Youtube Questioner: Obama understood question, Hillary didn't.

[geek tragedy]

After a week of escalating post-debate rhetoric from Hillary and Obama over meeting with dictators, Bush-Cheney lite, naivete and irresponsibility, we thought it would be worth finding out what the guy who asked the question that started it all thought.

So we called Stephen Sixta, the 59-year-old California video producer who asked on YouTube about the candidates' willingness to meet with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Cuba and Venezuela. He said it's been pretty much "surreal" to spend the last week hearing the question he wrote repeated in some kind of endless loop by everyone from Wolf Blitzer to Rush Limbaugh.

His bottom line: He liked Obama's answer, and he thought Hillary misconstrued what he meant by "preconditions" in acting like Obama had agreed to meet Fidel and Chavez with no diplomatic groundwork whatsoever. He said Obama just meant there shouldn't be a requirement of a change in a country's behavior as a condition of talking to them.

Sixta basically seemed to buy Obama's claim that the two candidates' different responses showed that Clinton was more a candidate of the status quo. "There's a more traditional approach that she has and the U.S. has traditionally used... and he was willing to ratchet it up a bit and put his personal charisma on the line."

http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2007/07/stephen_speaks.html#more

[ellacott]

1. I hope the Obama campaign see this and uses it. n/t

[geek tragedy]

2. I hope they read DU! eom

[zanne]

3. I'm a lowly volunteer for Obama's campaign....

But I think it should be pointed out that while Hillary's people point out her years of experience, Obama's campaign should emphasize his freshness and willingness to try something different. Experience is good, of course, but it also implies that Hillary has had more time to become "fixed" in her ideas, and unwielding. (I like Hillary, too, but I'm an Obama Mama!)

[ellacott]

4. I agree with you

I don't hate Hillary but I think she has not used good judgement in picking her battles. It's evident to many people that these battles are manufactured on her part to try and knock Obama down a few pegs. If she keeps doing this it's going to backfire. It's going to look like she's unfairly picking on Obama and that may get him more support.

[bigdarryl]

46. The bottom line is shes got no fucking EXPERIENCE!! this is becoming a joke

she was first lady for eight years and the last i checked that doesn't make you unqualified to be President.if thats the case Laura Bush should be running.Shes a junior senator with six years

[Tellurian]

35. Amazing a U-Tube video producer has the final say in US diplomacy...

when US diplomats and experienced foreign affair experts agree Hillary was correct and Obama was wrong...

[killbotfactory]

57. So let's see... He asked a question, Obama understood it and answered it

But Clinton didn't, so it's.... The questioner and Obama's fault.

Give it a rest.

QUESTION: In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since.

In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?

OBAMA: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, Ronald Reagan and Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.

And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them. We've been talking about Iraq -- one of the first things that I would do in terms of moving a diplomatic effort in the region forward is to send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria because they're going to have responsibilities if Iraq collapses.

They have been acting irresponsibly up until this point. But if we tell them that we are not going to be a permanent occupying force, we are in a position to say that they are going to have to carry some weight, in terms of stabilizing the region.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/23/debate.transcript/index.html

[IndianaGreen]

63. The more'experienced" Hillary misconstrued the question, and twisted it to slam Obama

but then, the more "experienced" Hillary trusted in Bush, ignored thousands of her constituents, and went ahead and voted for the war.

I think our country can ill-afford more of Hillary's "experience."

[Cha]

74. She stuck her political viper knife

in Kerry's back, too..making sure he wouldn't give her any competition for her assencion.

I'd like to know who gave her the advice to go after Obama in this disingenous manner? Or was it her very own?

[alteredstate]

5. k & r n/t

[disndat]

6. Obama won

That wasn't my reaction to the H.C./Obama exchange. At first when Obama answered, I applauded him. Then Hillary gave her, "mother knows best" answer. I hesitated. But in the long run, Obama seemed open to fresh and new, and H.C. seemed, "same old, same old" political skulduggery.

[jefferson_dem]

7. That settles it. Debate over.

The questioner himself liked Obama's answer...and thought Hillary misconstrued it.

Dig. Hillary. Dig.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

8. OMG

this is hugh111!!!!

well, at least we can all move from this topic. Score one for Obama.

[flpoljunkie]

9. Yes, like the failed "preconditions" Bush has imposed on countries that have not worked--

or that his adminstration has eventually reversed with the hope that no one has noticed--like talks with North Korea--and now we are talking with Iran about Iraq--and we may well found out later they have also been talking about Iran's nuclear programs, as well.

Dubya likes to talk tough, and evidently Hillary Clinton does, as well.

[journalist3072]

10. Well perhaps he should have been more clear in his question then

HE is the one who mentioned "pre-conditions" in his question. He should have been more clear what he meant then, while producing his video that he submitted.

Botton line: Clinton won this issue because Obama came off as wet behind the ears and unexperienced.

[geek tragedy]

11. So Obama loses for answering the question right and Hillary

wins for getting it wrong?

Spin, spin, spin.

[journalist3072]

12. How did he answer the question right? He came across as someone who

as President, would just go meet with leaders of rogue states without even laying the groundwork first, or bothering to send an envoy.

[geek tragedy]

13. No, Hillary tried to smear him that way, because she

has no principles when it comes to using rightwing frames to smear fellow Democrats.

I used to think that Hillary was more principled than Bill. Now I'm pretty sure she would have fried Ricky Ray Rector too.

[journalist3072]

14. She didn't try to smear him. She was not responsible for the way Obama answered the question

And that is how he answered it----that he wouldn't bother setting pre-conditiions.

And his answer was inconsistent with what he has said before on that issue. As I posted on here yesterday, he said before he would set pre-conditions. So he has flip-flopped on that issue.

But to say Hillary Clinton smeared him is beyond ridiculous.

[geek tragedy]

16. You apparently still don't understand the question or

what "preconditions" means when diplomats use it.

Just like your rookie candidate.

[journalist3072]

19. Who said anything about Hillary Clinton being my candidate? Have I said who I am voting for?

No, I haven't. Just because I am defending Sen. Clinton does not mean I've decided to vote for her.

And it's obvious that YOUR "rookie" candidate is the one who didn't understand the question, because he flip-flopped.

The answer he gave the other night is totally inconsistent with what he's said before on this issue.

[geek tragedy]

20. Uh huh. Praising Hillary for misunderstanding the question

and calling Obama a rookie for understanding it correctly.

Nope, not backing Hillary.

This, by the way, is the kind of 'conventional wisdom' that led people to take people who voted FOR the Iraq war as 'serious' and those who voted against it as 'unserious.'

[journalist3072]

21. ABC News: Before Spat, Obama Backed Conditions for Talks

Before Spat, Obama Backed Conditions for Talks

July 27, 2007 8:04 PM


ABC News’ Teddy Davis Reports: It turns out that Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was for pre-conditions before he was against them.

In a pre-debate interview with a columnist for the Miami Herald, Obama said that he would meet with Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez but he stipulated that he would only do so "under certain conditions."

"Under certain conditions, I always believe in talking," Obama told the Miami Herald’s Andres Oppenheimer. "Sometimes it’s more important to talk to your enemies than to your friends."

But once he reached the Democratic presidential debate, his position seemed to change.

Asked if he would be willing to meet separately "without precondition" during the first year of his administration with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea, Obama said, "I would."

In the days since the debate, Obama has argued that Clinton’s foreign policy approach smacks of "Bush-Cheney lite" even though the position he is attacking Clinton for holding, seems to be one that he himself held in his pre-debate interview with the Miami Herald.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/07/before-spat-oba.html

[geek tragedy]

23. Again, "without precondition" is not the same

as "no matter what."

[journalist3072]

25. I understand. Anything to apologize for your candidate's lack of experience. eom

[geek tragedy]

30. Yes, he understood the difference so that makes him

inexperienced.

Gotta love those HRC talking points.

[Zueda]

26. Stop! Your hurting my brain!

Much like watching Tony Snow.


Oh, and by the way. How much you wanna bet that Tony, if asked, would defend Hill?

[journalist3072]

33. How did Tony Snow enter this debate? eom

[Zueda]

38. Frankly...

I decided to evoke his name into it after concluding that your defense of Hillary, against all facts, hurts my brain the same way Tony's defense of Bush/Cheney does. I'm not making this up..It really does.

[ellacott]

27. I was disappointed in her also

I was even more disapointed when her spokesman was on Hardball and kept repeating that Obama would meet with a "Holocaust denier".

[Zueda]

40. ugh That's just Sick!

I never heard about this Rick Ray Rector until just now. I went and looked him up on wikipedia. That is just Sick, Sick, SICK!

[jefferson_dem]

15. LOL! I hope the Hillary camp use your line of apologetics.

Blame the questioner for not being clear enough for her... :rofl:

She wants to the the most powerful woman in the world yet has trouble comprehending a "youtube" question?

[journalist3072]

17. I see some people here on DU are still unable to take their partisan hat off and think critically

Hillary Clinton was not the only one on stage that night, who thought that "pre-conditions" meant just agreeing to meet with a foreign leader without laying any groundwork first. Other candidates on stage that night, also thought that was what the questioner meant by "pre-conditions." For example, John Edwards agreed with Sen. Clinton's response, so he obviously interpreted the question the same way Sen. Clinton did.

They obviously interepreted the "pre-conditions" question to mean meeting with foreign leaders without knowing the intent, and without laying any groundwork or sending an envoy first.

[geek tragedy]

18. John Edwards is afraid to disagree with Hillary.

He just sends his wife to do it.

[Zueda]

29. Yer Right!

After Hillary injected her Bush-Cheney Lite rhetoric into her answer.

[ellacott]

31. Has very little to do with a partisan hat for me

We can debate policy all we want. My huge issue with this whole thing is that HIllary tried to use this to her advantage by going out of her way and calling him irresponsible and naive. We can name many positions she's taken that can be called irresponsible and naive.

My issue is that she's trying to pick a fight and then gets mad when someone fights back.

She could have not said a word just like the other candidates at that debate, even those that agreed with her position didn't try and trash Obama.

[eggman67]

41. Blaming the questioner for

not asking a better question is just so "Clintonesque" though ;)

[Ethelk2044]

61. Wrong Obama won voters agree he won on this issue. Hillary's

supporters would like to try to push for otherwise. However, Rasmussen even did a poll. The voters agree Obama won on this issue.

[Captain Hilts]

22. A president should NOT meet with Kim Jong Il even with 'preconditions'. Or Chavez.

It places them on the same level as the US president, which they're not.

That's why the comparison to Reagan and Gorbachev does not work.

[geek tragedy]

24. How about Vladimir Putin or the Saudi Royal

Family?

[Captain Hilts]

48. Putin, yes, the Saudi Royals, no.

Because the Saudis actually are financing terrorism. And, no, we shouldn't be selling them weapons either.

[geek tragedy]

54. So why Vladimir Putin but not Hugo Chavez? eom

[Captain Hilts]

70. Russia is a major global player that was an ally in WWII and is on the UN Sec Council. nt

[geek tragedy]

71. Venezuela is a major oil exporter. eom

[Captain Hilts]

72. So's Russia, only moreso on the global stage. Sorry, Venezuela doesn't make the cut. nt

[JoePhilly]

28. I just rewatched this part of the debate .... The winner was the Democrats ...

Obama's answer focused on the real issue put forth in the question. Should we have more discussions with world leaders with whom we disagree? He said absolutely, much like we did with USSR which was much greater threat to Americans. He's right.

Hillary pointed out that in doing so, you have to be careful not to be used for propaganda. So you build up to it. She's right.

Edwards added that having such thoughtful discussions helps to demonstrate American leadership in the world and the strength of American values. He's right.

The losers are the GOP candidates that will ALL continue to keep their heads up their butts when it comes to diplomacy.

[jmp]

32. Sounds to me like ...

His bottom line: He liked Obama's answer, and he thought Hillary misconstrued what he meant by "preconditions" in acting like Obama had agreed to meet Fidel and Chavez with no diplomatic groundwork whatsoever. He said Obama just meant there shouldn't be a requirement of a change in a country's behavior as a condition of talking to them.

Sounds like they both understood the question just fine. Also sounds like Mr. Sixta is trying to toss Sen Obama a lifeline.

[geek tragedy]

34. "Ms. Clinton misconstrued what he meant."

Spin, spin, spin.

[Zueda]

36. Are you saying that...

Clinton understood his question but decided to "misconstrue"?

[jmp]

47. I'm saying that the Mr Sixta ...

... is misconstruing his own question.


QUESTION: In 1982, Anwar Sadat traveled to Israel, a trip that resulted in a peace agreement that has lasted ever since.

In the spirit of that type of bold leadership, would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?


Neither Obama nor Hillary misconstrued his question. Mr Sixta simply doesn't like the way Obama has been hammered over it and the implications of his answer.

[Ethelk2044]

73. He agreed with Obama. This is hurting Hillary in away she did not plan for.

[gulliver]

39. The questioner screwed up.

It was a poorly expressed question, a bad pass. He was trying to rig a response, and the resulting contraption question backfired on Obama. Hillary didn't misconstrue a thing. The guy asked the question poorly. Obama let the guy put poor words in his (Obama's) mouth.

Obama's best play was to take a beat and express his sentiment in his own words. His question analysis skills were not working well enough at the debate to evaluate the question completely enough to give an unqualified yes answer. Never give an unqualified answer to a YouTube question unless you are absolutely sure you know the full ramifications of the question's wording. Hillary was smarter than Obama on that question.

[geek tragedy]

42. Yes, it's the questioner's fault Hillary doesn't understand

what serious people mean when they talk about negotiations 'without precondition.'

[Zueda]

43. Now... I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but...

I clearly understood the jest of his question when he asked it. "Do as I say before we talk" then laying out demands fully knowing they will not comply, has been a hallmark of this current administration's foreign policy. In case you never noticed, the Bush/Cheney foreign policies have been much harped about here over the years.

[killbotfactory]

58. That's the way I understood the question.

That's the way Obama understood and answered the question, as you can see from his answer at the debate and immediately after it.
That's the way the questioner intended it.

But that's not good enough, apparently.

[gulliver]

37. Of course he liked Obama's answer.

It was the answer the questioner wanted! You can't hear that question without noticing that it is tendentious and, yes, naive. Obama basically just said what the "nobody anyone knows" questioner wanted him to say. Obama should have taken a beat and expressed his sentiment in his own words. He got played by a YouTube bozo from the Internet.

[Inuca]

44. Of course this is what he meant!

Obvious to any impartial listener. On the other hand, the spin about all this (from both sides but especially Clinton's) has been pretty awful. Just as an example, on Hardball the other day, discussion between two representatives of each camp (I forget the names), and the Clinton guy kept insisting that Obama has committed to meet with all these people and how wrong this is. He kept pushing the "committed" point, interrupting, talking over the others, and altogether sounding and looking exceedingly nasty. UGLY!

[Colobo]

52. Howard Wolfson is sleazy.

[Inuca]

60. Yep! That's the guy

He is horrible. Bad vibes :-).

[Onlooker]

45. Then it was a bad question ...

... and Obama failed to give a clear answer. He should have backtracked and clarified what he meant. The questioner instead, upset that he hurt Obama, is apparently putting words into Obama's mouth. At any rate, this is hardly a big deal, though Hillary's campaign is doing a good job making the most of it.

[rucky]

49. The winners are Hillary and Obama!

for creating a publicity tempest in a teapot.

[Ethelk2044]

50. He did understand. We need to engage people instead of

not talking.

[Colobo]

51. Yeah- Now we know the questioner is wrong, not Hillary's answer.

Had he preferred Hill's answer, would her cheerleaders say this man's question was wrong?

[Schema Thing]

53. Hillary understood. She just wanted the opportunity to bluster

and talk tough.

Obama is by far the better potential POTUS.

[killbotfactory]

55. This is exactly what I thought he meant.

Clinton spun the question to attack Obama on foreign policy experience.

[illinoisprogressive]

56. I heard that the guy agreed with Obama's answer and thought Hillary missed it.

[Placebo]

59. Stephen Sixta is a stupid FRIGGIN' idiot.

Who cares what he thinks? He matters not.

[Ethelk2044]

62. The Voters - Thinks it matters. They are the ones who will be casting votes.

[IndianaGreen]

64. Hillary Camp: Voters are idiots! They are supposed to rubber stamp Hil's coronation.

Is that the message you are trying to send, placebo?

[geek tragedy]

65. Yeah, fuck democracy. eom

[Colobo]

67. You REALLY represent Hillary Clinton very well. Congratulations.

[Alexander]

68. Gosh, with supporters like that, how can Hillary not win?

So full of class, wit and charm.

[elizm]

66. Thank you for this post! nt

[Imagevision]

69. Hil,acting like Obama had agreed to meet Fidel and Chavez with no diplomatic groundwork whatsoever..

that was clever!

[themaguffin]

75. I thought the questions were for all our benefit, not the few who

...got to have their questioned asked on the debate.

It's really irrelevant what that man thinks. Both candidates can claim whatever they want on this. I feel that Hillary was more correct as she was more specific in the diplomacy process.

One would think that that Obama would be the same as President and go through that process before jetting overseas, but he jumped too quickly with the promise which to me sounded naice IF he really would do that and really does feel that way.