Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Bummer... Obama Advisors Bailing On His Open Invite To Ahmadinejad

Bummer-- Today, Obama's foreign policy expert admitted-
"You Don't Talk With Ahmadinejad"

Governor Bill Richardson echoed the Bush Administration and Senator John McCain today in confessing that talking with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be a horrible idea.
Barack Obama says he would meet with any vicious, anti-American regime leader during his first year in office including Iranian President Ahmadinejad without preconditions.

HotAir posted the video:


Governor Richardson then explains that you would talk with some other "moderate" Jew-hating regime official to hold talks with...
Like maybe Ayatollah Khamenei?
Some liberals believe he's not so bad and even that he's not a flagrant anti-Semite.
These people are dangerous.

** Related... Joe Klein at TIME Magazine still has not corrected his post where he claims that Obama never said he would negotiate--specifically, by name--with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
He did.
Here's the video.

Someone ought to tell Klein to correct his inaccurate post.

More... The statement by Richardson today follows the confession yesterday by Obama supporter Tom Daschle who said that the meetings would not be unconditional:

Asked about Obama's original statement Tuesday morning on CNN, former Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., a top Obama adviser and supporter, said top-level meetings would not be immediate -- and would not happen without preliminary extensive diplomatic work.

"I would not say that we would meet unconditionally," said Daschle. "Of course, there are conditions that we [would] involve in preparation in getting ready for the diplomacy. ... 'Without precondition' simply means we wouldn't put obstacles in the way of discussing the differences between us. That's really what they're saying, what Barack is saying."
And, then there is this stumble-mumble by Obama advisor Susan Rice:

Susan Rice, a top Obama foreign policy adviser, said Monday that Obama's meetings with Iranian leaders might not include Ahmadinejad.

"He said he'd meet with the appropriate Iranian leaders. He hasn't named who that leader will be," Rice said on CNN. "It would be the appropriate Iranian leadership at the appropriate time -- not necessarily Ahmadinejad."

14 comments:

  1. You get the impression Obama is making this up as he goes along. I pray McCain pulls this out! God bless! Padre Steve

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous1:15 PM

    Next time, Ahmadinejad should get it in writing!

    ReplyDelete
  3. ++

    woah, i'm surprised this hasn't been scrubbed yet..

    Would You Meet with Iran/Syria/North Korea?

    need to correct the title:

    the question, aided by a visual, was.. "would you meet with the LEADERS, etc"..

    ==

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous2:37 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous2:39 PM

    That's no stumble-mumble, it shows that Obama (unlike McCain) is responsible not careless in the language he uses and that (unlike McCain) he's aware that Ahmadinejad is not the one with the power in Iran.

    Obama on foreign policy: right again.

    ReplyDelete
  6. ++

    lol..

    i see some people still believe DENIAL is a river on Egypt..

    ==

    ReplyDelete
  7. ==

    dang typo's..

    re: bg @ 3:00 PM..

    'in' not on of course..

    ==

    ReplyDelete
  8. I suspect if obama said so, cindy would see a brick wall as a freeway, and accelerate accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous4:57 PM

    Although I am an atheist, I must believe that God won't let John McCain lose this election.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Otter,

    There is no point in wasting your time relying to Cindy. She hears nothing and sees nothing unless her Obamamessiah tells her to. She says nothing except to parrot the Obamaniac line.

    Cindy is a pure Obamaniac troll and Obamaniac trolls remind me of the members of the "People's Temple". When her Obamaessiah offers her the chalice of grape Kool-Aid she will drink deeply from it and we won't have to put up with her anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous10:05 PM

    nahanni, I'm no troll, I'm an evangelical conservative Republican who's well-read (only relatively though, still on front end of learning curve) about Islam and am voting for Obama because I went beyond the red flags on Obama and read everything I could find about and by him -- the guy knows his stuff. I stated a fact: "Ahmadinejad is not the one with the power in Iran," and if you think I'm parroting something I've heard elsewher, you're seriously mistaken--Iran is a theological republic, that means the one with the power is the Ayatollah, duh.

    ReplyDelete
  12. ++

    Cindy @ 10:05 PM..

    here you go Cindy, a few things i'm pretty sure you haven't read about Obama..

    Obama & Me

    Barack Obama's closet

    Obama’s Communist Mentor

    btw.. Obama's Father & Mother were also Communists..

    Obama's Political Origins

    More Proof of Obama's Socialism. In 1996 he ran as member of New Party

    and much much more..

    believe it or not, there's still tons more, but i digress..

    ==

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous12:36 PM

    This delusional nitwit thinks that there's something resembling A MODERATE MULLAH in Iran! The fact that he thinks that means that he's FAR from qualified to be in the position he's in. ALL the so-called moderate Mullahs are either in prison or they've been executed and by moderate he better mean someone who disagrees with the Islamic Republic and believes in the separation of religion and state. FIRST because it's blasphemy in Shiitism for a Mullah to be in the position of running a country, second because there isn't a single Mullah who doesn't believe what Ahmadinejad says out loud and openly. LORD help us, if Obama and this buffoon win...their ignorance and arrogance will bring about Armageddon.

    ReplyDelete
  14. ++

    let me state right off the bat that i am a JFK Democrat.. not of the "Party No More" that has been undermining US since 9/11 (if not before).. and albeit i liken Bush to Kennedy in many ways.. let me also remind everyone that this not only happened many moons ago.. but is part & parcel of President Bush's historical appeasement lesson of which he recently spoke..

    HT : The Belmont Club

    In the footsteps of John Kennedy

    excerpt:

    [Kennedy’s one presidential meeting with Nikita Khrushchev, the Soviet premier, suggests that there are legitimate reasons to fear negotiating with one’s adversaries. Although Kennedy was keenly aware of some of the risks of such meetings — his Harvard thesis was titled “Appeasement at Munich” — he embarked on a summit meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna in June 1961, a move that would be recorded as one of the more self-destructive American actions of the cold war, and one that contributed to the most dangerous crisis of the nuclear age.

    The meeting was a disaster. Kennedy was prepared to be conciliatory. Khruschev was prepared to take the ball Kennedy wanted to hand him and run with it to the goal line.]

    ==

    ReplyDelete