BlackPerspective.net

In response to Bush’s “Appeasement” statement yesterday, and John McSame’s pilling on; Obama has done exactly what I’ve been saying he should do. Now I may believe that he might actually go after the republicans instead of soft peddling like he’s done with Clinton.

Today in his response he called Bush and McCain “disingenuous”, “hypocritical”, “naive”, “irresponsible”, “dishonest”; and said that McCain hasn’t offered “one substantial” foreign policy difference between himself and Bush.

Some other Texans criticized an American elected official (Bush) on foreign soil and were scorched for it by the right; and they were just some pop singers named the Dixie Chicks at a concert. I’m waiting to hear the right come out slamming Bush for going on foriegn soil to slam Senator Obama and President Carter (the white house said this is who it was aimed at).

Huffington Post Reports:

Lumping McCain together with President Bush, Obama declared: “If they want a debate about protecting the United States of America, that’s a debate I’m ready to win because George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for.” He blamed Bush for policies that enhance the strength of terrorist groups such as Hamas and “the fact that al-Qaida’s leadership is stronger than ever because we took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan,” among other failings.

Watch this Hardball coverage that includes some video of one of Barack’s two speeches where he says Bush and McCain have a lot to answer for on foreign policy:

Huffington Posst Continuted Obama continued the debate on Friday at a town-hall meeting in a livestock barn. He said he had planned to focus on rural issues during his swing through South Dakota, but felt compelled to answer the remarks from Bush and McCain.

Speaking of McCain and Bush together, he added: “They aren’t telling you the truth. They are trying to fool you and scare you because they can’t win a foreign policy debate on the merits. But it’s not going to work. Not this time, not this year.”

Obama also challenged them to a debate on foreign policy at “anytime”, saying it was a debate he was “happy to have”.

Obama further noted according to Huffington Post that Meeting with reporters, he argued that tough-minded diplomacy and engagement with rivals have long coexisted, citing the foreign policies of former Presidents Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan.

He also noted that Nixon opened talks with China with the knowledge that Chinese leader Mao Zedong “had exterminated millions of people.”

Finally, he pointed out that McCain had actually done what he was falsely accusing Obama; refering to an interview that McCain did in 2006 in Switzerland where McCain said that “Hamas is the government” so that we have to “deal with them”.

On CNN’s “American Morning” Friday, Rubin — a former assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration and a supporter of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign — said McCain’s criticism of Obama’s position was hypocritical.

“And then two years later, he’s taking a very, very different position … smearing people for suggesting that one ought to talk to Hamas when it was he himself who was prepared to talk to Hamas two years ago.”, according to CNNpolitics.com

When asked by Michael Calderone about Wednesday nights “debate”, Stephanopoulos said:

“We asked tough but appropriate questions,” Stephanopoulos told me by phone this afternoon.

When I asked whether questions about flag pins or Bosnia are actually relevant to voters, he replied: “Absolutely.”

“The vote for the president,” Stephanopoulos said, “is one of the most personal” decisions that someone makes.

“When people make that choice, they take into account how candidates stand on the issues,” he said, but also are concerned with “experience, character [and] credibility.”

Barack Obama and many media critics have been making the following argument for the last couple of days about the ABC’s political theater show that was posed as a presidential debate; which was moderated by Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos:

“What he’s going to do in this campaign is focus on what’s important to the American people, on the jobs and the education. That’s what the American people care about. They want to move into the future. They don’t want to be diverted by side issues, and they’re not going to let the Republican attack machine divert them”

But those aren’t Barack Obama’s words, nor the words of anyone in his campaign. They’re the words of George Stephanopoulos himself; as communications director for Bill Clinton in 1992.

So wait a minute; when bringing up this type of stuff doesn’t benefits the Clintons Stephanopoulos says we shouldn’t be diverted with republican side issues, and when it does benefit the Clintons he says its important and fair game to bring up republican side issues.

It can no longer even the least bit be denied that Wednesday night was a political hit job by an insider Clinton hit man; not to mention intentional salacious yellow journalism for ratings.

Hear Him In His Own Voice and Picture at Huffington Post

Say Goodbye To George Stepphanopoulos’ journalistic credibility - In Memoriam

An Open Letter:

We the undersigned deplore the conduct of ABC’s George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson at the Democratic Presidential debate on April 16. The debate was a revolting descent into tabloid journalism and a gross disservice to Americans concerned about the great issues facing the nation and the world. This is not the first Democratic or Republican presidential debate to emphasize gotcha questions over real discussion. However, it is, so far, the worst.

For 53 minutes, we heard no question about public policy from either moderator. ABC seemed less interested in provoking serious discussion than in trying to generate cheap shot sound-bites for later rebroadcast. The questions asked by Mr. Stephanopoulos and Mr. Gibson were a disgrace, and the subsequent attempts to justify them by claiming that they reflect citizens’ interest are an insult to the intelligence of those citizens and ABC’s viewers. Many thousands of those viewers have already written to ABC to express their outrage.

Rest of the letter and media signees: mediamatters.org/altercation/200804180003#2

She makes this accusation with no offering of evidence mind you; not even anecdotal. At best this is Hillary making double talk excuses to her donors in private to justify why they should give her losing campaign more money, at worst this is a political hit job against a large swath of American voters that she needs in order to have the slightest chance to win in the general election.

This while noting that their beef with her is driven by policy difference over foreign policy, i.e. the Iraq war. And, with the fact that MoveOn.org was created to defend Bill Clinton against impeachment, originally know as Censure and Move On; as in, instead of impeaching, just censure him and move on.

Hear Audio On Dan Abram’s Show