Home > Politics > Political Punch
Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

What the FARC Was Obama Talking About?

May 25, 2008 11:08 AM

"I have learned that when you are campaigning for as many months as Sen. Clinton and I have been campaigning, sometimes you get careless in terms of the statements that you make," Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, said, "And I think that is what happened here. Sen. Clinton says that she did not intend any offense by it, and I would take her at her word on that."

One reason why Obama may be so forgiving (even if his campaign was not) about Sen. Hillary Clinton's assassination reference?

The man has been a one-man gaffe machine.

On Friday afternoon in Sunrise, Florida, Obama said, "how's it going, Sunshine?" (Watch HERE.)

Wrote the local Sun-Sentinel: "It wasn’t clear if Barack Obama knew exactly where he was Friday afternoon when he spoke at his mass rally at the BankAtlantic Center."

He did the same thing in Sioux Falls, SD, calling it "Sioux City." (Watch HERE.)

"Obama starts speech with a gaffe," wrote the Argus Leader.

But those are the relatively silly ones. There have also been gaffes of more consequence.

As ABC News' David Wright and Sunlen Miller wrote, Obama seemed to either think Arabic is spoken in Afghanistan or he misunderstands the nature of military translators.

More recently, Obama as he traveled through Florida seemed to give some contradictory statements about Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and the Colombian terrorist group FARC.

On Thursday Obama told the Orlando Sentinel that he would meet with Chavez and "one of the obvious high priorities in my talks with President Hugo Chavez would be the fermentation of anti-American sentiment in Latin America, his support of FARC in Colombia and other issues he would want to talk about."

OK, so a strong declaration that Chavez is supporting FARC, which Obama intends to push him on.

But then on Friday he said any government supporting FARC should be isolated.

"We will shine a light on any support for the FARC that comes from neighboring governments," he said in a speech in Miami.  "This behavior must be exposed to international condemnation, regional isolation, and - if need be - strong sanctions. It must not stand."

So he will meet with the leader of a country he simultaneously says should be isolated? Huh?

On Friday in an interview with the Miami Herald, Obama also used language suggesting that he's not as positive that Venezuela is supporting FARC.

"When I asked him what he would do about the estimated 37,000 Interpol-certified Colombian FARC guerrilla computer files that indicate an active support from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa to the Colombian rebels, Obama went farther than the Bush administration," wrote the Herald's Andres Oppenheimer.

Said Obama: "I think the Organization of American States and the international community should launch an immediate investigation into this situation. We have to hold Venezuela accountable if, in fact, it is trying to ferment terrorist activities in other borders. If Venezuela has violated those rules, we should mobilize all the countries to sanction Venezuela and let them know that that's not acceptable behavior."

"If" Venezuela "is trying to ferment terrorist activities in other borders"? Just one day before Obama had asserted that Chavez was supporting FARC in Colombia.

I've asked the Obama campaign for a clarification and will get back to you as to what they say.

- jpt

UPDATE: The Obama campaign says there's nothing unusual about proposing the isolation of a country at the same time a President talks about meeting with its country's leader. (The Obama campaign cites how the U.S. is talking to North Korea via the Six-Party talks as an example. Though it might be observed, those diplomatic efforts are quite different than a presidential-level meeting.) 

As for the statement, and then the very qualified "if" statement about Chavez and FARC, the Obama campaign says Obama is laying out his principles. The U.S. government says all the time, "If Iran continues its nuclear program," the Obama campaign says. I don't know. Saying, "if in fact" Venezuela is aiding FARC seemed to me at least to be different than saying "if Chavez continues aiding FARC." What do you think?

UPDATE 2: So, I just spoke to an Obama campaign foreign policy adviser and this is how he explains any confusion.

Obama, he says, believes that Chavez is supportive of the FARC, both ideologically and tangibly. The Obama campaign disagrees that Obama's language -- "if, in fact, it (Chavez) is trying to ferment terrorist activities in other borders" -- is hedging language at all. Obama has been very clear that he believes that Chavez is supportive of the FARC, the adviser says.

As to the question of whether one can pledge to isolate a country while also proposing a presidential-level meeting, the adviser says that I was inaccurate in characterizing Obama as proposing such a meeting -- the reality was that Obama was merely acknowledging a willingness to meet.

But "if we are going to isolate the Venezuelans, it may be that we have to engage in a full-on diplomatic strategy with them," the adviser says. Obama was not saying he, himself, would propose such a meeting, nor that he would necessarily participate in that meeting. When Obama referred to "my talks with President Hugo Chavez," he did not mean "my talks," literally (necessarily) -- he meant his administration's talks -- "though it could be him engaging in this diplomacy directly and personally," the adviser says. The point is, all the tools need to be in the diplomacy kit -- isolation, willingness to hold presidential meetings, and everything in between.

Got it?

May 25, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (133)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This is to standup's comments. Stop using the race card as a crutch. When ever there is a credible criticism of anyone of color the rest of the political and follows claim it is because he is black. Well then stand up I am against Barak Obama because he is half white. The first White African American President. The only thing wrong is that it does not matter what color he is just that he has no clue and goes against his own executive orders regularly. Rule do not apply to him.....sounds like Nixon and he did not last long did he.

Posted by: B | Jan 30, 2009 12:15:06 PM

I have noticed a distinct pattern from Obama and his supporters towards revisionist history. Whether it's Pastor Wright, with his radical interpretations of American history, or Pastor Moss' denigration of Thomas Jefferson, or Obama's historical distortions, which support his P.R. image building efforts. Their tactic is to discredit, or distort history, in order to pave the way for their new extreme policies. A President of the United States should know, and communicate real historical facts, not fabrications for personal political gain.

Posted by: Gina | Jul 8, 2008 4:13:57 PM

The teleprompter candidate .. thanks but NO THANKS LOL

Posted by: Swannie | May 28, 2008 3:13:32 PM

As Obama, McCain & Hillay speak and comment on each others, one remains with the impression - ans hope - that those who really run the USA must hide somewhere, far from this moromic lot and maddening circus.

Pierre JC

Posted by: Pierre JC Allard | May 27, 2008 7:36:56 PM

This column is out and out racism. You don't like Barack simply because he is a Black man!

Posted by: StandUp | May 27, 2008 12:09:22 PM

To all of you who want this Man, who has no idea whats, what in the world , for president, good luck! Unless there is a teleprompter, telling him what to say , he has no idea about foreign affairs. He actually makes a fool of himself. He has fooled everyone, just because he is a Harvard graduate, does not make him intelligent. There are those who are professional students. They go to school forever without really mastering anything. Without other people words and thoughts, what has Obama really mastered! He hasn't been that great of a politician or lawyer.

Posted by: jp,michigan | May 27, 2008 12:05:49 PM

What really gets me about Obama is that he has been in national politics for what 3 to 4 years,but he constantly makes these foreign policy statements that make no sense if you actually analyze them, with an arrogance has thou he knows what he is talking about because for some reasons he thinks spending the last 20 years in the south side of Chicago gave him a better understanding of the world than someone who has actually been dealing with the world problems for the last 30 years. Even if you take away Obama lack of experience and lack of accomplishments or qualifications, he hasn't even traveled the world, he's been to three or four countries, never visited latin America, Europe most of Asia or the Middle East , then you compare that with McCain that has traveled the world extensively , visiting over 40 countries getting to know the way the governments work as well has how the people live and think and I know from experience that what you know of a country changes once you have visited it.

Posted by: sam | May 27, 2008 3:58:55 AM

It is extremely unlikely Obama could point to Colombia on a map, much less discuss a coherent policy on FARC.

The man has absolutely no friggin' clue about geopolitics and foreign policy. None whatsoever.

Given this level of monumental ignorance, why isn't Obama an undisputed candidate for the Democratic Party nomination?

He's done everything possible to ensure the American people that he's a twit. What more could Democrats want?

Posted by: beamish | May 27, 2008 3:51:36 AM

Just for the record -- how many of those out there defending Obama's gaffes still chortle at Dan Quayle's verbal clumsiness?

It would seem obvious that gravy for a goose is not, at least in this instance, gravy for a gander...

Posted by: Cthulhu | May 26, 2008 11:28:35 PM

ABC: We know you'd like nothing else than to see Obama fail, but it's not going to happen. I'd like nothing more than to see your network's check canceled. I used to watch ABC but couldn't stomach turning the channel your way after that last shameful debate! Out with the old, in with the new. Obama 08!

Posted by: Movement | May 26, 2008 10:02:25 PM

Unqualified or not it seems the media and Dems are going to nominate him.

Posted by: AGS345 | May 26, 2008 6:00:30 PM

If you want to irritate an Obama supporter, ask them what Obama's specific ideas are. If and when you twist their arm and get an answer, then debunk the idea as socialist or something that has been tried or failed before. You will then be accused of being a racist.

Posted by: Joe | May 26, 2008 5:07:03 PM

Obama is being protected by the liberal media. He is truly a knucklehead, an educated idiot if you will. None of his ideas are good ones and he routinely speaks out of both sides of his mouth. Like many lawyers, he is an overpaid, egotistical liar.

Posted by: Joe | May 26, 2008 4:49:27 PM

How about last week, when he clarified his comment that Iran was not a "serious threat" to us by saying that it was a "grave threat" to us? Or am I being to nitpicky?

Posted by: Jim O'Sullivan | May 26, 2008 4:07:53 PM

In his commencement address at Wesleyan University, Obama addressed the President of Welleseley, Clinton's school. By the way, former head of the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman, made a worse mistake than her successor, who didn't know the difference between Shi'a and Sunnis. Sunday she said that finally Iraq's Sunni government is going after the Sunni militia.

Posted by: Richard L.A. Schaefer | May 26, 2008 3:41:36 PM

Is FARC located in Massatoosits?

Gravitas baby, GRAVITAS.

Posted by: Rev. Dr. E Buzz Miller | May 26, 2008 3:39:28 PM

Sorry "jedreport", Tapper makes Obama look like a one man waffle machine in this piece. Is it too hard to get a straight answer out of sissy nuanced libs? Oh maybe I'm just "bitter" because they can't speak plain English, despite being obviously smarter than us common folk.

Posted by: sigh | May 26, 2008 2:43:40 PM

Pssst, will someone please clue Obama in on the meanings of the words "ferment" and "foment". Would hate to think he's a total moron from all these gaffes, now wouldn't we.

Posted by: sigh | May 26, 2008 2:06:20 PM

Uh-oh. We're getting into John Kerry-nuance territory here.

Posted by: hailstate | May 26, 2008 1:56:56 PM

Obama is the divine one and CANNOT
commit a "gaffe". It is we mere mortals
who cannot always grasp the perfection
of his reasoning that bear the imper-
fection of thought.....or so we are
told. To believe that Obama is a soft-
spoken carny-barker is heresy.

Posted by: hombre | May 26, 2008 12:28:10 PM

Next Comments »

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS