the debates and they were just awkward. Whoever our nominee is, McCain should be
pretty easy to beat....
--- In Dems2008@yahoogroups.com, isabelle <isabelle_ms@...> wrote:
>
> McCain already has the reputation of a loose canon at
> best, among republicans, and I've heard some say he's
> crazy. I don't think he will be able to hold his
> tongue during the general campaign and I think his
> anger will backfire on him. The last thing we need is
> another cowboy running off at the mouth.
>
>
>
> >
> > --- In Dems2008@yahoogroups.com, "azober2000"
> > <azober@> wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-
> > op.hillary12feb12,0,94551.story
> > >
> > > Battle-Tested
> > >
> > > by Joseph C. Wilson IV
> > >
> > > With the emergence of Sen. John McCain as the
> > presumptive Republican
> > > nominee, the choice for the Democrats in the 2008
> > presidential
> > > election now shifts to who is best positioned to
> > beat him, in what
> > > promises to be a more hard-fought campaign -- and
> > perhaps a nastier
> > > one -- than Democrats anticipated.
> > >
> > > Sen. Barack Obama's promise of transformation and
> > an end of partisan
> > > politics has its seductive appeal. The Bush-Cheney
> > era, after all, has
> > > been punctuated by smear campaigns, character
> > assassinations and
> > > ideological fervor.
> > >
> > > Nobody dislikes such poisonous partisanship,
> > especially in foreign
> > > policy, more than I do. I am one of very few
> > Foreign Service officers
> > > who have served as ambassador in the
> > administrations of both George
> > > H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, yet I have spent the
> > past four years
> > > fighting a concerted character assassination
> > campaign orchestrated by
> > > the George W. Bush White House.
> > >
> > > Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is one of the few who
> > fully understood the
> > > stakes in that battle. Time and again, she reached
> > out to my wife --
> > > outed CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson -- and me
> > to remind us that as
> > > painful as the attacks were, we simply could not
> > allow ourselves to be
> > > driven from the public square by bullying. To do
> > so would validate the
> > > radical right's thesis that the way to win debates
> > is to demonize
> > > opponents, taking full advantage of the natural
> > desire to avoid
> > > confrontation, even if it means yielding on
> > substantive issues.
> > > Hillary knew this from experience, having spent
> > the better part of the
> > > past 20 years fighting the Republican attack
> > machine. She is a fighter.
> > >
> > > But will Mr. Obama fight? His brief time on the
> > national scene gives
> > > little comfort. Consider a February 2006 exchange
> > of letters with Mr.
> > > McCain on the subject of ethics reform. The
> > wrathful Mr. McCain
> > > accused Mr. Obama of being "disingenuous," to
> > which Mr. Obama meekly
> > > replied, "The fact that you have now questioned my
> > sincerity and my
> > > desire to put aside politics for the public
> > interest is regrettable
> > > but does not in any way diminish my deep respect
> > for you." Then one of
> > > McCain's aides said of Obama, "Obama wouldn't know
> > the difference
> > > between an RPG and a bong."
> > >
> > > Mr. McCain was insultingly dismissive but
> > successful in intimidating
> > > his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one
> > face-to-face encounter
> > > with Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama failed to stand his
> > ground.
> > >
> > > What gives us confidence Mr. Obama will be
> > stronger the next time he
> > > faces Mr. McCain, a seasoned political fighter
> > with extensive national
> > > security credentials? Even more important, what
> > special disadvantages
> > > does Mr. Obama carry into this contest on
> > questions of national security?
> > >
> > > How will Mr. Obama answer Mr. McCain about his
> > careless remark about
> > > unilaterally bombing Pakistan -- perhaps blowing
> > up an already
> > > difficult relationship with a nuclear state
> > threatened by Islamic
> > > extremists? How will Mr. Obama respond to charges
> > made by the Kenyan
> > > government that his campaigning activities in
> > Kenya in support of his
> > > distant cousin running for president there made
> > him "a stooge" and
> > > constituted interference in the politics of an
> > important and besieged
> > > ally in the war on terror?
> > >
> > > How will he answer charges that his desire for
> > unstructured personal
> > > summits without preconditions with a host of
> > America's adversaries,
> > > from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Kim Jong Il, would be
> > little more than
> > > premature capitulation?
> > >
> > > Senator Obama claims superior judgment on the war
> > in Iraq based on one
> > > speech given as a state legislator representing
> > the most liberal
> > > district in Illinois at an anti-war rally in
> > Chicago, and in so doing
> > > impugns the integrity of those who were part of
> > the debate on the
> > > national scene. In mischaracterizing the debate on
> > the Authorization
> > > for the Use of Military Force as a declaration of
> > war, he implicitly
> > > blames Democrats for George Bush's war of choice.
> > Obama's negative
> > > attack line does not conform to the facts. Nothing
> > could be farther
> > > from the truth. I should know. I was among the
> > most prominent anti-war
> > > voices at the time -- and never heard about or
> > from then Illinois
> > > State Senator Obama.
> > >
> > > George Bush made it clear publicly when lobbying
> > for the bill that he
> > > wanted it not to go to war but to give him the
> > leverage he needed to
> > > go to the United Nations and secure intrusive
> > inspections of Saddam's
> > > suspected Weapons of Mass Destruction sites. Who
> > could argue with that
> > > goal? Colin Powell made the same case individually
> > to Senators in the
> > > run up to the vote, including to Senator Clinton.
> > It is not credible
> > > that Senator Obama would not have succumbed to
> > Secretary Powell's
> > > arguments had he been in Washington at the time.
> > Why not? Obama
> > > himself suggested so in 2004. "I'm not privy to
> > Senate intelligence
> > > reports,' Obama said. 'What would I have done? I
> > don't know." He also
> > > told the Chicago Tribune in 2004: "There's not
> > much of a difference
> > > between my position and George Bush's position at
> > this stage."
> > > According to press reports, Powell is now an
> > informal adviser to Mr.
> > > Obama.
> > >
> > > In his tendentious attack, Obama never mentions
> > that Hans Blix, the
> > > chief United Nations weapons inspectors, declared
> > that without the
> > > congressional Authorization for the Use of
> > Military Force the
> > > inspectors would never have been allowed into
> > Iraq. Hillary's approach
> > > -- and that of the majority of Democrats in the
> > Senate -- was to let
> > > the inspectors complete their work while building
> > an international
> > > coalition. Hillary's was the road untaken. The
> > betrayal of the
> > > American people, and of the Congress, came when
> > President Bush refused
> > > to allow the inspections to succeed, and that
> > betrayal is his and his
> > > party's, not the Democrats.
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________________________________
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dems2008/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Dems2008-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:Dems2008-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Dems2008-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder