RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« 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 wasnât 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)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Rise up, all ye neocons and closet neocons masked as democrats. Lets unite and fulfill/reinforce our mantra of war is peace. We will show the world that the $3 trillion war debt is chump change when we quadruple that in years to come. Make sure you start investing in sovereign funds. If you're poor, good luck because you'll be screwed whoever gets nominated.
For the record, I won't hang my hat on any one of these three candidates nor the two parties. Invest (divest) accordingly. Read WSJ, Economist, etc.
Posted by: independent | May 26, 2008 10:44:05 AM
"The man has been a one-man gaffe machine."
Yes, he has, Jake. I'm beginning to think Obama is dumber than Bush....
Posted by: Foodforthought | May 26, 2008 10:09:47 AM
When Hillary says something that is not "politically correct", it is front page news on every newspaper, every website and every TV news hour. And it STAYS front page news for 2-3 days. When Obama gaffes, it is rarely even reported, and usually gets a third page comment somewhere behind the local obituaries. Fair? When the media's darling falls flat on his face, where are they going to print that? On the back page?
Posted by: JRS | May 26, 2008 9:50:41 AM
Please take a look at the articles below. This is incredibly important. If you read nothing else this week, read these.
Investigative journalist Evelyn Pringle set out to research Barack Obama's legislative history, and review the accomplishments which led to his rise. What she unexpectedly discovered became the series of articles linked below. They are a must-read for anyone involved in the political process of the United States, and anyone who cares about the future of our country.
Evelyn Pringle is not associated with any political campaign. Before deciding to research Obama's history, she did lean toward Hillary Clinton for her vote, but intended to support Obama if he won the nomination.
Evelyn Pringle Series
Barack Obama - The Wizard of Oz
Search google, oped news
It took a while but I'm hoping it's worth the work. If only a few read the articles and can get through the complexity, it may make a difference. If this story doesn't get out there now, it certainly will if he wins the nomination..the Republicans will see to it.
Posted by: Linda Derr | May 26, 2008 9:30:11 AM
>>>>"I'm a Hillary supporter... but I'll vote for McCain if Barack wins" ask yourself what that *really* means
That means the elite Washington establishment ran a newbie senator for president for the purpose of preventing a Hillary presidency.
The establishment never like those hicks - Carter and Clinton - because those Dem presidents didn't bow down to them and attend their fancy dinner parties where the deals are cut before the votes are cast in Congress.
No Dem candidate would be allowed to repeatedly trash a former Democratic administration WITHOUT the blessing of the Washington Establishment.
After Obama has trashed the Clinton administration for over a year - "brushed Hillary off" the bottom of his shoe while laughing along with the crowds - engaged in race-baiting to falsely accused the Clintons of racism - who will he lean on to help him win in Nov?
The Clintons - who are supposed to deliver the White vote after Obama has called Democrats not voting for him - racists.
Obama's brand of "new politics" includes character assassination and race-baiting to distract from his Empty Suit.
Obama is too immature to be president!
Yes - we'll vote for McCain.
Posted by: JoseyJ | May 26, 2008 9:07:15 AM
I am convinced that the fanatical adoration of Obama will fade quickly after a few unpopular decisions as president.
He won't be able to blame his campaign or racist or Hillary for his mistakes.
As we saw with Bush, the politians trying to prop him up still couldn't
make up for Bush's lack of experience or hide the fact that he was unqualified to be president.
The DNC backed by billionaires,chose Obama, banking on his color and charm to win people over. Hillary wouldn't bow down to them.
And now we are stuck with Obama or have to cross parties to get an experienced, qualified president.
Hillary or McCain 08
Posted by: cindy in nc | May 26, 2008 8:50:21 AM
obama is weak on a lot of the issues concering our country.
I can remember him saying when i am president we will deal with a of that
"stuff"
he said it first and he said it best
"he is not ready to be president"
"needs more experience"
he should have stayed with that.
Posted by: worldcitizen | May 26, 2008 8:40:46 AM
He is incredibly weak on Latin American foreign policy!
Obama's use of the word "ferment" and "fermenting" is very stange (and wrong) as well. The word he needs to have used is "foment" or "fomenting".
You don't "ferment" terrorism or anti-American sentiment. The correct word is "foment". It means to promote the growth of or incite.
And, let's not forget that in March, when the Colombians captured two FARC terrorist laptop computers at a terrorist camp, they found evidence that FARC was talking to "gringos" about Obama. The FARC Terrorists were hoping and expecting that Barack Obama would win the US elections in November because he was most aligned with the Colombian Marxist group.
This is the exact quote translated into English:
"The gringos will ask for an appointment with the minister to solicit him to communicate to us his interest in discussing these topics. They say that the new president of their country will be Obama and that they are interested in your compatriots. Obama will not support "Plan Colombia" nor will he sign the TLC (Colombian Free Trade agreement). Here we responded that we are interested in relations with all governments in equality of conditions and that in the case of the US it is required a public pronouncement expressing their interest in talking with the FARC given their eternal war against us."
Posted by: Foodforthought | May 26, 2008 8:33:10 AM
Whatever the case with gaffes etc, it's pretty clear that many of the anti-Obama crowd simply just can't help themselves from launching ad homenim attacks in ways that don't even relate to substantive criticisms about him.
Everytime you read something along the lines of "I'm a Hillary supporter... but I'll vote for McCain if Barack wins" ask yourself what that *really* means - since they're nearly the same ideologically and Hillary says she'll ultimately support him he he becomes the nominee.
Posted by: Chris | May 26, 2008 8:23:46 AM
He doesn't need to attack Hillary because his media, camp will help him to do it.
He comes out as a hero.
Posted by: catleya | May 26, 2008 12:36:31 AM
That is exactly right, catleya! The press and pundits keeps talking about Obama "taking the high road" throughout this campaign. BS! His surrogates and 24/7 media fan club do all the dirty work. He never gets the blame, even though it belongs right on him and his campaign. I have to say that Obama Axelrod sure knows how to run an "old politics" campaign. Sorry to upset all you folks thinking that Obama is some kind of "new politician".
Posted by: cappamore | May 26, 2008 2:23:13 AM
He doesn't need to attack Hillary because his media, camp will help him to do it.
He comes out as a hero.
Posted by: catleya | May 26, 2008 12:36:31 AM
"What I really meant was......", Oh no, are we in for another speech??
Posted by: rosietheriveter | May 26, 2008 12:31:33 AM
He is starting losing his bearing??
Becareful, when he becomes president if he order to do something.
Oh,,no,,that's not what I meant.
Oh,,it's too late Mr president,we already ordered to do it.
????
Posted by: catleya | May 26, 2008 12:26:37 AM
Can someone please tell me again, Barack is running for POTUS because.......?
Posted by: SadStateOfAffairs | May 25, 2008 11:19:14 PM
I think the missus writes his speeches and is the brains behind the campaign. He is far too stupid to speak without a teleprompter and far too stupid to be the POTUS.
Posted by: rosaleen | May 25, 2008 11:18:20 PM
Thank you Jay for being a journalist and not following the faux/reportage of the CNN/NBC ObamaMessiah cult.
This man is Kerrylight, and other than having written two narcissitic auto-bios,being a great stump speaker and some basketball skills, he is not Presidential material.
Posted by: BigBen | May 25, 2008 11:17:37 PM
Thanks to the person passing on the latest Gallop Poll info. This is the answer to the question as to why does she stay in the race. At this point I wish Hillary would run as an Independent.
Posted by: RL in Illinois | May 25, 2008 11:09:22 PM
In response to some of the posts above, it is precisely because I am an American first and then a democrat that I will vote for Sen. McCain if Sen. Clinton is not the democratic nominee. I am more concerned about the future of our nation than the future of the democratic party and with Sen. Obama as head of our government I think we will be in deep, deep trouble. I think he needs to get more legislative experience at the national level and become more involved in international politics and policies, then maybe I will be ready to support him, but not now, not this time.
Posted by: Don | May 25, 2008 11:02:15 PM
"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.
Fermenting terrorism? Now that's rotten.
Posted by: js | May 25, 2008 10:57:42 PM
Jake, you are a good man. However the story comes, you make sure it's the STORY. How refreshing. Bravo zulu.
Posted by: tree hugging sister | May 25, 2008 10:02:15 PM
Post a comment
