Thursday, July 26, 2007

Obama Calls HIllary "Bush/Cheney Lite"

Ouch! That's gotta hurt. Democratic presidential frontrunner Barack Obama has fired a broadside at Hillary Clinton:

“I’m not afraid of losing the PR war to dictators...I’m not going to hide behind a bunch of rhetoric. I don’t want a continuation with Bush-Cheney. I don’t want Bush-Cheney light. I want a fundamental change.”

Obama was referring to Hillary Clinton's statement that, like Bush/Cheney, she too would not talk to leaders from countries like Iran unless they first met certain conditions.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Obama's inexperience is showing and using the Bush/Cheney card is "low", "low", "low".

Secretaries of State are supposed to deal with these issues and set it up for the president.

Obama is far too inexperienced for the volatile times right now.

mezba said...

We have seen what Bush/Cheney's "experience" did to the ME. Obama can hardly do worse.

Psychols said...

Obama's statement may backfire but he has a point. Refusing to speak with foreign leaders, even antagonistic foreign leaders, is unwise and dangerous. Bush and Cheyney have a terrible record when it comes to foreign policy.

Anonymous said...

They both have a point on something that is a bit much ado about nothing.

Obama didn't exactly say he'd go around hugging all the dictators in the world for photo ops - he made a point of just saying that you couldn't operate in the world by patently refusing to talk with your enemies.

Likewise, Clinton certainly did not say she'd never talk with another leader - in fact she took great pains to say that she would if the topics were defined and the groundwork was laid.

They both have good points. But as this is the first real "public divide," Clinton is going to naturally say Obama is naive and he is in turn going to say she just represents Bush's way of dealing with the world. Both about 5 steps outside the margin.

I'm still praying for a Clinton / Obama ticket as I think they both have a lot to offer. Just psychologically, it would do wonders for the US to have an African American and a Woman in charge of the Executive Branch. A breath of fresh air long overdue.

So I hope they don't shred each other too badly in the primaries.

Stephen said...

Not a big Clinton fan, and I think Obama's right. I don't think he'sxs will the nomination. The best hope is if Gore runs.

Anonymous said...

Gore or Edwards. Anywho, nothing wrong with the country wanting someing different. The democrats (including Hilary) have not shown enough differences in the two parties. Look where the country is now.

The Mound of Sound said...

I have deep reservations about Hillary. It strikes me that she's quite comfortable with two centre-right parties for America. Bush/Cheney/9/11 effected a fluke shift of the American political centre that needs to be undone and Hillary's record shows she's not apt to be the one to do that. To get the US back on an even keel will take someone with more vision - Gore, Obama, Edwards.

Dorna said...

I think democratic candidates shouldn't get into name calling and negative advertising.

In this case Obama clearly started it. In the debate their views seemed very close, and it just looked like Obama talked a little too soon, and didn't think the question through. I don't think any U.S. president should promise to meet with all these presidents in his/her first year of taking the office, of course he wouldn't be so naive to do that when it comes down to it.

As an Iranian American I don't see the meeting of the presidents to necessarily have a positive effect in Iran's internal democratic movements. Of course, we need to use diplomacy and not ignore our enemies, but meeting of the presidents in the first year of presidency is well.. kind of naive.

And that is exactly what Hillary said, she absolutely did not say "they need to meet certain condition," she said we need to study the situation, and make sure the meeting will not be used for propaganda purposes before we arrange a meeting between the presidents. That means she knows what she is talking about because at least in Iran the government is just waiting to use what the U.S. does to destroy all the new democratic movements.

I think Obama made a mistake in answering the question the way he did, otherwise he really is naive. Anyhow, I think attacking the democratic front runner is a horrible idea. He needs to know better, because for democrats the priority is to get republicans out of office.