Stop Lying About My Record

Good for Obama for pushing back.

How McCain can think that the instant nuclear obliteration the USSR could have rained on the USA is not a much greater threat than Iran can dream of being is a sign of the fear mongering the Bush GOP has fallen prey to. Without an all powerful boogie man, their foreign policy is shown for the abject failure it is.

Yes, Iran has political interests in conflict with those of the USA but they have little to no capability to project power beyond the Persian Gulf. To say anything else is just lying to the American people.

"Here's the truth: the Soviet Union had thousands of nuclear weapons, and Iran doesn't have a single one. But when the world was on the brink of nuclear holocaust, Kennedy talked to Khrushchev and he got those missiles out of Cuba. Why shouldn't we have the same courage and the confidence to talk to our enemies? That's what strong countries do, that's what strong presidents do, that's what I'll do when I'm president of the United States of America."
Obama also said: "What are George Bush and John McCain afraid of"?

I look forward to McCain's response to that from Senator Obama today.
No one should take Bolton seriously, and almost no one does.

No one should take Bolton seriously, and almost no one does.

I'm almost starting to think that he doesn't even take himself seriously. The comment about preferring negotiation 99% of the time speak either to a total willingness to make a joke of your own reputation or a lack of self-awareness bordering on psychosis.

Another pack of lies from another pack of liars. What did you expect from this crowd – the truth? They've lied their way into the White House so often it's all they know. The only way they'll quit is if they're thrashed at the polls, and that presupposes (unfortunately) that the media will broadly and repeatedly call b*llsh*t when the lies are told.

Joe, what you've done here is a start but unless your colleagues take this responsibility (to correct lies forcefully and unequivocally, whoever's telling them) far more seriously we'll get X more years of godawful government crammed down our throats.

It's all about denying a competitor (and potential adversary) options. Any time the US talks with a foreign power it reduces the vacuum of information within the public sphere. The more entangled a country is with the US, on any level, the more difficult it is for that country to disengage and attack solely on a military level.

Diplomacy may be nothing but a lot of noise, but at least when the US is engaged we can be certainly that some of it is our noise. Why give an enemy the advantage of our silence?

Good post, Joe.

Your France joke is pretty on target. Bolton comes from the Michael Ledeen wing of the GOP that's been calling the shots on foreign policy in the Bush Jr. era. Ledeen once wondered if we'd need to attack France and Germany, as their opposition to the Iraq invasion was prima facie evidence of their being in cahoots with terrorists.

To call them insane is an insult to people with mental health problems. These people choose to act crazy. (Scary thought: if Iraq had, by some miracle, gone well for a year, the world could now be in worse shape, because we'd now be occupying Damascus and in a ground invasion of Iran, in addition to the ongoing occupation of the ungrateful volcano in Iraq).

As to Obama's response, he should stress what Chris Matthews did in that interview with that Republican talk-show host last week-- appeasement is giving things away. Are Bush and McCain so scared of saying whatever they can to get into the good graces of whoever's across the table that they can't risk talking to people?

Given McCain's flip-floppery (here's Jon Chait on McCain using the same disarming technique to convince liberals he's liberal and conservatives he's conservative) and Bush's dubious ability to peer inside men's souls, they both may be right to be scared.

(Put it in the dead tree version, please!)

Obama hits back quickly, but often seems to me to miss obvious responses, to wit: "John McCain must not realize who the Iranian leadershp is." Og course, since 98% of our fellow countrymen don't either, I suppose there's no point in that.

I had thought I could stop gritting my teeth after the primary season; foolish me. On the other hand, this sort of drivel ought to put the brakes on for those disappointed Democrats who think they're going to vote for McCain in the GE.

Obama framing it as "What is McCain afraid of?" is pretty smart politics.

"On one side are those who believe that negotiations should be used to resolve international disputes 99% of the time. That is where I am...."

You mean aside from your contempt for the UN, Mr. Bolton?

Honestly, after January 2009, can we please please please stop listening to kooks? Can we acknowledge at that point that these people aren't anywhere near the mainstream, and therefore we don't have to give them columns in major newspapers?

Thanks for checking that, Joe.

I'm actually surprised that Obama hasn't pushed back harder about the misreprentation of his words, but I guess he's too busy reiterating his refusal to negotiate with Hamas and Hezbolah to worry about who the correct head of state in Iran might be.

I'm also glad that he's willing to point out that a refusal to engage in dialog is a sign of fear - not strength.

The advantage Obama has is that his record of public service is so incredibly short, he simply doesn't have the verbal record most candidates have. The majority of Obama statements in the public domain have been made during the campaign, which allows him to better control the message. He's also very good at not holding press conferences, which further limits the opportunity for mistakes.

All of this helps explain why the right is frothing at the mouth over pretty much nothing. All of those backroom researchers who normally turn up awkward statements from the past are completely unemployed and their talk show bosses are grasping at straws.

This points to a new method of securing the White House: find a candidate with as little national experience as possible (and thus with limited previous public exposure) and then run a tightly controlled Coca-cola style marketing campaign. It's a perfect strategy for finding the most electable candidate (although perhaps slightly flawed in finding the best qualified person to govern the country).

Ah, the maverick McCain--absurdly deranged in his own positions; an utter liar in his representations of others.

Tomorrow, Joe Klein will assert that Obama's angry, bitter, militant wife, Michelle Hussein Obama, did not say in February 2008: "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country."

Then why didn't Obama dispute it when McCain asked why he was willing to meet with Ahmadinejad?

Obama's angry, bitter, militant wife

Hmmm, its a good thing that a total stranger with a hostile disposition knows what lies deep in her heart better than she does. It's so much easier than having to take people at their word....

Another good post Joe. Dead-tree edition would also be a good place for this sort of post...since almost no one else is writing this sort of fact checking.

Wow. Now, Obama "thinks" that American citizens need the permission of foreign countries (i.e., leftist countries who have endorsed Obama) to "drive our SUVs", "eat as much as we want" and "keep our homes on 72 degrees". The exact, in context, quote from the Democrat/Superdelegate party nominee: "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK." http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h-wpxs1Re-8vx2Zk5xnYygW1W67w.

From your link, texte:

"We're sorry.
The article you've requested is not available."

Please try again.

Also, John Bolton knows how to engage in diplomacy like I know how to drive a nuclear submarine.

Which is to say, not at all. Why do people continue to allow him to speak in public? (And don't say it's the mustache.)

Do you pay your research staff?

A simple yahoo search of 'obama - Ahmadinejad' comes up with the following:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2007/09/24/politics/horserace/entry3291763.shtml

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/obama-defends-c.html

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/09/24/obama-stands-ground-on-meeting-with-ahmadinejad/ - This one has video

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0907/Obama_on_Ahmadinejad_Meeting_yes_Columbia_no.html

So in the first 20 results we have CBS, ABC, CNN, Politico. Gee, I wonder why McCain insists on saying it....

Thanks Joe, interesting take.

Strike up the band, and a-one, and a-two...

"Republicans do what Republicans do,
bobbies on bicycles, two by two,
Flash burn the Dems and don't worry what's true,
don't forget the wives and the little kids too."

It's nice that the GOP remains so refreshingly predictable, isn't it? The Slime Monkeys of Rove are at it again, and isn't America better for it.

Barring voter machine fraud, Obama will wipe the floor with the GOP this year, or there is no future for America worth living through.

Joe you are full of bull-crap. Your statement

I promised to check into whether Obama had ever said that he would negotiate--specifically, by name--with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Indeed, according to the crack Time Magazine research department and the Obama campaign, he never has.

YOU lied Joe, and here is my PROOF you did, and distorted the facts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1dSPrb5w_k

and if THAT isn't enough, here is another impartial news article.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/jul/25/digitalmedia.broadcasting

You owe us all an apology. Obama NEEDS to own up to HIS statements, and show integrity. Obama is flip-flopping on this issue, and then trying to distort McCain's record to deflect the controversy.

No Intergrity, No Judgment, and NO CHARACTER, this is what Obama is all about.

STOP LYING OBAMA, STOP LYING TO AMERICA

Rev Wright / Obama '08, WRONG for AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kathy, good points. I think he should talk about McCain not knowing who the leadership of Iran is, because a. it pushes the narrative that he is a confused man who can't tell the difference between Sunni and Shia, etc. and b. it's a great way to push back against the attack without having to say essentially "No, I'm not a Nazi appeaser," which is not a message any candidate should be advancing.

Peter, that's an interesting perspective. Although the Republican right is usually "frothing at the mouth over pretty much nothing."

And on the topic of texte's quote from Obama on SUVs - I don't know if Obama said it, but I agree with the quote anyway - after reading an excerpt of Jim Webb's book where he basically says that global warming is not an important issue, I think he should be completely disqualified as a VP candidate. (and I know there are other reasons to disqualify him, but I firmly believe that this is reason enough) We need to grasp that global warming is a kitchen table issue.

> disappointed Democrats who think they're going to vote for McCain in the GE

Let's think pragmatically, here, people: whether you love Obama or Clinton, it doesn't matter. If McCain wins, we're doomed. Not your candidate; not your party - this country!

You're not teaching either Clinton or Obama a "lesson" by voting for McCain: you're committing this country to a death sentence.

Which is most important: candidate, party or country? Vote appropriately.

"You're not teaching either Clinton or Obama a "lesson" by voting for McCain: you're committing this country to a death sentence."

Your also not teaching anyone anything if you continued to vote against your own interest. Sex should matter and skin color and faith should not matter. If any of these things matters most to you as a voter in this country you deserve what you lose.

Hey, lookie-here, folks. Rusty's come out of his bomb shelter. Think baby-steps, Rusty.

While you're here, Rusty, would you care to hold your candidate to the same standards? What about McCain's lies? What about his ties to the "Keating 5"? What about the instances where he's said, "I don't abuse my position to help my friends," except, surprise!, he does. What about his flip-flops?

Why do you never get righteously indignant about the sins of your party, Rusty?

And I'm still waiting for this list of sites where someone not Republican said they were going to give away this country.

Gy, I'd like better candidates, but them's the breaks. Do either Clinton or Obama match my ideals? Nah, not really. But I'll vote for either one based on the simple fact that they're not McCain, and, therefore, give this country a chance to recover from the profound disappointment that has been Bush/Cheney.

Rusty, when you hire a hooker, do you ask her to be really bad and liberal. Perhaps getting her to raise your taxes while you're tied up to the bed, or talking dirty to you about how carbon emissions need to be reduced. Thanks in advance.

Feeble attempts to associate McCain to the Keating 5, which he was totally exonerated by the investingating committee of the Congress is all you have Nice Guy?

I have no fear that Obama will lose this election on his inability to say what he means. His lack of integrity and character is now becoming well known.

Obama will change his "views" to suit the situation that sets him on the soup dujour of the day in politics.

All that Obama has is "Hope and Change" and a little of "Yes We Can" slogans that mean absolutely nothing. Nothing gets you nothing.

I am confident that the moderate and conservative voters will look at the real differences between McCain and Obama and then judge for themselves who to vote for in November. And the winner is.....McCain.

Rusty,

Go join the White Liberation Army.

I hear they are taking applications for mess cooks.

You don't even have to be good...

Rustydog and dorshe1:

Klein is being disingenuous and mealy mouthed about this topic when he doesn't have to be. Let's assume that Obama has agreed to meet with Ahmedinejad if he becomes President?

So what? What's your point?

And Rusty - it's disingenuous on your part to confuse Klein's sidestepping of the issue with a flip-flop on Obama's part. Do you have an actual flip-flop of his?

Or are you just smashing buttons randomly on the keyboard like usual?

Well, then, Rusty, who is Hagee?

AND, why is he firing so many lobbyists these days?

One thing that I havn't seen is Obama change his views on much of anything. On the other hand, there are ALL THOSE postions McCain has taken that seem to have been so ably tossed aside in order to mold him into a conservative, er, liberal, um, I mean reformer, um, er warmonger peace making pro anti environmentalist free trade no regulations anti for negotiations with Iran and Hamas while fighting a 5 year 100 year long war that will never end except that we will win or lose.

MAYBE...

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/10/history-re-written-obama-never-said-he-would-meet-personally-with-iran-without-precondition-says-advisor/

Read it all for yourself Cliff. "Random keyboarding" complete lies is a Democrat forte when the facts are pointed out.

Flip-flopping Obama makes Kerry look like the straightest shooting politician that ever attempted to run for President.

What a joke. Dukakis even looks like a shoe-in compared to Obama.

"...It seems the only way the neoconservatives are able to attack Barack Obama's foreign policy proposals is to exaggerate and misrepresent them..."

???

What IS you talking about?

His 20 YEARS sitting on his thin hands listening to Rev Wrong -- or his Carter-esque calls for dealing with terror by unilateral RETREAT?

The only Timeline libs understand IS the one on the way back to the Vineyard in Time for the latest blovations on Frothline, bashing Bush for defending freedom and freeing the slaves.

If Klein and Kos had been Edward R. Morrow's boss in 1941, we'd all be speaking German and smelling French.

= ANONYMOUSE ACCOMPLISHED =

"Random keyboarding" complete lies is a Democrat forte when the facts are pointed out.

DNC SOP aka Soviet styled propaganda, by any other Intl Answer name.

Clinton was also exonerated by the special prosecutor, but it doesn't reduce your hard-on any, does it?

How do you defend against McCain's violation of the election law he drafted and which bears his name?

Really, Rusty, you should step out of the shelter from time to time. I think the stale air affects your thinking.

Well, nowadays you could call it "American styled propaganda," too. Bush & Co. must have taken lessons from the Kremlin. And you lap-dogs just lap it all up...

Susan Rice, Obama's foreign policy advisor says "But nobody said he would initiate contacts at the presidential level; that requires due preparation and advance work."

That's it? That's your big flip-flop? Whoop-de-f**king-do.

You got anything more impressive than Allahpundit playing around with semantics?

I mean, they even posted a quote from Obama's website (the one concerning diplomacy and Iran) that confirms what he said on national television. I don't know, that indicates consistency in his message to me. All your link does is show Susan Rice waffling a little bit.

Psst -- Joe!

Bolton is batsh!! crazy. I mean, really, really nuts! And we knew this DURING all the hearings! (Did you?)

Cliff: I was merely pointing out that Mr. Klein's entire attack was that McCain has to exaggerate Obama's position in order to score political points. He asserted that Obama never said he's sit down with crazy A (which I posted three websites and video outside of the spurrious debate comment)that proved otherwise. That means that it is a legitimate argument.

If you want to debate on whether sitting down with the leader (whoever it may be) with Iran is a good idea, fine. But I think that Joe not be making bold sweeping comments like he did without actually making sure Obama didn't actually say that he did.

I'll be honest, I don't think we will get Khamenei. Either way, they are the leadership of a country that supports terrorism and represents a large threat to our security and I don't feel they should be given international legitimacy unless they bend to some basic pre-conditions. (Stop sending IEDs into Iraq, stop funding Hizbollah, and agree to work for a stable Iraq). Meeting with either of them without those conditions will merely embolden them.

I apologize then, I shouldn't have lumped you in with Rustydog.

I agree with you on Joe's post here. It seems like he's trying to sidestep the issue by arguing semantics, and I don't see the need for him to do that. And he's done so very sloppily, as all your links show.

And your ideas on the pre-conditions are reasonable. If we can get Iran to agree to that, then great. But I don't feel we have anywhere near enough leverage to get them to agree to any sort of conditional discussion. MAYBE if the UN backs us up, they'd do it.

But I see Obama's statements on this topic as an acknowledgement that we're going to have to start from Square One on diplomacy.

Time: You need to get the Doofus Letterman transcript with Webb tonight and indicate that Webb said and corrected NOTHING when Letterman stupidly claimed that 600,000 Iraqis have died since the 2003 invasion.

Among other BS from CBS tonight.

Mr. Klein, there is also a video on The Weekly Standard blog showing Sen. Obama stating his willingness to meet with Ahmadinejad.

Time's crack research staff is as proficient as Joe Klein. Here's the link to the video of Obama saying he'd meet with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/05/heres_the_video_of_obama_sayin.asp

Actually, all of the video clips of the press avail after Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia just show Obama *not* bothering to take the time to correct the presumption of the questioner. He did not name Ahmadinejad.

While this may seem like the same thing, it isn't. You could argue that Obama dodged the question by saying: "nothing's changed with respect to my belief that strong countries and strong presidents talk to their enemies and talk to their adversaries" which may be, erm, dodgy but it actually goes to the theme that Obama was avoiding naming Ahmadinejad.

BTW, this is the same sort of tactic (making a related statement rather than a direct answer or answering a slightly different question that/as was posed) that Clinton used to dodge the original YouTube/CNN question of are you "willing to meet" by saying "i will not promise to meet".

I checked all those links too, related to the same press conference. A couple articles translated his words to mean Amadinejad, but he clearly never says that name. And it might seem to be laboring the point, but the political difference between saying you'd meet with adversaries and you'd meet with the infamous Amadinejad is substantial. Signifigant enough that it's obvious why Obama's critics would subsitute "Ahmadinejad" specifcally for his actual words on different occasions of leaders, enemies and adversaries. You can argue that's what he meant, but it's dishonest to say that's what he said.

M4V Converter free download center- ALL M4V conversion tools which help you feel free to convert M4V to MP3, AVI, WMV, MPEG, FLV, 3GP, WMA. And useful Guide on How to Deal with M4V files.
m4v converter
convert m4v
Ultra Quicktime M4V converter currently is the best M4V converter which can convert Quicktime movie M4V to AVI, MPEG, MP4, MPG, WMV, ASF and Vob. As we know Quicktime movie usually has the video formats of M4V, MOV, QT, MP4, and M4V, With this M4V Converter, you can feel free to Convert them all with fast speed and high output quality.
m4v to avi
m4v to wmv
With the fast and powerful QuickTime video decoder inside, Ultra QuickTime M4V Converter supports almost all MOV, QT, MP4, M4V files, even QuickTime Player has not been installed. Integrated High-speed MPEG-2 encoder which let you convert M4V to DVD-Video files(VIDEO_TS, AUDIO_TS) and VCD/SVCD image(*.bin,*.cue), so you can burn VCD/SVCD/DVD disc easily from QuickTime files by using third-party buring tools. It is a software program for converting video formats at fast speeds and high quality. Very user-friendly interface and Quality Profiles.
m4v to mpeg
m4v to mp4

Easy Way to Cut Large Video Files into Small Clips with Video Cuttervideo cutterFLV Video Cutter3GP Video Cutter Ultra Video Cutter is a powerful video cutting tool. The main function of Ultra Video Cutter is to cut large video files into new video files, and also to join or merge multiple video clips into a large one. AVI Video CutterMP4 Video CutterDVD Video CutterDAT Video CutterVideo Editor
The program supports so many video formats including AVI, Divx, XviD, MPEG, WMV, ASF, RM, MOV, 3GP, MP4 formatsVideo MergerVideo JoinerVideo Splitter