Obama had every chance to ignore Bush's remarks in Israel. It's clear that Obama is not the only one calling for talks with enemy powers. Lots of people in many countries are saying the same thing. He could have claimed the comments weren't directed at him because "appeasement" is not his intention.
But no, he pleads guilty in rising to what may not even have been bait. By objecting he's essentially said that "Yeah, I guess what I want to do could be called appeasement, so you were talking about me!"
McCain, meanwhile, probably should have just kept his mouth shut and let Obama hang himself. But his response of "Obama favors talking with these people. I just want to know what he plans to say" is immensely valid, and for Obama to pretend it's not means he's got something to hide. The American public deserves a chance to vote for the person they think would have the best things to say to our enemies.
Why not answer McCain's question? What if the things he would say are all the right things? Wouldn't that HELP his candidacy? Wouldn't that PROVE he's got the foreign policy chops to get the job done? Why isn't he welcoming the chance instead of throwing up an smokescreen and dodging the issue...again?
Instead he's falling back on his standard response to any criticism: "How dare you bring that up! That's off limits! I won't even validate such criticism with a response! And that goes for both of you, even though McCain was saying something entirely different!"
Meanwhile, he's also mixing in his own brand of misinformation. Bush has not, as he and Hillary claim, been going it alone on Iran. Iran is one place he HAS been working with other nations. There have been times when the other nations have actually talked tougher on Iran than we have. The "Cowboy Diplomacy" they accuse Bush of is exactly what he's NOT been doing with Iran.
So what Obama is really telling us here is that Bush's multi-national approach is not working, and that HE will solve the problem ALL BY HIMSELF by talking to our enemies. This particular quote by Obama is interesting:
"Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what (Presidents) Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power — including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy — to pressure countries like Iran and Syria."
This leaves me more confused. He initially claimed we need to talk to these nations. Now he's saying that talk isn't enough--we need to act. So what exactly is he proposing? Why not lay it out for us so we can see how his approach is so different--and better--than Bush's?
I heard no mention of working with other world powers on this. So after so many years of criticizing Bush for "going it alone" that's exactly what HE wants to do! And if we're going to go it alone to back up his talk, just what exactly does he plan to say?! McCain has it right! I want to know!
But he won't say. He does everything in his power, including sulking like my five year old whenever anyone says anything that could be taken as criticism of him. Why on earth would we want this to be our face to the world for the next four years?
No comments:
Post a Comment