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 »
Rahm: Bush and McCain Are Following Obama's Foreign Policy Lead
July 17, 2008 4:23 PM
House Democratic Caucus Chair Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., today claimed that President Bush (not to mention Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.) are following the lead of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, in foreign policy.
"Who is leading who on foreign policy?" asked Emanuel in a statement. "The Bush administration is right to follow Senator Obama's lead by engaging in diplomatic efforts with Iran, cracking down on Al Qaeda, and supporting additional troops in Afghanistan. But in every case, it's politics first, policy second - first the Bush administration and Senator McCain play political games, and then they decide to do the right thing and follow Senator Obama's lead."
His case is fairly bereft of nuance, and can of course be argued, but here it is:
IRAN:
NOVEMBER 2007: OBAMA URGES TALKS, THEN BUSH AND McCAIN ATTACK...JULY 2008: BUSH FLIPS AND CHANGES POLICY
OBAMA URGES DIPLOMACY, November 2007. Associated Press: Obama Says US Must Try Talking to Iran.
BUSH ATTACKS. Bush Describes Diplomacy with Hostile Regimes as "Appeasement." "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 Speech to the Knesset, 5/15/08]
McCAIN ATTACKS. Washington Times: McCain needles Obama on pledge to talk with Iran.
BUSH FLIPS AND FOLLOWS OBAMA, July 2008. Washington Post: American Envoy To Join Iran Talks; Move Is Departure From Prior Policy
**
AFGHANISTAN:
AUGUST 2007: OBAMA CALLS FOR MORE TROOPS...JULY 2008: BUSH AND McCAIN FLIP AND CHANGE POLICY
OBAMA CALLS FOR MORE TROOPS IN AFGHANISTAN, August 2007: "As President, I would deploy at least two additional brigades to Afghanistan to re-enforce our counter-terrorism operations . . ." [Obama speech at Wilson Center, 8/1/07].
OBAMA CONTINUES CALLS FOR MORE TROOPS, June and July 2008: "If we're going to catch bin Laden or most importantly break down al Qaeda, which have reconstituted itself as stronger now than anytime since 2001, we've got to have the capacity to put more troops in Afghanistan." [CNN, 6/7/08].
BUSH HAS TROOPS BOGGED DOWN IN IRAQ. Joint Chief Said He Could Not Send More Troops to Afghanistan. During a press conference Joint Chiefs Of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen said, "I don't have troops I can reach for, brigades I can reach to send into Afghanistan until I have a reduced requirement in Iraq." [Mullen Press Conference, 7/2/08]
BUSH FLIPS, July 2008. Associated Press: Bush says US to send more troops to Afghanistan.
McCAIN FLIPS. ABC News: McCain Shifts Position on More US Troops to Afghanistan.
**
IRAQ
SEPTEMBER 2007: OBAMA CALLS FOR BRIGADES TO COME OUT OF IRAQ, BUSH AND McCAIN ATTACK…JULY 2008: BUSH FLIPS, BRIGADES COMING OUT
OBAMA CALLS FOR BRIGADES TO COME OUT OF IRAQ, September 2007: Obama proposes a plan to withdraw 1-2 brigades a month from Iraq. [Speech On Turning The Page In Iraq, 9/12/07].
McCAIN ATTACKS: "We must once again reject, as we did in early 2007, the calls for a reckless and irresponsible withdrawal of our forces just at the moment when they are succeeding," [John McCain, 4/7/08]
BUSH FLIPS, July 2008: U.S. to cut troop levels: AP: "The Pentagon's top military officer [Adm. Mike Mullen] said Wednesday that he is likely to recommend further troop reductions in Iraq this fall."
**
Yesterday ABC News' Martha Raddatz asked White House press secretary Dana Perino about the Iran aspect of this.
RADDATZ: Why is this different from what Senator Obama has suggested, sitting down and negotiating?
PERINO: Well, our condition remains the same that there will not be any negotiation unless they suspend their uranium enrichment.
RADDATZ: And you just flat out say this is not negotiating, even though there's someone sitting there in the room with the Iranians?
PERINO: The underlying -- absolutely, because he's going there as a part of the international community showing their unity when it comes to the underlying fundamental principle, which is that there will not be any negotiations unless Iran suspends its nuclear -- uranium enrichment.
RADDATZ: Can you understand why people might look at what's happening now and go back and think about what the President said in the Mideast about those who negotiate with terrorists or talk to terrorists --
PERINO: As I just said --
RADDATZ: -- as an appeaser?
PERINO: As I said, there is no negotiation here. We are going there. Under Secretary Burns will be there as a part of the international community showing our unison that we are going to provide two paths for the Iranians from which to choose -- one, that they could accept the incentives package, and then if it's verified that they have halted their uranium enrichment, then there will be negotiations. And that's what I would seek to explain to the American people.
- jpt
July 17, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (51)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
THANK GOODNESS OBAMA CAME UP WITH THE BETTER INTENATIONAL DIPLOMACY POLICY FOR BUSH THE LESSER AND MCCAIN THE AGED TO STEAL....LET'S PUT OBAMA TO WORK FOR AMERICA....VOTE OBAMA!!
Posted by: BENIGHSE | Jul 17, 2008 6:24:00 PM
Obama was not in Seante during the vote but he was running. And when asked in 2002 if he would vote for the war he said no. He spoke against the war when it was popular. "Barack Obama on Iraq, Opposition from the Start"
Posted by: Vanessa | Jul 17, 2008 6:17:40 PM
Perino says "we are going to provide two paths for the Iranians from which to choose --"
Giving them choices. isn't that a negotiation?
Posted by: Mitch | Jul 17, 2008 6:17:36 PM
"Had we followed Obama's plan a year ago, Iraq would most likely be in the middle of a genocidal war"
or Iraq would be MORE settled than it is today and Afghanistan (remember the country we actually had a reason to invade) wouldn't be in the middle of a resurgence of Taliban control.
Posted by: JR | Jul 17, 2008 6:14:14 PM
I'd like to remind everyone that Mr Obama, with all his touting that he voted against the war in Iraq...excuse me...he was against the war in Iraq, HE WASN'T EVEN THERE FOR THE VOTE BECAUSE HE WASN'T A U S SENATOR AT THE TIME!! He WAS in the Illinois Congress, although he had NO position on most hotbed issues because he was afraid to let his opinion be know, because it might hurt his chances to get elected to the U S Senate some day.
It really is difficult to stand behind someone that likes to manipulate people this way. If he was a true statesmen he would have stood up for what he believes in. Instead he chose the cowards way out and voted present! What a joke, and some of you want him as our President!!
Granted the man has changed his view on some things, everyone of us is entitled to change an opinion on something, once you have more facts. If he were a true statesmen he would have conceded that the surge strategy is working and admitting he was wrong. That would have showen real integrety. Instead he hides the fact that he was wrong by saying well the surge is working but at what cost? Give me a break. When are people going to realize he will say whatever he needs to say to get elected.
To be fair so will John McCain. Or anyone running for that matter because it's no longer about whats good for the Country, it's about what's good for the candidate!!
In the immortal "Ask not what your country can do for you...
Posted by: Historian | Jul 17, 2008 6:12:25 PM
"How about not having any wheels on the "Staight Talk Express"?"
They moved to a jet. Try to keep up, Nat. Wheels only matter if they have to land somewhere.
Obama's chances of being POTUS are slipping everyday the electorate gets to know him and realizes he doesn't represent their viewpoint. Meanwhile his base is cracking as they realize the same thing.
Obama is for Obama. Details don't matter to egotists without a sense of humor.
Posted by: len | Jul 17, 2008 5:47:21 PM
• Senator McCain's service and experience, both as a POW and as a Senator apparently hasn't infused him with a dose of good judgment.
• Senator McCain's experience hasn't led him to realize that the war in Iraq and it's continuance has empowered and emboldened Iran, and destabilized the region.
• Senator McCain's experience hasn't caused him to recognize that we're losing ground in Afghanistan, and Osama bin Laden is still out there, plotting.
• Senator McCain's experience didn't
lead him to support the 21st Century GI Bill -- he opposed it. It didn't even make him feel the need to get back to Washington to vote on this -- one of the most important veterans' bills this Congress. He twice skipped votes on the GI Bill, to fundraise.
• Senator McCain's experience didn't help him empathize with troops are overstretched and overdeployed, when he voted against the bipartisan Webb-Hagel "Dwell Time Amendment," which would have given troops as much time at home as in the field.
Senator McCain is running on his experience, saying it makes him ready to lead right away. By doing so, he is asking people to look at what that experience taught him. By looking at Senator McCain's positions and votes (or lack of them), it seems that experience has not given him the right judgment on important issues of our time.
This is why he will be CRUSHED in the GE
OBAMA 08 - ITS INEVITABLE!!!
Posted by: Nat Turner | Jul 17, 2008 5:40:02 PM
Obama is better than McCain on foreign policy. I supported Ron Paul in the republican primary for both fiscal responsibility and foreign policy. If Obama changes his spending to reflect self reliance and personal responsibility, he might sway me to his side. As it stands now, neither Obama or McCain will get my vote, but in my opinion Obama is better for a host of reasons, least of which is that the republicans need to be punished this go around.
Posted by: Ben Straub | Jul 17, 2008 5:29:40 PM
Just to hit one one of these (because there's so many), one the last 'examples' regarding troop withdrawal; Using an Obama message from 2007 and marrying it up to a Bush decision in mid-2008 and calling it a flip is pretty damn stupid.
I'm tired of people telling us stuff, without putting anything into context or historical perspective.
Do you think, there could be annnnnny possibility, that in a year's time the Surge has helped bring enough stability/draw-down in violence to present us with the opportunity to withdrawal some of our forces? I mean, I know this requires logical thought and all but the cause and effect theme seems to be present here, and the 'cause' isn't Obama's speech from a year ago.
As for McCain's speech, he is absolutely correct, you do not remove a military force from an active theater of operations, willy-nilly, on some pea-brain timetable that has no basis in reality (16 month hog-wash) or takes into consideration the security situation on the ground. You CAN begin to draw-down forces as the security situation improves the the indigenous forces are able to shoulder more and more of the security load backed up by a viable central government.
Had we followed Obama's plan a year ago, Iraq would most likely be in the middle of a genocidal war, with us having little political will to re-engage.
I swear, the amount of intellectual dishonesty that roams the halls of our government and the web is just staggering.
Posted by: Jake | Jul 17, 2008 5:24:12 PM
• Senator McCain's service and experience, both as a POW and as a Senator apparently hasn't infused him with a dose of good judgment.
• Senator McCain's experience hasn't led him to realize that the war in Iraq and it's continuance has empowered and emboldened Iran, and destabilized the region.
• Senator McCain's experience hasn't caused him to recognize that we're losing ground in Afghanistan, and Osama bin Laden is still out there, plotting.
• Senator McCain's experience didn't
lead him to support the 21st Century GI Bill -- he opposed it. It didn't even make him feel the need to get back to Washington to vote on this -- one of the most important veterans' bills this Congress. He twice skipped votes on the GI Bill, to fundraise.
• Senator McCain's experience didn't help him empathize with troops are overstretched and overdeployed, when he voted against the bipartisan Webb-Hagel "Dwell Time Amendment," which would have given troops as much time at home as in the field.
Senator McCain is running on his experience, saying it makes him ready to lead right away. By doing so, he is asking people to look at what that experience taught him. By looking at Senator McCain's positions and votes (or lack of them), it seems that experience has not given him the right judgment on important issues of our time.
This is why he will be CRUSHED in the GE
OBAMA 08 - ITS INEVITABLE!!!
Posted by: Nat Turner | Jul 17, 2008 5:12:53 PM
And this is their strength?? me thinks not so much...The choice couldn't be any clearer, I can't wait for the first debate.
Posted by: mims nj | Jul 17, 2008 5:09:35 PM
"you mean bush is meeting with foreign enemies DIRECTLY"
That's not the point. The point is Bush called Obama an appeaser for stating he or anyone in his administration would meet with the Iranians. John McCain followed suit and mocked Obama. Both Bush and McCain are hypocrites. Their both flip-flopping to Obama views.
Posted by: Vanessa | Jul 17, 2008 5:08:11 PM
Okay the surge is working. But there wouldn't be a need for a surge if everyone followed Obama's judgement and not invade Iraq.
Also, McCain wantes to stay in Iraq for a 100 years and wants to add 3 brigades a month to Afganistan. With whose money? tax payers? chinese?
Obama should definitely attack on this. Not only is McCain and Bush flip-flopping, their both flip-flopping to his views.
Posted by: Vanessa | Jul 17, 2008 5:03:52 PM
you mean obama was the FIRST to say the SURGE worked?
you mean bush is meeting with foreign enemies DIRECTLY?
lmao
Posted by: trettione | Jul 17, 2008 5:00:04 PM
To Nat Turner.
Obama called ICE immigration agents terrorists for raids on illegals.
You seem to love Obama's marxism.
Posted by: Michael | Jul 17, 2008 4:59:21 PM
Obama scrubbed his site of past comments critical of the surge.
Obama in 2007 predicted violence would go up because of the surge.
He scrubbed that comment away. Obama said the surge would have the opposite effect of tamping down violence.
So who is leading exactly.
Obama in 2004 argued against a timeline or withdrawing any troops when the war was more popular.
Obama said the surge would have the opposite effect and now has to scrub his site for those comments.
Obama has never even been to western europe accept for a one day stopover.
What a joke.
Posted by: Michael | Jul 17, 2008 4:58:13 PM
My friends,
The Silly Season Express needs a total overhaul.....How can I win?
I don't have any support from true conservatives, women or National Labor organizations.........
I can't speak without a teleprompter and/or someone whispering in my ear....
I tried flip flops and the DU-Pod, but I couldn't figure out how to hook em up together.....BTW, what is a z-pod anyway?
Now, I'm being outraised 2-1.
Now, Obama is taking over the only leg I have to stand on and that's National Security. I'm flip flopping Bad on this one.
My friends, I'm hurtin. Hurtin bad....Even I know I don’t have a porkchop’s chance in a piranha tank of becoming POTUS.
Well, it’s not about winning, just as long as you get to play the game, right???
Is that a good spin on how dismal things are for me?
IS THE ELECTION OVER YET? I'm already cooked.
John McCan't
Posted by: Nat Turner | Jul 17, 2008 4:58:12 PM
McRove can't be trusted.
Posted by: Snarxon | Jul 17, 2008 4:58:10 PM
We've been putting more troops in afghanistan for years.
Since last year we have added more troops in afghanistan.
It was Obama who jumped on the reports of the bush administration moving more troops to afghanistan.
The iran meeting is with the eu. Bush has always been for that. They gave the negotiator demands and are hearing back after the tough sanctions seem to be having some effect.
Obama didn't want to wait to have the sanctions have an effect.
Obama is lost.
First Obama is for meeting with rogue leaders then he is against it.
Rahm Emanuel who wants Obama's senate seat.
Obama didn't want to wait for the sanctions to work.
Obama wanted unilateral diplomacy not working with the EU.
Obama wanted to give the crazy iran president a huge stage for his ranting without conditions.
My god the media is constantly covering up Obama's mistakes.
The media is one sided like we are in russia.
Posted by: Michael | Jul 17, 2008 4:55:32 PM
Reality doesn't process well with cynics.
Whether you're pessimistically cynical or not, I have two approaches for you.
1 - OBAMA WILL BE POTUS.....It's going to take more than media driven magazine covers, lapel pins, thesis papers, Rev's and White Priests to prevent it. IT'S INEVITABLE! McCain doesn't have a chance.
2 - McCain as POTUS - Donkeys are incapable or winning thoroughbred horse races. This is just another example of many as why McCain just doesn't match up. He's totally out of his league when up against OBAMA.
Try reality, CYNICS.
Santa Claus isn't coming to town for you this election.
OBAMA 08 - ITS INEVITABLE!
Posted by: Nat Turner | Jul 17, 2008 4:54:27 PM
Post a comment
