Clinton/Obama feud - what's your take?

O

Onceler

New member
When I first saw the exchange in the debate, I thought both gave pretty good answers. I liked how Obama jumped on it, and his logic about opening up dialogue with leaders we don't like was solid. Hillary's answer was more measured & cautious, but she didn't exactly rule out dialogue with anyone.

I'd be curious to hear other opinions on this. I basically agree with Obama, though I get Hillary's point about not rushing into a meeting with anyone as President - the envoys & other arms of the admin should lay the groundwork & ensure that any meeting that might ultimately occur would not be mis-used.

I HATE this admin's stance about diplomacy & who we should & shouldn't be speaking with. Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union an evil empire, but still met with them, with great results. I don't think anything can be gained by shutting dialogue down; it strikes me as childish...the way a pre-teen would handle diplomacy.
 
I had the same opinion as you state here of the actual exhange. I'm not too crazy with Hillary jumping all over Obama for his answer afterwards. To me, that's where she comes off looking like a Republican. Republicans are going to be hitting dems with their old standby of "dems are weak on national security", that's when they're not coming right out and saying that democrats are fighting on the side of "the terrorists".
 
Darla said:
I had the same opinion as you state here of the actual exhange. I'm not too crazy with Hillary jumping all over Obama for his answer afterwards. To me, that's where she comes off looking like a Republican. Republicans are going to be hitting dems with their old standby of "dems are weak on national security", that's when they're not coming right out and saying that democrats are fighting on the side of "the terrorists".
Click to expand...

One of these days, I'm gonna find something we don't agree on. I hate how Hillary did this, and I think it's backfiring on her. She brought Obama up to her level by engaging him this way.

Her minions have been even worse about it. Last night on Hardball, one of her campaign guys totally mischaracterized it, saying something like "he's determined to meet with Castro!"
 
Obama's desparate and his actions show it, Hillary will take the high road. Hopefully he doesn't talk himself out of the #2 spot.
 
Onceler said:
One of these days, I'm gonna find something we don't agree on. I hate how Hillary did this, and I think it's backfiring on her. She brought Obama up to her level by engaging him this way.

Her minions have been even worse about it. Last night on Hardball, one of her campaign guys totally mischaracterized it, saying something like "he's determined to meet with Castro!"
Click to expand...

I know, I saw it.

Well, not to worry, Top might be in any minute to call you names and say that it's losers like you (and duhla) who are going to ruin it for his girl, Hillary.
 
Topspin said:
Obama's desparate and his actions show it, Hillary will take the high road. Hopefully he doesn't talk himself out of the #2 spot.
Click to expand...

He's not getting the number two spot.

She's going with Edwards.

If Gore entered, and won, I believe he would tap Obama.
 
I think edwards is too much a liability as she has more balls than he does.
I'd rather see Richardson.
 
Onceler said:
When I first saw the exchange in the debate, I thought both gave pretty good answers. I liked how Obama jumped on it, and his logic about opening up dialogue with leaders we don't like was solid. Hillary's answer was more measured & cautious, but she didn't exactly rule out dialogue with anyone.

I'd be curious to hear other opinions on this. I basically agree with Obama, though I get Hillary's point about not rushing into a meeting with anyone as President - the envoys & other arms of the admin should lay the groundwork & ensure that any meeting that might ultimately occur would not be mis-used.

I HATE this admin's stance about diplomacy & who we should & shouldn't be speaking with. Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union an evil empire, but still met with them, with great results. I don't think anything can be gained by shutting dialogue down; it strikes me as childish...the way a pre-teen would handle diplomacy.
Click to expand...


there's nothing unusual about what clinton said.

Bill Clinton had Richard Holbrooke and Wes Clark lay the diplomatic groundwork for many months before he met with Milosevic to sign the Dayton accords. Jimmy Carter probably never met with Leonid Brezhnev or Anwar Sadat for months or years, until his top diplomats had laid the groundwork for Salt II, or the Sinai Peace accords.

There's nothing magical about having a president rush into meeting a leader of a foreign nation. The key is commitment and follow-through. Holbrooke and Clark were tough bastards, and Bill Clinton picked the right people to do the groundwork diplomacy. In contrast, Bush at best, is sending low level hacks to do "diplomacy", and bush is not committed to follow throught.
 
Topspin said:
I think edwards is too much a liability as she has more balls than he does.
I'd rather see Richardson.
Click to expand...

Well, I could be wrong, but I've been watching those two the past couple of debates, and it's kind of like trying to spot the couple in the office you know? And, it's not really that hard to do. And this is not about a man/woman thing, you could do it when all the candidates were men too. I think she's going with him.
 
Oh my, I just threw up a little in my mouth. Edwards is too pretty for Hideous Hillary. Ewwh she reminds me of my ex in 10 more years. yuk
 
Topspin said:
Oh my, I just threw up a little in my mouth. Edwards is too pretty for Hideous Hillary. Ewwh she reminds me of my ex in 10 more years. yuk
Click to expand...

No no, it's not a romantic thing. I just used the office couple as an example. I mean, whenever two people are in any kind of cahoots, body language can and will give them away.

however, I will stipulate that men in general are pretty clueless about this.
 
she seemed to vibe with Obama in the first two debates, as they slammed back Edwards week ass attempts to score on the war.
 
Topspin said:
Obama's desparate and his actions show it, Hillary will take the high road. Hopefully he doesn't talk himself out of the #2 spot.
Click to expand...

top, stick to stocks bro. What Hillary did is going to hurt her. Democrats believe that we need to take a more pro-active approach into our foreign policy and hold discussions with foreign leaders to try and work out problems without dropping bombs. I tend to agree with that policy. Obama seems like a guy that can really do something about our foriegn policy issues, and he is right now my favorite Dem running. Don't count my vote for Obama though because I will be voting in the Republican primary for Ron Paul.
 
DigitalDave said:
top, stick to stocks bro. What Hillary did is going to hurt her. Democrats believe that we need to take a more pro-active approach into our foreign policy and hold discussions with foreign leaders to try and work out problems without dropping bombs. I tend to agree with that policy. Obama seems like a guy that can really do something about our foriegn policy issues, and he is right now my favorite Dem running. Don't count my vote for Obama though because I will be voting in the Republican primary for Ron Paul.
Click to expand...


Digital Dave, there is always as an end to negotiation, and that what comes after is what you're willing to do about things. No amount of negotiation will achieve anything if your a wimpy little pushover. it's not that conservatives are against communication, it's that talk is cheap.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Digital Dave, there is always as an end to negotiation, and that what comes after is what you're willing to do about things. No amount of negotiation will achieve anything if your a wimpy little pushover. it's not that conservatives are against communication, it's that talk is cheap.
Click to expand...

C'mon; that's ridiculous. This admin, led by Cheney, doesn't even want to START communication.

Of course there is an "end" to it, if it breaks down & we're not getting what we want. To try to portray it the way you just did is what conservatives have been doing for years: The Dems just want to sit down & sing "kum ba yah" with everyone. It's such a lie. Diplomacy has solved more problems than force, by a wide margin.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Digital Dave, there is always as an end to negotiation, and that what comes after is what you're willing to do about things. No amount of negotiation will achieve anything if your a wimpy little pushover. it's not that conservatives are against communication, it's that talk is cheap.
Click to expand...

Negotiation needs to benefit both parties. There needs to be discussion amongst both parties before a negotiation can take place. I would call it a wimpy move if we just started giving foreigners things with no real return other than 'Hey, we won't bomb you now, thanks for the goods!'. But talks need to take place and it seemed as if Hillary was calling Obama an idiot for wanting to create a dialogue.
 
becauser your a loser, she didn't say that you assumed.
Just as the dems are commying it up for the leftards they will hawk it up a little for the moderate and conservative dems as to not look week.
Neither is likely to start any war.
 
Topspin said:
Digitaltool, I'll give you Obama and Paul vs Hillary for $5
Click to expand...

toppy, this is only one issue. This doesn't indicate what the outcome will be after all of the debates and marketing campaigns. I'm simply stating Hillary will get a black eye on this one. A Black eye will heal, and by the time primaries role around, people will have forgotten about it. But this will create a few people jumping on the Obama bandwagon.
 
"she didn't say that you assumed."

She didn't call him an idiot; she said he was being naive.

Not exactly a huge difference, considering the topic & the stage they're on...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top