Don't you people realize that Obama now owns the 'fight the terrorists that attacked us' position?

[Dawgs]

The media is helping one of our most electable candidates. They are giving this position to him, and some of us are trying to bring him down because of it.

This is why he would destroy Giuliani in the general. Giuliani's one position is that he is tough on terrorism. Obama owning the 'I will fight those that attacked us' keeps Giuliani from being able to use it. He either has to agree with Obama, or he has to agree with Bush. Either way he loses. And, this is not just limited to Giuliani. Any Republican candidate will need the 'we fight the terrorists better' position to knock down the Democratic candidate. They lose if they are going against Obama.

I admit that there are a few positions Obama takes that I don't agree with (fixing the environment, gay marriage), but doesn't everyone have a problem with the candidate they support? I know you Kucinich supporters might disagree with that last sentence, but you have to admit that Kucinich's electability is a huge problem for him.

To the Hillary supporters, go ahead and disagree, but any of you that watched the debate the other night saw Obama get cheered for this position and Hillary get booed for disagreeing. I'm not saying she is necessarily wrong, but we all saw how the American public reacts to Obama's position. He wins with it because America likes to hear the tough talk, and now he owns it.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

1. This is all based on Obama being cheered by Democrats in his hometown?

==To the Hillary supporters, go ahead and disagree, but any of you that watched the debate the other night saw Obama get cheered for this position and Hillary get booed for disagreeing. I'm not saying she is necessarily wrong, but we all saw how the American public reacts to Obama's position. He wins with it because America likes to hear the tough talk, and now he owns it.==

So why is HRC still heavily favored over BO on Iraq, terrorism/security by voters?

[Dawgs]

4. I disagree with your first point.

Hillary was cheered loudly when she made other points that night, but was booed on the one. Don't act like every one there was a Obama supporter, because that clearly wasn't the case.

Your second point is irrelevant. You clearly ignored the point I was trying to make, and it appears you did to bring down Obama.

BTW, when do you plan to change your avatar to a Hillary Clinton image? Every one of your posts is about attacking Obama and supporting Clinton. I have never seen one post by you that supports John Edwards.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. How Do They Feel Knowing That Mrs. Clinton Is For, AND Against, Nuking Terr-ists?

Her Joe-Lieberman-like lead may soon be an amusing footnote.

[Ethelk2044]

13. in the general not from state to state. You do not win Primary by General polls

[earthlover]

14. Hillary is from a Chicago suburb.....remember? Oh, maybe you forgot

[Nimrod2005]

2. Well said, and HE IS RIGHT ON THE ISSUE!!!

Plain and simple.

[Nimrod2005]

3. Well said, and HE IS RIGHT ON THE ISSUE!!!

Plain and simple.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Mrs. Clinton Has Painted Herself Into A Bad Corner

First, she's the candidate that's against going after bin Laden aggresively. Next, she's the candidate who might nuke terrorists - except, per her usual M.O. (embrace every position at the same time), we found out today that she's also against nuking terrorists.

She's picked stupid issues to go after Obama with.

[Middle finga]

12. That's what happens when you try to run an election without principles

she's all about triangulation just saying whatever to win her political points. If you're not running on a platform that you truly believe in then why are you in the race, just obtain power? Get fuck out here.

[earthlover]

15. Hillary was against nukes on the table before she was for nukes on the table....

HA!

[Middle finga]

7. I got to admit for a minute I thought Obama was about to get

"Deaned" by the media but so far so good he seemed to have turned the argument to his favor. I've heard he has a sharp and smart campaign staff so hopefully these primaries will not be a cake walk for Hillary no matter what the MSM say.

[earthlover]

17. I suspect that Obama's researchers knew Hillary's previous statement about nukes on the table....

before he sucked her in with his comment that he would take nukes off the table.

In her overconfidence, she took the bait.

Either way, though, Obama wins. If she had agreed with Obama, that would have been one more thing she was forced to agree with Obama's lead on.

Obama's team must have been pleasantly surprised when Hillary used the occassion for attacking Obama because she would not take nukes off the table.

Maybe he ain't that naive.

In the meanwhile, Hillary has just created another flip-flop the Reps would use against her if she is the nominee.

She sure is making some bone-headed mistakes out there. Is she ready for the big leagues yet?

[hedgehog]

21. Isn't it possible that he just said what he believes without any

calculation about what Hillary or anybody else would say?

Sometimes the easiest way to win people over is to be honest and be yourself.

[earthlover]

26. Yes it is possible.

I am not saying more than I wouldn't be surprised. But a campaign does engage in researching the statements of political foes. That is a fact of life. And, if Obama knew Hillary said this a year ago, he could easily have put her in the position he did. It was a no-lose thing. If she agreed, he took the lead. If she attacked him, her old statment would come back to bite her in the butt.

Then again serendipity is a beautiful thing at times.

[Major Hogwash]

8. Smooth as silk, Dawgs.

This was Kerry's position in 2004, and it should be the Democrat's position in 2008 - to fight terrorism.

How can we support any country that gives safe haven to terrorists?
We can't.
We can't afford to give millions of dollars of aid to them and then let them look the other way when it comes to harboring terrorists.

[Colobo]

9. Obama is very skilled- he's won the Foreign Policy battle.

[Ethelk2044]

10. Bush Stance today is is the same Stance Obama took. He was right!

What took Bush so long to figure it out? I guess he realized Obama was right.

[meowomon]

11. I Agree

Obama hit it right on the nose. Bin Laden is more dangerous to us now than he has ever been and the Pakistani government is complicit by harboring him and the Taliban. If they were truly our ally, they would move hell and earth to root bin Laden out and turn him over to the US to be tried in open court for the murder of thousands.

[earthlover]

25. Some Hillary supporters have tried to diss Obama in the tired "not ready" meme....

....but Obama came out of this little chess game in good shape.

First of all, Obama paints himself as the one who will go after Been Forgotten without hesitation. Something Hillary was forced to agree with the same day even while her supporters were acting as if going after Been Forgotten was embarrassing.

Secondly, Obama takes a position on talking with our enemies that Hillary hedged on. While Hillary tried to paint this as naive, it is a position that most Americans support....we want our leaders to negotiate and we view it as a source of strength rather than a sign of weakness.

Most significantly, Hillary really commits a severe gaffe by saying nukes are on the table (a position in itself that many Democrats are not wild about) when just a year ago she said they would be off the table. This shows Obama to be strong, yet restrained...while Hillary winds up looking desperate and flip-floppy about nukes of all things. Hardly what the Clinton camp would have wanted to happen.

Hillary gambled and lost by calling Obama naive and irresponsible. It only opened up the way for Obama to attack her on her naive and irresponsible duping about Iraq. And set herself up for when the flip flop about her on again-off again relationships with nuclear tables hit the fan.

I:t is amazing how big-time Hillary muffed up this week.

[sandnsea]

16. Fixing the environment??

What's the point of any of the rest of it if we don't fix the environment? Unless you're talking about coal mines, which is a difficult decision to make.

[Dawgs]

24. I'm not saying he won't, I just don't agree with his approach.

[venable]

18. I swear if he sneezed, people here would say he uttered a deep truth

at a certain point, it has got to be the actual things he says and not that it's him saying them. Let's not get into idolatry. We can't afford it as a party.

I think he is in mildly serious water with his foreign policy stuff, though I personally think that the Pakistan and nuke stuff is minor misspeaking, and I don't begrudge him this...., OTOH, he is not acting, to my mind, like the visionary some here propose.

His obfuscation and vaguenss are very old school, and he muddies the water by saying that those that voted for the IWR "cheered war on, and said we'd be greeted as liberators', etc. This is ugly, old school disinformation that is not worthy of a 'visionary'.

His answer to KO about why he delayed his vote on funding was borderline surreal, and even KO says, upon repeated viewing, he has no idea what BO said.

He is just a young, smart, inexperienced guy who has yet, in my mind, to do or say anything of substance.

I don't think he has made the serious mistakes others attribute to him, but he aint no Gandhi, Mandela, RFK, Biko, Havel, etc. He is a young, smart, ambitious, principled, inexperienced Senator who is lucky to have been elected two years ago.

I am afraid that a strong Republican campaign would wipe the floor with him right now. In a year, he'll probably be much better. but good enough to win? Don't know, and kind of doubt it.

I want him to be the nominee in about 16-20 years. I think he is, oddly, even younger than his minimal experience. Not now.

[NYCGirl]

20. Read this and tell me it's "minor misspeaking" —

http://www.cfr.org/publication/13974/obamas_speech_at_woodrow_wilson_center.html

[venable]

29. i'm referring to the hoopla over his 'troops on the ground in pakistan'

and his 'scratch that' when he was talking about the use of nukes.


This has caused a great uproar amongst the HRC crowd, and I don't think it is anything more than a well-meaning guy being a tad over his head, and probably more tired than he's ever been.

my guess is if as president he was given the option to send troops against Pakistani people or soldiers he wouldn't do it as blithely as those particular words suggest.

(by the way, he is wrong to call it the Northwest territories of Pakistan. It is Tribal Territories and it is in the border area between Pakistand (NW) and Afghanistan. It is wild country - I've been there - and it is not part of any nation. It's an odd thing - it's not a sovereign nation, nor is it part of one, it's simply the Tribal Territories. Guns and drugs are freely sold there. Anyway, I digress)


I hadn't read his CFR speech, thanks for sending it.

[Dawgs]

23. In your opinion, but thanks.

[SaveElmer]

19. Except he doesn't...

Todays Gallup...

On who would do a better job handling the following issues:

International Terrorism

Hillary 60
Obama 33

Relations with Nations That are Unfriendly to the US

Hillary 60
Obama 35

War in Iraq

Hillary 56
Obama 36

Role as Commander in Chief

Hillary 56
Obama 36

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=28345

[Dawgs]

22. Thanks for proving my point.

[BeyondGeography]

27. It was a very smart move

Pro-IWR Democrats favored the wrong war. They criticize Obama for being hawkish on Pakistan and he clubs them over the head with own fatally flawed records. We saw exactly that at the debate on Tuesday.

Republicans who disagree are saying they want to stay in Iraq instead of fighting Al Qaeda. Another losing line of argument.

He's on very solid ground.

[MODemocrat]

28. Democrats are not winners because of the infighting

Quite frankly, I'm just about worn out with all this picky picky stuff. There are many problems we
face in this contry besides the war Bush is so proud of; and the so-called fight against terrorism. It seems that the candidates need to at least let the rest of us citizens who are not war-mongers, believe that there are economic issues that are of importance to them.

Tough talk kept Bush's ratings soaring for a very long time; yet we haven't seen Bin Ladin's head on a platter.

Hillary can't say or do anything right, according to some, but I believe in her; and my vote will
count.

:crazy: :crazy: O8) O8)

[Hobbs]

30. He doesn't own it

Kerry said it back in 2004 and many Dems in Congress have been saying it for over a year. Both Edwards and Hillary have said the same before.

Quite frankly, I'm tired of a whole nation hijacked by one guy who may very well be dead. We are all much more likely to die of tainted food, bad medical care, air and water pollution, driving over a bridge and many more issues that have been ignored.

I am tired of having 45% of my taxes going into the war machine that has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people over the pass few years.

I am tired of having our world ruined by Moby Dick's mad Ahab seeking revenge. I don't want any candidate to assume that madness.

I am tired of having my own children hear the madness, the dying and killing whenever they turn on the TV.