiana, I am told, since voters do not register by party.
That said, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, seems to have an edge here, at least as evidenced by her endorsement by the editorial board of the Indianapolis Star, which today says she "is well prepared for the rigors of the White House. She is tough, experienced and realistic about what can and cannot be accomplished on the world stage."
(Two caveats, per the Star -- "Clinton regrettably has pandered more to voters, particularly on gas prices, than Obama. Both have taken stands on free trade that give in to protectionism. Clinton also was an integral part of her husband's political machine, which earned a reputation for flattening opponents. That factor understandably gives many voters pause about whether another Clinton should serve as president.")
**
One wonders about Clinton's heralded experience when one reads headlines abroad.
Her comments to Good Morning America's Chris Cuomo about Iran a couple weeks ago raised proverbial eyebrows.
As you may recall, Clinton said that were Iran to attack Israel with nuclear weapons, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran…In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."
On Wednesday Iran's Deputy Ambassador to the UN Mehdi Danesh-Yazdi complained to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the president of the Security Council, saying in a letter that her comments were "provocative, unwarranted and irresponsible" as well as, according to the official Iranian news agency, a "blatant violation of the UN Charter and contradictory to all international legal principles on rights of other nations."
Across the pond, former UN deputy secretary-general Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, the British foreign office minister responsible for Asia, told reporters that "while it is reasonable to warn Iran of the consequence of it continuing to develop nuclear weapons and what those real consequences bring to its security, it is not probably prudent... in today's world to threaten to obliterate any other country and in many cases civilians resident in such a country."
Clinton in 1999, you may recall, called another international dust-up for the opposite reason -- she sat by as Suha Arafat (speaking in Arabic) accused Israel of poisoning Palestinians, then gave Mrs. Arafat a kiss on the cheek. Clinton later said the translation of what Arafat was saying sounded less harsh, and she condemned "inflammatory rhetoric" and "baseless accusations."
After Clinton launched her 2000 Senate campaign, Republicans later attempted to make hay out of the incident to obviously little success.
- jpt
May 2, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (89)
You can surely tell the difference between the people on here who read and find out things for themselves vs those that get their info from fauxnews. They believe everything them white guys tell them. Then too they could just be using that as a way to hide behind their still blatant racism. A vote for Hillary now is a vote for McCain in the general election. Please find out stuff for yourself and stop letting Hillary treat you all like puppets on a string. If she wins I feel sorry for us all.
Posted by: Caddycts | May 4, 2008 5:36:40 PM
a few basic FACTS for some ignorant people here
1) Iran has not "repeatedly" called for israel to be wiped off the map. Fact: iran's president was mistranslated during a speech, once, saying that. iran certainly does not like israel, but if you actually listen to ahmadinejad's speeches (not just short clips from the mainstream media), he always talks about israel collapsing into itself, and not about any external force
2) it is not proven that iran has a nuclear weapon's program. remember saddam's "wmd's". what is has is a civilian nuclear energy program
3) iran has made it quite clear they would not attack israel unless israel attacked them first
4) even if we accept iran having repeatedly made belligerent comments, this does not justify hillary clinton doing so
Posted by: george | May 3, 2008 10:42:57 PM
There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING 4 Iran 2 worry about from what Hillary said unless they are trully intending to develop a nuclear weapon for the use of lauching a nuclear attack on Israel. It is a DETTERENT policy, like that used in the Cold War with America and Russia establishing a Mutually Assured Destruction policy, where both nations still exist along with their allies because they wouldn't risk the consequences of pressing the nuclear button. Obama said the same policy in the ABC debate but Hillary's words were more explicit. There is no intention to go to war, but should development of nuclear weapons not be prevented at a time when Hillary and Obama aim to reduce nuclear proliferation, then that is the established detterent policy.
Posted by: rekha varma | May 3, 2008 9:48:03 AM
I want a strong leader like Hillary representing our country. I don't want some mealy mouthed little namby pamby like Obama holding hands with America's worst enemies and selling the interests of the USA down the river!
Posted by: HoosierSue | May 3, 2008 9:04:25 AM
So, Clinton should have said, "If Iran attacks Israel (thus starting WW3) the US should sit down and have some tea with Iran?!? Every year in its military parades, Iran marches missiles down the street that have "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" painted on them. All of you who care about the "lovely people of Iran" should think twice about voting for anyone who would allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Iran is already a humanitarian nightmare for its own people (imprisoning, torturing, and executing journalists, students and anyone who disagrees with the individuals in power). A nuclear Iran would feel free to treat its people even worse, figuring the international community would be too scared of nuclear war to step in to defend the Iranian people against their (increasingly dictatorial) government.
Posted by: George R | May 3, 2008 8:21:56 AM
I have been reading all these posts and I am so saddened to outraged with clinton's statements about Iran. The Iraian people are just like you and I,they don't deserve that. It is no wonder that the United States is hated----------we are looked upon as the bullies. i hope the UN acts on her statement. The sad fact is that the voters think she is tough and she will make a better president. Thats really sad. the STUPID idea of a tax relief for the simmer months!!!!!!!!!!!!. Say anything,do anything to get the vote. She went to Valpariso to visit the closed plant and blames it on Bush when in truth it was her own husband that was responsible for that caper. Her screw um comments about southern people. She says Rev Wright would not be her pastor when infact her own pastor is in jail for inapproriate behavior with a minor. Who did slick willie call to the wh when the Lewsinky story broke to act as his spiritual advisor---------YES Rev Wright. What about the trial in progress against her and slick willie. You never hear about that. ________________________
Posted by: elizabeth | May 3, 2008 8:19:28 AM
Don't you love the fact that Iran keeps calling for Israel to be wiped of the map, that it says it would attack Israel if anyone attacked Iran, and then when someone who is candidate for president (but not president) says the US could attack Iran if it attacked Israel Iran goes running like a crybaby to the UN? Iran has been sposoring terrorism, sending weapons to Iraq to kill Iraqi civilians and coaltion forces, and proclaiming to Iranians "We are the number one superpower in the world." They believe they are untouchable bullies who can get away with whatever they want. I don't support Hilary Clinton but her comments about Iran don't deserve all the outrage people are giving her. Basically, whoever was against her to start with is mad at the comments, of course.
Posted by: Shirin | May 3, 2008 7:55:20 AM
I have been reading all these posts and I am so saddened to outraged with clinton's statements about Iran. The Iraian people are just like you and I,they don't deserve that. It is no wonder that the United States is hated----------we are looked upon as the bullies. i hope the UN acts on her statement. The sad fact is that the voters think she is tough and she will make a better president. Thats really sad. the STUPID idea of a tax relief for the simmer months!!!!!!!!!!!!. Say anything,do anything to get the vote. She went to Valpariso to visit the closed plant and blames it on Bush when in truth it was her own husband that was responsible for that caper. Her screw um comments about southern people. She says Rev Wright would not be her pastor when infact her own pastor is in jail for inapproriate behavior with a minor. Who did slick willie call to the wh when the Lewsinky story broke to act as his spiritual advisor---------YES Rev Wright. What about the trial in progress against her and slick willie. You never hear about that. ________________________
Posted by: elizabeth | May 3, 2008 6:52:23 AM
I am Iranian and HC's comments to me are just immature, what would this election alter in the foreign policy of United States if HC is elected? Please remember that at the moment America is one of the most detested nations around the world!!! Are you going to bring more war and misery to the world? Are you going to cause more bloodshed? "obliterate" Iran? Open your eyes, in today's world the use of an A-bomb is not pragmatic, bombing Iran would actuate ww3. Are you so naive as to think Iran would attack Israel? What was the last time Iran attacked another country? Are HC's comments an indication of "testicular fortitude" or absurdity?
Posted by: Roozbeh Afrasiabi | May 3, 2008 1:33:17 AM
I am Iranian and HC's comments to me are just immature, what would this election alter in the foreign policy of United States if HC is elected? Please remember that at the moment America is one of the most detested nations around the world!!! Are you going to bring more war and misery to the world? Are you going to cause more bloodshed? "obliterate" Iran? Open your eyes, in today's world the use of an A-bomb is not pragmatic, bombing Iran would actuate ww3. Are you so naive as to think Iran would attack Israel? What was the last time Iran attacked another country? Are HC's comments an indication of "testicular fortitude" or absurdity?
Posted by: Roozbeh Afrasiabi | May 3, 2008 1:31:35 AM
Hillary's comments were not directed at the Iranian people but the Iranian government...which speaking of loose cannons...
Thanks Hillary for showing some
"testicular fortitude". It took B.O., too long (and too many flip-flops on what he knew and when he knew it) to dump Rev. Wright.
For those of you who don't have a clue, including B.O.,Iran is NOT an ally of the USA.
Posted by: debunker | May 2, 2008 11:02:37 PM
i travelled to iran for the first time and saw for myself that iranians are the best friends that USA has right now. in the middle east and anywhere else, when they see us americans they flinch. but in iran it is quite different. this country is the most misunderstood nation in the whole world. i am sorry for the people who believe the picture that our media have depicted of this beautiful land of culture and poetry. just try to go and see it with your eyes. then travel to the UAE and Saudi Arabia and compare their people with iranians.
clinton's remark was rash and full of unnecessary female emotions.
Posted by: Smokri | May 2, 2008 10:42:55 PM
Clinton is Political Clown.
But if she will misspoke again and press the button...
That it would be far away from circus, but a hell.
Now - you gonna vote ?
Posted by: LINDA,FL | May 2, 2008 10:28:43 PM
I wonder what Kanter calls the Persian people.
Hillary is sick. The Iranians are not a threat. I have been listening to her lies about Iran and how she feeds peoples prejudiced emotions.
Posted by: Anna | May 2, 2008 8:43:51 PM
What is this word "TOUGHER" ? Is the rest of this world are thugs and bunch of idiots that we have to be TOUGH on them? So, by the argument of tougher should win all the thugs, drug dealers and bullies on the street have the right and the one who can not fight them on the street should suck it up because tougher should win. On the other hand if the smarter and more politically inclined that can resolve the problems peacefully wins then there is no need for killing and this unnecessary TOUGHNESS!
Posted by: cy | May 2, 2008 7:55:48 PM
I cerainly think that Senator Clinton would be tougher on the foreign nations who would do harm to the US. Senator Obama is a loose cannon. Don't know which direction he would shoot. He seems to favor Muslim countries maybe even thinks he can change Iran policies toward the West.
Again, Obama has no foreign or even domestic service to brag about. His resume is empty of accomplishments.
Posted by: Mary | May 2, 2008 5:55:32 PM
Now, that GOP Knows they can not win the election, they are backing the Democrat GOP that is Hillary ( do you remember Joe LIEberman?) to keep Washington policies and business as usual. She has won the endorsement of FOX channel WOW!!! The full media propaganda machine is at its full force to not allow Obama become the elected Democrat nominee.
Posted by: cy | May 2, 2008 4:40:39 PM
I have a single reason to not vote for Hillary or McCain. It’s their stupid foreign policies. The aggressive and warmongering policies are what I’m talking about.
Hillary is reading poll to see which way to cast her vote. If war popular vote yes, if not popular say you were mislead or vote against it.
No sound principle whatsoever. I can't stand her two-faced split-tongue personality.
Posted by: My America | May 2, 2008 3:22:37 PM
And who is doing business in Iran right now? General Electric! No wonder Obama wants to have talks with Ahmedinajed!
Posted by: rs | May 2, 2008 1:58:55 PM
Obama has such a boatload of dirty friends……drip…drip if that boat springs a leak…watch out. Look at Rezko on trial right now. Rezko, as a real estate magnate in Chicago, was given a contract for 3 energy plants to be built in Iraq…. through our government. The plants were never built because Rezko got indicted, but NO DOUBT that Senator Obama helped Rezko GET that contract for Rezko. Not to mention that Axelrod was a lobbyist for Exelon (and the later nuclear legislation with no teeth), or that much of the $$$ loans came through General Electric Financial. Who have been large contributors to Obama’s campaigns, General Electric and Exelon! Who owns one of the largest loan insurance and credit card companies in America, General Electric. Who voted for unlimited credit limits and voted against a 30% cap on credit cards? Obama! Obama said he voted against the 30% cap because it was too high. Apparently NO cap is better than a cap that’s too high. Who owns NBC and MSNBC the home of all anti-Hillary all the time? General Electric! Who owns Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Tim Russert and Andrea Mitchell? General Electric! Could it be Obama's speech against the war in Iraq had nothing to do with his personal ideology but business interests?
Posted by: rs | May 2, 2008 1:55:01 PM
She was asked by Keith Olbermann, if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons what would she do. Any American president would have to obliterate Iran. Even Obama, but then again maybe he wouldn't. I hope Israel and Jews living in the U.S. are taking notes.
Posted by: Tina from Florida | May 2, 2008 1:26:15 PM
Obama answered "I DON'T KNOW" when a reporter asked him in June 2007 about what his voted will be if he is in senate seat during Iraq's war voted.
Afer Obama elected as senior senator from Illinois, he voted over and over to funding Iraq war.
Obama rallied opposing the Iraq war was in front of anti war.... like weather underground people... Bill Ayers barack Husein obama's friends
Posted by: Iman | May 2, 2008 1:03:51 PM
She said she would obliterate millions of Iranian people, and probably start WW3-------------->>>Why Iran can obliterate USA or Isreal, we can't obliterate them???
Hillary does not have experience?????>>>>>>> On earth, everyone knows, Hillary play the same role as Bill clinton, she is just act on the back, she already have 8 year president experience!!! And create 8 year best time in US history, now she is ready to lead again! to a better future!!
Posted by: laratta | May 2, 2008 12:57:47 PM
Hillary voted for Iraq war because she wanted to protect her State after 911 and her country, but barak HUSEIN obama opposed the war because he wanted to protect his mansion..... Rezko connected to Auchi, and Auchi connected to Sadam Husein.
Posted by: auch! | May 2, 2008 12:41:35 PM
Not only do I want to end the war, I want to end the mindset that got us there in the first place - Barack Obama
Posted by: AkaDad | May 2, 2008 12:37:54 PM
To come up with a plausible plan while BO is still struggling to get his tongue around his thoughts during the Pennsylvania Debate.... PROVES what a brilliant, venerable President Hillary would be:
"Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, said that the U.S. “should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much further than just Israel. Of course I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States, but I would do the same with other countries in the region.” …
That umbrella of deterrence would be offered, Clinton suggested, in order to deter other nations in the region “from feeling that they have to acquire nuclear weapons. You can’t go to the Saudis or the Kuwaitis or UAE and others who have a legitimate concern about Iran and say: ‘Well, don’t acquire these weapons to defend yourself’ unless you’re also willing to say we will provide a deterrent backup and we will let the Iranians know that, yes, an attack on Israel would trigger massive retaliation, but so would an attack on those countries that are willing to go under this security umbrella and forswear their own nuclear ambitions."
Granted, there are other such umbrellas set up in the world.....so it's not a unique idea. But it's something worth considering!
Obama is still thinking...
I'LL TAKE HILLARY!
Posted by: questioner | May 2, 2008 12:33:12 PM
Hillary Clinton is presidential material!!
The sad mealy mouth Obama has no answers to questions. He mm and haws and pause and NOTHING!
We already have a guy in the white house who can barely read scripted sentences. We do not need the bama and the wright spoutin' dodah!
Posted by: HP Boston | May 2, 2008 12:30:18 PM
She also supporteed Barry Goldwater in the 60's AKA Nukem Goldwater. This just points to her views that the NUke is the answer.
She is a loose Cannon and we should be concerned about this.
Posted by: Thinking | May 2, 2008 12:28:57 PM
She's a loose cannon that is going to get us into war with Iran now. Bet on if so those left to vote? Remember that a vote for Clinton is a vote to go to war AGAIN. Her judgement was OFF on the first one and it is now shown to be OFF again.
Posted by: Brian | May 2, 2008 12:14:58 PM
Why is this blog censoring quotes from Obama?
Posted by: AkaDad | May 2, 2008 12:12:54 PM
Hillary the Bosnian General will say anything and everything to win the nomination, it is unfortunate that she made comments like this about Iran which is not helpful at all. US should use diplomacy if not it will lose as it is facing the trist reality in Irak. A war again Iran will be even harder. Hill has no foreign policy experience no understanding of the world and no national security knowledge. She is acting like WBush-Cheney-McCain thinking that she has to show that she is tough, unfortunately that will help the US. No, wars diminish great nations. This is confirming her inability to be commander in chief even in Bosnia. God bless America and God bless OBAMA.OBAMA08.
Posted by: BKMC | May 2, 2008 12:10:05 PM
Perhaps the thing that worries me the most about Hillary Clinton is the sense I get that she will need to prove herself -- that a woman can be tough, commander-in-chief, have "testicular fortitude" (whatever happened to gender-neutral "intestinal fortitude"), by pulling a "Dubya" and taking us off to war. What better way to prove that a woman can be CIC, than by "obliterating Iran."????
In that regard, she's not unlike Dubya, except he was smart enough not to give us a clue about who he really was when he ran for President in 2000.
We know Hillary Clinton, and we should know better than to vote for her.
Obama 2008 -- YES, WE CAN!!!
Posted by: Jackt51 -- Vietnam Vet and Proud Liberal | May 2, 2008 11:57:01 AM
I guess Iran will continue their support for Obama!!
Posted by: spock | May 2, 2008 11:45:29 AM
the people in indiana are not as dumb as you all seem to be trying to play them.
they know this election is about the future.
their futures
all they want to know is what will sen. clinton do for them over the next four years.
obama SAID what he said about clingling to guns a few weeks ago.
rev. wright said no matter what obama says on the campaign trail-the minute he steps into the white house he will be there. he said this on monday.
the people of indiana want to know what sen. clinton is going to do for them in the future.
healthcare, jobs, college for tomorrow
Posted by: indymom | May 2, 2008 11:41:41 AM
God forbid she would win the election - she will destroy civilization as we know it. She said she would obliterate millions of Iranian people, and probably start WW3. The Russian will come to their aid. And forget about ever using you car ever again ( No gasoline!!) we would all be riding bicycles and electric mobiles .
We lost a lot of Americans especially this month in Iraq,
Bush and McCain are taking us into a war with Iran.
Our prices of food and cost of living is going out of sight,
Cannot buy gasoline,
Cannot pay for health care,
We are losing hundredths of thousands of dollars by the devaluation of our homes.
Our kids can go to college,
Posted by: GHM | May 2, 2008 11:01:36 AM
I am glad the Iranian Nut doesn't like Hillary. All the more reason we should elect her.
Posted by: A reader in Georgia | May 2, 2008 11:00:45 AM
Please god, do not let this woman anywhere near the white house.
Posted by: ll | May 2, 2008 10:59:29 AM
Rick,
Not only that, but guess who are major clients of Joe Andrew -U of Chicago Hospitals and the City of Chicago.
Michelle Obama and the Daley machine.
The media is trying to paint this guy as Mr. Indiana, in the same league as Larry Bird and John Mellencamp. He is nothing but a sleazy lawyer in the pocket of the Obama camp.
Posted by: geevill | May 2, 2008 10:55:58 AM
I have to laugh at Iran. It's nutcase president says he will "wipe Israel off the map" and that "Israel will be devoured in a ball of fire". Iran defies the will of the international community to press ahead with its nuclear program... and now Iran is complaining to the U.N. about Hillary's "provocative" language.
GO HILLARY!!
Posted by: hopesprings52 | May 2, 2008 10:45:21 AM
Hillary is the best candidate. Obama is a puppet of big political machines and money from the sored losers oldies in the Democratic party including Kerry, Daschle, Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, Richardson, etc.etc. They haven't be able to provide leadership in Congress and much less they will provide leadership with Obama as President.
And for the people that look to Obama as a God or the "chosen one," please. Is that easy to sold a person to the public? a man without credentials, without proven leadership even here in Illinois, a man with bad judgement to pick his friends and even the now well known annoying Pastor, not to mention his arrogant, pretentious wife. They are trying to push a new Obama while he is hidding his really supporters including Sharpton, Jessie Jackson,. Ayers, Farrakhan, etc. The command from his campaign was for him not to rally or bring Jackson, Wright or Sharpton to the stages; but we all know here in Illinois they will be with him, it's all political posturing. Is like Obama outrage with his pastor, he only got upset when his pastor said he was just acting like politician and exposed the fact that Obama and his family even prayed down in the basement with Rev. Wright before the rally in Springfield launching his campaign.
Who are they kidding? Who is really dividing the party? the old losers in Congress that are trying to push Obama, the same ones that derailed Edwards candidacy and now are trying to derail Hillary, the same ones that are demonizing and betraying Bill Clinton legacy?
I will not vote for Obama never. I know this man well in Illinois and I will not waste my vote again as I did when I voted to elected him to the US Senate.
Posted by: Nancy_Chicago | May 2, 2008 10:45:19 AM
So where is Rev Wright?, After all the disowning from Obama why has he gone silent? Was this just a set up to boots Obama's falling numbers for political expediency?
Strange all this silence from a man that did not care one hoot what the government thought about what he was saying, now he seems to have gone into hiding because Obama was upset .....strange indeed
Posted by: SJ | May 2, 2008 10:37:41 AM
Anytime someone opens up their post by saying they are African American, chances are the are not. Sheeps in Wolves clothing. It doesn't make you credible. Just voice your views and keep race out of it............Please
Posted by: Charles | May 2, 2008 10:28:17 AM
She claims to have diplomatic seaoning and international experience, as a cornerstone of her argument of being best qualified for the presidency.
These statements are the oposite of good diplomacy. This is a prime example of how hollow her international experienc claims ring. Add to this that most of her diplomacy experience talking points turned out to be disputable at best and outright lies at worst, and she's successfully shot that argument in the foot.
She wanted to be elected based on experience - turns out she doesn't have much at all (especially when compared to John McCain, who will slaughter her if this is an experience vs. experience debate).
She wanted to be elected based on her toughness. She claimed that her large negatives were due to being tough. We now know that most of her negatives are actually due to being perceived as dishonest, not tough, an issue that's gotten worse and worse for her in this campaign.
She wanted to be elected based on having a cleaner closet. Doesn't even pass the straight face test for anyone who's not been in a coma for the last couple of decades.
Now, she wants to be elected based on her electability (huh? see above...) and her proof? Although she'll lose the delegate count, the number of states won count, and the so-called popular vote, she argues that if you count one state where she was unoposed on the ticket and another state where an invalid illegal balloting took place, and if you DON'T count perfectly legitimate legal caucus votes, and you pretend that this is based on electoral votes and also pretend that most of the big states she carried won't go democrat in the election regardless of who's on the ticket, then magical fairies and moonbeams will fart out an electoral success for her. (am I missing anything their Clintonistas?)
She's running out of arguments. Lets face it, if Obama hadn't had bad press/gaffes, she'd be dead already. Once these die down, people will remember that she's got nothing to offer, and her inevitable demise will finally happen.
And if she does somehow win? Well, I'm sure she'll take pride in being the "default due to press manufactured scandals" or "well, I guess she's all that's left - sigh" candidate.
Way to Hillary! Hillary Clinton - the ideally suited desert to the George Bush buffet of suck.
Posted by: fontapa | May 2, 2008 10:25:16 AM
You keep saying Obama is weak.. where exactly is the evidence to support your conclusion? Is it because he refuses to sink to Clintons level of dirty politics? He could simply ask her who has the most unsavory associates.. and guess what -- it would be her - not him.
He could ask - who made the wrong decision - she did! He could ask - what has happened to those who have opposed the Clinton machine - their dead! - but he doesn't.
He is above that - that is his message- to change the way we have gotten used to carrying out our political campaigns.
Posted by: jozy | May 2, 2008 10:20:36 AM
jgaw
try to throw the discussion away from important topics again...
but nuclear obluiteration is more important.
Period.
People need to stop letting their eye get taken off the ball of the real issues.
You are using typical clinto bad tactics...
Posted by: dl | May 2, 2008 10:17:10 AM
@ruthmatters,
I am african-american female, and I do not think we should just "give it to him because he is black"
once again-if the msm had done their job earlier on-obama would not be in the lead. he actually would have been out.
so for those of us who were upset about the outcome of the 2000-where we feel the election was just taken from the voters-what has happened this time is a lot slicker-but it is still the same
this election has been stolen from the voters.
I do think it is time for a third party.
The right hijacked the rep. party in 2000 and you see what we got.
and 2008 the left has hijacked the dem party-and with obama it is slowly being unveiled what we will get.-he is not the one.
and the sad thing is the people who are most vunerable with obama-the black people-are the ones who will suffer the most-mark my words-we will have the welfare system beefed up again-foodstamps, many of you will remember the late 60 early 70.
if obama wins the presidency it will be made even more clear to me
we claim we are so fair and good.
but in the scheme of things when it comes to the ameican elections.
the american voters are in last place when it comes to who is most important in the process.
and once again just because obama is black should not be the main qualifications to elect him.
and for any white guilt out there
putting someone that is as unknown and has such a short political resume'
in office-with our country in the shape it is in-is just foolish.-and you should search yourselves a little more.
my black folks have this sewn up anyway you look at it.
if obama is not just GIVEN this election this country is racist and their will be hell to pay-well not from the working black people.
they should not be allowed to hijack this party.
Posted by: jgaw | May 2, 2008 10:08:40 AM
This is why my vote will go for Obama, who stresses the importance of diplomacy. We do not need another loose canon in the White House.
Also, living in Indiana, I'm offended by this comment from George Stephanopolos and James Carville. These men are her advisors and this clip is going through Indiana media like wildfire:
Posted by: Lynne | May 2, 2008 10:04:33 AM
Well now she wants a poll of Congress over the Tax holiday crap, next she will want a Poll of Congress over this flap.
Fact is she is not the president of the US and should not be making these kinds of Statements.
She does not represent me and I am offended by her remarks, She should keep her trap shut!
Just a loose Carpetbagger from NY.
Posted by: Thinking | May 2, 2008 9:59:11 AM
toby
This issue overhwelmingly says..she is not the best candidate. She is the candidate yes...who fights for the nomination the most.
I don't care.
I absolutely do not want someone like Bush. These statements are closer to Buch than McCain is.
and Don Tufts
what you are arguing is the Bush doctrine that got us here.
Hillary as a potential President is on tape ...threatening "nuclear obliteration" of another country.
It does not matter what the question was...and Iran does not have nuclear weapons ready to hit Israel...that is something straight out of Cheney's keyboard.
She uses fear...but only that fear ...now is used to recruit...that Fear ...is not courage.
That fear is politically tactical.
and it is overwhelmingly dangerous.
Posted by: dl | May 2, 2008 9:57:09 AM
So now some are of the view that Hillary is too tuff on Iran, she is beating up on them causing them to report her, Americans are sure getting wimpy.
Maybe we should have Obama challenge the Iran leadership to a bball game and winner takes all, since standing up a telling Iran as it is seems to be a no no especially if its coming from a woman.
Posted by: SJ | May 2, 2008 9:55:10 AM
She made these comments during the unfair debate with Obama that ABC held. When she said it, I could not even wrap my mind around the words that came from her mouth. Was she called out on it at the time. NO!! I am tired of this woman getting a free ticket with the Media, I have stopped watching cable news. She will not be a good leader, she lies, when she gives her promises out on the stump she always starts with her eyes rolling up and around. Experts call that a lie coming. You guys vote for whom you wish, but I will never vote for this woman.
Posted by: Becky | May 2, 2008 9:54:30 AM
jgaw
that is exactly the dangerous mentality that is amking this situation worse...
that somehow if obama or McCain said it would be okay...
NO ...this ios about a Presidential Candidate using Nuclear Obliteration in a campaign... and that being taken...
obviously Obama and McCain somehow (on either end of the experience question with the candidates)
know enough never to be caught threatening nuclear "obliteration" in a speech or interview...
Clinton whether she gets the nomination or not...just hurt us ...because her focus is not the country for the country's sake...
It is the country for The Clinton's sake.
This is BAD. With a capital A.
Posted by: dl | May 2, 2008 9:53:20 AM
What we are witnessing for the first time in an election is that the very best candidate is being asked to dropout of the race everyday. So that the weak candidate will look stronger, it still willnot help him.
Posted by: toby | May 2, 2008 9:50:34 AM
This is what I mean: instigating another war with someone who has not attacked us. It's a no-brainer. Obama is the only choice for this election.
Posted by: Seriously Evaluating | May 2, 2008 9:49:47 AM
If you go back and read the comments listed here-the majority of the naysayers to sen. clinton on this id themselves as men. If mccain or obama
had said this-it would be a different dialog going all together.
Women will do everything they can to avoid going to war. but the clear message that needs to be sent to Iran-(and in a round about way-Russia)
"don't think that just because the new POTUS is a woman-she is a creampuff"
we will use diplomacy always-but to iran and they way they are about women.
She was right to answer the question as she did.
Posted by: jgaw | May 2, 2008 9:45:34 AM
It seems to me that this election 2008 is turning more like a deposition for a law suit for wrong doings by slave ownors of over 200 years ago. How can we voters settle this with our ballots? It is not for voters to decide this it's up to the courts That's why we have courts.Yes, blacks were wronged. the Government made amend but blacks are still not satisfied.Maybe there ought to be a class action suit AA virsus US gov
But i don't beleive the settlement should be "give me president" but rather an apology and an equal amount of cash to every AA. This is the fairest way of doing things. We should let the system work. We are mixing apples and oranges.
Obama is a candidate in all do respect and should be treated no better nor worse than any other candidate NOT as a "settlement". Once we accept this we will be back to not trashing each other anymore.I think we have done enough damage to rehash hatred that was part of the past. What we built together for years and years is priceless.
God bless us all
Posted by: ruthmatters | May 2, 2008 9:44:35 AM
dl i hate to tell you this but iran has missile capability to reach israel now,plus get your facts right it would be hezbolla irans surogate that used a backpack nuke not al queda.the only thing that might stop the crazies in iran IS a very clear threat of their own demise.yes the mad doctrine worked very well against the soviet union and i much prefer a threat than either us or israel trying to take out their facilities with conventional strikes.
Posted by: don tufts | May 2, 2008 9:38:37 AM
Don Tufts
I can tell you we most likely may need to use nuclear weapons back... but Iran won't be the ones sending a missile... it will be al quaeda...
and the President of the UNited States should only threaten nuclear retalliation when we have actual REAL OVERWHELMING evidence that that country is close to doing that...and that that country actually has nuclear weapons.
THIS is not Reagan and Russia...Iran does not have nuclear weapons...so what is the quickest way to ensure a country that does not have nuclear weapons gets nuclear weapons or makes sure that the terrorists get nuclear weapons...
threaten then with nuclear weapons...never mind "Nuclear obliteration" and "massive ,nuclear> retaliation"
this woman can not be President. Period.
Yes say wright and all the rest...but her judgement is based on what is best for The Clintons at the cost of everything and everyone else.
Period.
Posted by: dl | May 2, 2008 9:29:29 AM
Regardless of what MIGHT be done in such circumstance...you NEVER threaten to OBLITERATE other COUNTRIES when, at present, they have done nothing!
She is so off base. This might hurt her.
Posted by: dannymorris | May 2, 2008 9:27:40 AM
You can't threaten to "obliterate" other countries. There are cilvilians there. On this, she is wrong.
Posted by: NTYL | May 2, 2008 9:25:06 AM
Rick and the rest who are defending Hillary on these comments...
do you see how her comments are going to be used. Do you see that they are on video...no matter what the question ...she's got sooo much smarts and experience...
that she is on video (numerous times now I may add)
Threatening Iran with Nuclear Weapons...all for the sake of her candidacy...
This going to the UN is just the start...
That video is going to be played in every mucslim village where people are starving or ruined by the Iraq war or have lost jobs or food... that Al Quaeda is looking for recruits...
and they will use it to say America is a nuclear Devil... do yuo get that...
do you realize how stupid these statements by her were...and how overwhelmingly dangerous.
do you understand how most of the world hates us because we are looked at like imperialist who threaten the world with take over.
There was a reason why Lincoln said "walk softly and carry a big stick"
I am outraged by people taking down Obama because their candidate just threatened our own safety with her stupidity and greed to get this nomination.
This was not being strong...this was being tactical...and putting her own candidacy, again, above the safety of the country AND the planet.
Posted by: dl | May 2, 2008 9:23:55 AM
dl since you are so wise please enlighten us with your opinion on what the us should do if iran used nukes in a first strike against israel enquiring minds want to know.
Posted by: don tufts | May 2, 2008 9:23:42 AM
Now she's created international outrage? Go McCain!
Posted by: carol | May 2, 2008 9:23:30 AM
As much as I hate to admit it, Hillary's "obliterate" comment was right on the mark.
If George W. had said this (and he certainly should have by now) it would have been hell to pay from the media and the left.Oh, sorry, that is one and the same isn't it?
Anyway, we know Hillary is just like Bill.....she will say ANYTHING to get elected. No matter. She would be a far superior president than Obambi.
McCain would beat either of them. And he Will say and do to Iran what Hillary has suggested.
Posted by: jerry | May 2, 2008 9:21:56 AM
dl...YOU are so RIGHT!
Americans need to snap out of the haze and SEE what's happening here!
She is wayyy too trigger happy to have a finger ANYWHERE around a Nuclear button!
People, please, look at her temperament throughout this thing...look at her "say anything, do anything' way of dealing with the People, of getting votes. This is short-sighted and bad for the country. She is un-trustworthy to most.
The "gas tax holiday"? Bloomberg calls it "the DUMBEST IDEA I've EVER heard"!
Please, wake up, America! Don't be tricked by the Clintons...
Posted by: annie | May 2, 2008 9:21:21 AM
Sue - Do you want to dance with Osama, Ahmedinajad and all those terrorists?
Do not forget, Obama said he will bomb Pakistan...
Hillary replied to a question if Iran uses Nuclear weapons against Israel what will you do and she gave an answer.. If Iran wants to take offence at it so be it. They could have just said, we do not plan to create or use nuclear weapon on anyone.
Now Obama needs help from Iran to beat Hillary !!! Great.
Posted by: Rick | May 2, 2008 9:15:28 AM
Everyone says she can't win , she should drop out, we need to end this process, blahblahblah! I voted for Hillary in PA and she won by ten points. Everyone in Indiana and N.C. who have doubts about Obama should vote for Hillary also. I don't see 2025 stamped on his forhead yet and losing all these states before Denver is not what the SD's want to see. By the way if she has more popular votes than he and they give the nomination to Obama they may still see riots, but it will be at the polls in Nov.
Posted by: Jim | May 2, 2008 9:15:17 AM
Do you all understand that her clips will be played over and over by every rogue leader and every al quaeda leader...every terrorist...
saying they need to save America from the devil with nuclear weapons...
do you get that!
cause if you don't you need to quick.
Because if you don't you get John McCain who will keep us in Iraq...
and if by the very long shot we got Hillary Clinton... ugh...
do you see what will happen? do you get it?
McCain doesn't even threaten countries with Nuclear Obliteration...and Massive retaliation with nuclear weapons...
She does not know what she is doing...she is trying to be a cowboy...all the while wearing her pearls talking about the "first woman President" promising states like California , New York, Ohio, New Hampshire...that she is going to end cowboy diplomacy and reduce our aggressive and imperial image in the world... winning those states when she is not planning on ANY of those things.
Please...please... I beg people for your children and grandchildren do not wake up from this long brainwash.
Posted by: dl | May 2, 2008 9:14:05 AM
For those of you who do not know Joe Andrews.
Joe Andrew who jumped ship to Obama.. guess where he work?
He is a partner at Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal LLP , a 700 member law firm. They gave over $75K to Obama.
Here comes the money connection.
Obama is playing dirty politics here.
Posted by: Rick | May 2, 2008 9:13:17 AM
Hey Eric: That's the point. Hillary wants to STOP Iran from getting nukes! Obama and his sponsor/supporter General Electric want to go talk to Iran and give them business and help them develop nukes - but of course they'll say we're not giving them any technology that will help them in that way. That's Obama for you. Deny, Lie, and Lie some more.
Posted by: calli | May 2, 2008 9:12:38 AM
Actually that's the THIRD international outrage at Clinton, and she's only running in a primary election.
1. "Wink, winked" at the Canadians and provoked mahem in their parliament.
2. Angered the Bosnians with her sniper fire.
3. Now uses "obliterate" referring to another country. However stupid the question might have been, a presidential person would never use such a strong word!
Posted by: Sara | May 2, 2008 9:11:00 AM
Who cares about all of this? The democratic hierarchy has decided the party will move to the left and they've fixed the election to make sure that happens. Obama's nomination is a done deal.
Better to get absorbed in some real news for a while. Like Madonna's new album or an improved strain of grass for the lawn.
Posted by: Aston | May 2, 2008 9:09:53 AM
I read that Rev. Wright is going to speak out against Obama today and tell the press some things Obama doesn't want us to hear. This is awsome!