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.
--- worldpeacesoon <berts420@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Sounds like Joe Wilson is doing the same thing that
> Bush did to him and his wife. People
> are sick of this attack politics, the dirty campaign
> tactics, the surrogates talking about
> bongs. To me his letter to McCain sounded very
> diplomatic, eveidence that Obama doesn't
> want to get involved in the bitter partinship, but
> rather unite the country.
>
> If Hillary comes into office, we are going to have
> eights more years of bitter partinship. We
> need a uniter, not a divider.
>
> --- 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.
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