Politico: Bill Clinton Seeks Truce with Obama, Takes Dig at Edwards in DLC speech today

[flpoljunkie]

Bill Clinton seeks truce with Obama
By: David Paul Kuhn and John F. Harris

July 30, 2007 04:13 PM EST

Bill Clinton said Monday that he had no interest in wading into “that little spat” that broke out last week between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama over whether the next president should commit to meeting with the leader of several U.S. adversaries. Then, in the next sentence, the former president waded right in -- in a way that sounded like the Clintons are seeking a truce with Obama in the debate over the proper role of presidential diplomacy when dealing with assorted bad guys on the world stage.

While Hillary Clinton and her team pounced on Obama’s pledge to meet with leaders of such countries as Iran, Syria and Cuba as “naïve,” her husband took pains in a speech to centrist Democrats to emphasize that all the candidates basically agree on the big picture. “We have to get back to more diplomacy,” Clinton said, adding: “I’ve heard no fewer than four of our candidates say in the last month, remind us that in the middle of the cold war, in the darkest hours, we never stopped talking to the Soviets at some level. So no one disputes that.”

If the 42nd president was speaking in any way as a proxy for his wife’s campaign, it’s a pretty clear sign that Obama has succeeded in his pushback against Hillary Clinton. In response to her criticism that it was “irresponsible” to give the foreign leaders a propaganda victory by meeting with a U.S. president without forcing concessions in advance, Obama said Clinton sounded like President Bush in refusing to practice diplomacy with adversaries.

Bill Clinton said people could interpret the candidates’ answers for themselves, but indicated he did not see much disagreement on “the big question, And that is: should we have more diplomacy? The answer is yes. Then you can parse their answers to the specific questions and decide who you think is right.”

more on Bill Clinton's Edwards' dig...

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5154.html

[rodeodance]

1. He is right. It is the big policy question that is right and should be applauded for

bringing it into view.

[BlueStater]

2. I'm confused. Is it his wife who's running for president or is he seeking a third term? n/t

[madison]

3. When did "without preconditions" morph into...

When did "without preconditions" morph into "forcing concessions"?

[TeamJordan23]

4. I wonder if Edwards will respond. Bill was clearly taking a shot at Edwards' campaign theme. nm

[flpoljunkie]

5. Clearly.

[sandnsea]

26. And lying to do it

EIC is not a DLC invention. I can't imagine what he was thinking when he said it.

[ShortnFiery]

6. So what are we to conclude from HRC's "husband" using his CLOUT now?

Nepotism on steroids? ... IMO, Bill Clinton wants that third term for HIMSELF. :scared: :thumbsdown:

[Totally Committed]

10. And, it looks like he's determined to get it, even if he has to

make her win to do it.

This is what is known as a "full court press", I think.

TC

[jsamuel]

7. First off, I would like to see his speech before I decide that he was going after Edwards.

Politico is not a good source for they try to make fights between dems out of nothing.

Secondly, if what they say is true... Just because Clinton did some good things in the 1990's doesn't mean that it was enough. We need bigger changes than what the DLC offers. I think that is readily apparent to most people.

[flpoljunkie]

8. If Clinton used the word "voguish" I'd be suspicious. Edwards was just on the cover of Men's Vogue.

Could be coincidence, but a strange word choice--unless, of course, it is Politico's word choice...

In what might be a sign that Democratic candidate John Edwards is getting on Clinton’s nerves—though he did not mention Edwards by name -- Clinton said it “galls” him that fighting poverty is now seen as a voguish issue, and that people assume he and the DLC cared only about the middle class and not the poor.

Edwards has made fighting poverty a centerpiece of his campaign. Clinton said his administration, using DLC ideas such as the earned income tax credit, deserve credit for tackling the issue.

“The only way you can expand the middle class is to move poor people into it -- unless you are trying to make the rich poor,” Clinton said, adding, “We had the most successful antipoverty program in a generation and it still works.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5154.html



A very nice photo of Edwards, by the way.

[madison]

9. Pres. Clinton talked to the leader of North Korea and ...

Back in the Cold War days, there were a few occasions when an American president raced off to a "summit meeting" with some "difficult" foreign leader and ended up humiliated and disgusted. From that time on, American presidents never went to any summit meeting until a whole lot of preliminary work had been done by lower-level officials who had discussions about: the agenda, who would be part of the meeting, how long the meeting would go, where the meeting would take place, and how many side meetings would occur between lower level diplomats over "smaller" issues.

American presidents vowed never again to be put into an awkward or humiliating situation -- or used for propaganda purposes by foreign leaders who scored more domestic points by NOT negotiating in good faith than they would by actually engaging in serious negotiation.

I find it hard if not impossible to believe that any current-day American president would promise to engage in any highest-level talks with "difficult" foreign leaders unless and until serious preliminary work had been done and ground rules and an agenda set.

President Clinton never hesitated to talk to any foreign leader, but he never promised to do so until quiet, low-level talks had been held and plans made.

Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton share a world view and both have a deep understanding of how the world works, politically and economically. If she were to become our president, Hillary Clinton would be as willing and eager to engage in talks with all foreign leaders as her husband always was, but she understands -- as does Barack Obama -- that both President Eisenhower and President Kennedy were wounded by going to such "summit" talks without making certain that all parties understood what the talks were to be about, what the areas of agreement and disagreement were, who would be the participants in the talks, and how long the talks would last.

-- from The New York Times: "After the debate, David Axelrod, a top Obama adviser, elaborated on Mr. Obama’s statement, telling the National Review that Mr. Obama would initiate talks 'just as during the Cold War there were low-level discussions and mid-level discussions between us and the Soviet Union,' but that he was 'not promising summits' with the leaders of those rogue nations."

There could not be two more different presidencies than those of President Clinton and George W. Bush. For instance, Clinton talked to the leader of North Korea and worked out a treaty agreement with North Korea regarding their nuclear program. When Bush became president, he dismissed the agreement and would not comply with the treaty Clinton had made. Now, six years later, Bush has finally come around to wanting that same treaty arrangement, except during the years Bush wasted with his posturing, North Korea developed a few nuclear weapons that they did not have when Clinton was president.

[Skip Intro]

11. "Obama said Clinton sounded like President Bush in refusing to practice diplomacy with adversaries"

No one can show me where Hillary refused to practice diplomacy. In fact, her answer specifically said she'd use diplomacy.


I guess the facts are secondary to spin.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

12. IMO when you have double the African-American vote of an African-American

competitor, it's a serious mistake to call him "naive". IMO Obama's handlers won't let Hillary ever forget she used that over-the-top word. IMO Hillary's African-American support peaked exactly at the moment she uttered that ill-considered word.

[Skip Intro]

16. Are you saying it wasn't a naive answer because he's African-American?

It seems more than just naive to me to promise to meet that list of leaders, in his first year, without precondition.


What does skin color have to do with it?


Obama has handlers?

[ProgressiveEconomist]

28. Are you saying that Hillary's African-American supporters definitely are not sensitive

to possible political use of codewords? Codewords embodying racial stereotypes that may play well with some white voters?

[Skip Intro]

34. naive is a racial codeword? Guess that makes Hillary a racist too, eh?

:eyes:

[ecstatic]

29. hmm... I don't think that particular statement will hurt her

Because many people do view him as naive, hence the hesitation of black voters when it comes to Obama. However, Clinton does have to be very careful in that regard because all it takes is one ill advised comment to ruin everything.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

33. So you agree Hillary's use of the word "naive" caught your attention. Did you wince

when you heard it, the way I did? I agree. Hillary probably had not thought about the possibility an ill-advised word could--if not alienate some of her African-American supporters--lead some of them to compare how well Hillary and Obama would represent the nuances of their views.

IMO Bill and Hillary have so much "capital" among African-American Democrats that they'll cut Hil lots of slack. But still, Hillary needs to be very careful in her choice of words from here on.

[ecstatic]

36. I didn't see the video--just going by hearsay

Good points though. Without actually seeing the body language, I can't get the full impact of how that word might have been perceived.

[maximusveritas]

13. He's digging at both Obama and Edwards there

Both of them have made poverty an issue in their campaigns, while Hillary has refrained from doing so. He obviously senses a possible weak spot there and is trying to close it.

[TeamJordan23]

17. I agree with that also. nm

[elizm]

14. Hillary goes off script...and Bill has to jump in to clean up the mess. nt

[AtomicKitten]

15. "sounds like ... wanting a truce" ... that's journalism?

I saw the clip of Clinton's statement. It was succinct. Two sentences. The last punctuated the point that all the Democratic candidates believe in diplomacy as a departure from the current regime.

This brouhaha is much ado about not much.

[flpoljunkie]

18. Funny how the authors now have changed their title to: Bill Clinton Sands Edges of Obama 'Spat'

Sounds like someone from the Clinton camp complained to them about their original headline, and they caved...

Bill Clinton sands edges of Obama 'spat'
By: John F. Harris and David Paul Kuhn
Jul 30, 2007 04:05 PM EST

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0707/5154.html

Original title from OP:

Bill Clinton seeks truce with Obama
By: David Paul Kuhn and John F. Harris

July 30, 2007 04:13 PM EST

[AtomicKitten]

19. it's pretty clear the author is trying to frame the brief statement

in a way that gives all kinds of inference with nothing to back it up ...

It really was a pretty innocuous statement.

[flpoljunkie]

21. Agree with Politico it's a "pretty clear sign Obama has succeeded in his pushback against Hillary."

It is obvious that Bill is taking a shot at John Edwards, as well.

[AtomicKitten]

32. Obama is definitely holding his own.

But, on point, the piece starts out declaring Bill Clinton is seeking a truce when that's complete and utterly irresponsible speculation. That's what happens in politics. Everyone has an opinion and that opinion often colors they way they view things. And that's the problem with opinion pieces disguised as news. It serves those that require very little provocation to go off on familiar targets.

[flpoljunkie]

39. I would not described it so much as a truce, but an attempt to end the discussion--move on. However,

having yet another man, first Tom Vilsack in Iowa and now Bill Clinton--step in and defend Hillary--doesn't help her carefully crafted image.

[AtomicKitten]

42. I think he is trying to be the leader of the party at the same time

... he is spouse to one of the leading candidates. A delicate balance to be sure and one I think that is fraught with peril (i.e., allowing room for misinterpretation and criticism).

I thought the brouhaha between Clinton and Obama rather lame, but I did like Bill Clinton backing up the entire field. I think that's smart, good politics. You can never go wrong when you communicate on a positive note. I wish I had the self-restraint to follow that policy 24/7 myself.

[jefferson_dem]

20. Ok. Now the "Big Dawg" asks for Obama to call of the dogs...?

Fine. We'll chalk it up as a clear political win for Obama ...for now. More to come later.

[Skip Intro]

22. rofl.

A clear political win for Obama.


:rofl:

[jefferson_dem]

25. Yup.

:bounce:

[Skip Intro]

35. I was laughing at your analysis that this is a clear win for Obama.

Still am.


Do the Obama people really think they can just make stuff up and that's the way it will be?

[sandnsea]

23. EIC was passed in 1974

Good lord, Clinton is trying to take credit for that?? Incredible. I guess there's just no telling what a bunch of junkyard dogs will stoop to.

[Forkboy]

24. Politico......'nuff said.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

27. Word.

[IndianaGreen]

30. Hillary can't cut the mustard, so she brings out hubby to bail her ass out

This past weekend it was former Iowa Governor Bilesack that came out saying that Obama was mean to Hillary, or words to that effect. That didn't work!

We can't have a President that has to trot out the spouse everytime he or she gets in a jam.

[zulchzulu]

38. Bingo

What a role model for women...

:crazy:

[illinoisprogressive]

31. Vilsack couldn't save her so she runs to hubby for help. Obama bested her

[flpoljunkie]

37. More today on this and Kate Snow's interview with Bill Clinton from ABC's The Note...

Former President Clinton yesterday told the Democratic Leadership Council that he had no interest in getting involved in "that little spat" between his wife and Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., last week. But this is Bill Clinton we're talking about: He "waded right in -- in a way that sounded like the Clintons might be seeking a truce with Obama in the debate over the proper role of presidential diplomacy when dealing with assorted bad guys on the world stage," Politico's David Paul Kuhn and John F. Harris write. He suggested that he saw little disagreement on "the big question, and that is: Should we have more diplomacy? The answer is yes. Then you can parse their answers to the specific questions and decide who you think is right," Clinton said. (He also said it "galls" him that fighting poverty has become popular among politicians, since it suggests that he and the DLC only care about the middle class. Hear that, John Edwards?)

The Clinton camp said the former president was speaking extemporaneously and did not coordinate his message with his wife's campaign -- good, since Obama seems not to have accepted any treaty terms. "The notion that somehow we have had an effective foreign policy by not talking to people is part of the perceived conventional wisdom that got us into this war in Iraq," Obama said yesterday outside a fundraiser in Dallas, per The Dallas Morning News' Gromer Jeffers Jr.

ABC's Kate Snow sits down with former President Bill Clinton tonight on "Nightline," and he tells her that he would keep an office in the White House's East Wing if his wife is elected president. (He also plans to take care of some "first lady" duties while continuing his foundation work.) He's pledging to hold his tongue when possible in the rough-and-tumble of the presidential race. "She's big enough to handle her own political fights," Clinton says. "When I feel people talking about someone I am not familiar with, I want to step in, and I do have to hold my tongue because it's . . . you know, again I'm trying to do what's helpful."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/Story?id=3105288&page=2

(But has Bill Clinton "held his tongue?" I think not.)

[madison]

40. Why should Bill Clinton hold his tongue?

Why should Bill Clinton hold his tongue?

Last I knew this was still a free country.

Is there some rule that spouses of candidates cannot speak out?

[flpoljunkie]

41. You will have to ask him. Those are his words.

He's pledging to hold his tongue when possible in the rough-and-tumble of the presidential race. "She's big enough to handle her own political fights," Clinton says. "When I feel people talking about someone I am not familiar with, I want to step in, and I do have to hold my tongue because it's . . . you know, again I'm trying to do what's helpful."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/Story?id=3105288...

[madison]

43. Bill did not say Hilary was right and Obama was wrong.

Bill did not say Hilary was right and Obama was wrong.

H said that all the Democratic candidates were basically on the same page on this issue.

Is that allowed?

Is it okay for Bill to say that?