October 23, 2007
Some Nerve! (A.B. Stoddard)
Just weeks ago I wrote off Barack Obama in a column, saying I think he isn't audacious enough to beat back Hillary Clinton. I still think he loses to her, but I was wrong: This guy has some audacity!
In their mailboxes this week Iowans found a CYA (that's Cover Your, um, Rear) letter from Clinton about her vote on the Kyl-Lieberman amendment earlier this month, in which she supported the declaration of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization. Her hawkish move, which Mike Gravel declared in his final debate appearance made him ashamed of her (she cackled wildly in response), has remained a controversy ever since and a great gift to Obama and John Edwards.
The problem for Obama, who has a history of dodging controversial votes, is that he wasn't at the Senate vote and didn't actually oppose it. But that didn't stop him from following her mailer with one of his own, criticizing her vote and saying the amendment is "dangerous," because President Bush and Vice President Cheney could "use this language to justify keeping our troops in Iraq as long as they can point to a threat from Iran. And because they could use this language to justify an attack on Iran as part of the ongoing war in Iraq."
No matter that the senior Democratic senator from Illinois and key Obama supporter, Dick Durbin, opposed the Iraq war resolution in 2002 but voted with Clinton for the Iran measure. "While other Democrats voted for the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment, Barack Obama opposed another Bush foreign policy fiasco," reads Obama's letter.
Add to this that the Huffington Post has unearthed an interview Obama gave to an Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz, in May of this year in which he said Iran would have to show positive steps before the United States engaged in diplomacy with Iran. "I don't think it would be appropriate for us to engage in full-scale diplomatic discussions without some progress or some indication of good faith on the part of the Iranians," Obama said in the interview. He also said it is "absolutely critical for the international community to verify progress before there are changes in our attitude toward Iran."
Yep, this is the same guy who said at a Democratic presidential campaign in July that he, unlike Clinton, would be willing to meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions during his first year in office.
That Obama has some nerve.
***
Can Obama get away with this? Does the Democratic base even notice? Send me your questions at askab@thehill.com and join me on my weekly video Q & A.
Permalink TrackBack
Email This Post
Share this post
What's This 7 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
I think you are wrong about Obama ! I think he & Billery had planned for her to win the nomination and choose him as his running mate long ago. Going for the woman / Black vote thinking its a one two punch. Com on man you gotta look at the big picture !!!
Comment by Keith in NH — October 23, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
I think "has some nerve" should be replaced with "is a flake". The audacity of shameless incompetence.
Comment by Igor R. — October 23, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
You're assuming of course that this would matter to the average American voter. Most of them do not support Obama's fervent belief that you can talk your way out of trouble. That's usually just before the ass kicking starts.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — October 23, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
AB:
He also co-sponsered a bill (not just a non-binding resolution) in April 2007 which declared the IRG a terrorist organization!
Comment by JoeCHI — October 23, 2007 @ 5:21 pm
A State Senator who ended up running virtually unopposed against Alan Keyes gave a fabulous speech to liven up Gore's very dull convention. Has he done anything since that night to deserve the Oval Office? No.
Comment by David Erlichman — October 24, 2007 @ 9:26 pm
AB;
Talking about some nerve. How about vetoing a 35 billion bi-partisan bill for heathcare for children and requesting 196 billion to kill people who never did anything to us, that's nerve.
Comment by Mike Coleman — October 25, 2007 @ 1:44 pm
The whole Universal health care thing is a sham on the american people. Instead of regulating prices doctors & hospitals can charge ie; Japan. We want to find a way for everyone to be able to pay for the 11 dollar asprin… Its pitiful
Comment by Keith in NH — April 18, 2008 @ 6:20 pm