Ding! Round one goes to the dove with the dodgy name - Obama Vs. McCain

So, round one of the 2008 foreign policy debate goes to ... Barack Obama? Improbable as it seems, in the first direct rhetorical showdown of the general election campaign - over a question, foreign policy "toughness", that's been a perceived Democratic weakness since Vietnam - it was the guy with the thin foreign policy résumé, suspected by some of his compatriots of being a Muslim, who out-punched the war hero with the extensive résumé. And shall I add that the one with the thin résumé and the strange name has a dodgy position on the question at hand, and yet still won?

Here's how it unfolded. Last Thursday, speaking before the Knesset in Jerusalem, George Bush compared "some" Democrats to those who thought in 1939 that war might have been avoided if we'd just been able to sit down with Hitler and talk some sense into him. This was, despite some White House demurrals, a clear shot at Obama, who has repeatedly announced his intention to negotiate personally as president, and "without preconditions", with the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hugo Chávez.

John McCain, that same Thursday morning, was giving a speech in part about the need to move beyond partisan bickering of the last decade. Within an hour or two, following Bush's lead, McCain attacked Obama: "What does he want to talk about with Ahmadinejad, who said Israel is a stinking corpse?" The Obama campaign emailed reporters accusing Bush of launching "a false political attack".

Now here's the important part. In the past two presidential campaigns, that's where this would have ended. The Democrat "responded" for the record, but somewhat perfunctorily, while the Republicans got their point across: the Democrats are appeasers, the Democratic nominee wants to talk to terrorists and he won't keep country safe.

McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds called Obama’s reaction “hysterical.” “The guy has really ‘stepped in it’ this time,” Bounds chortled. “Here we have the President making a perfectly reasonable remark to the Jewish people who were nearly exterminated by a war brought on by a policy of appeasement and Obama goes ballistic. Such passion in defense of appeasement is a stunning revelation of what an Obama Administration portends for this country.”

So, round one of the 2008 foreign policy debate goes to ... Barack Obama?

This is off-topic, but concerns Obama.

Why don't we seize the opportunity provided by the MSM's deification of Obama to permanently de-claw the IRS and get God back into the public school classrooms?

This post (<-click), while addressing taxes, helps to explain why government "leaders" like Obama are actually in contempt of the Constitution that they have sworn to defend, foolishly following in the footsteps of FDR's dirty federal spending politics.

In fact, the article referenced below shows that Obama is the #1 federal spending proposer in the Senate for '08; Clinton is #2.

Obama, a big-shot federal spender

And this post (<-click) exposes how corrupt justices then began using FDR's politically correct license to ignore the 10th A. to unlawfully stifle traditional family values, including the USSC's scandalous legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade. Note that the post first references two non-abortion cases in order to show Roe v. Wade in a different, troubling perspective.

In fact, consider that the states have the constitutional power (10th A.) to authorize public schools to lead non-mandatory (14th A.) classroom discussions on the pros and cons of evolution, creationism and ID, as examples, regardless that atheists, separatists, pagan-minded judges and the MSM are misleading the people to think that doing such things in public schools is unconstitutional.

The people need to reconnect with the Founder's division of federal and state government powers. The people then need to wise up to the major problems that, since the days of FDR's dirty politics, the USSC has not only wrongly been ignoring the 10th A. protected power of the states to address religious issues, but also that Congress has not been operating within the restraints of the federal Constitution, particularly where constitutionally unauthorized federal spending is concerned.

The bottom line is that the people need to get in the faces of judges, demanding that judges uphold their oaths to defend the 10th A. protected powers of the states to address religious issues - or get off the bench. The people also need to send big-shot, Constitution-ignoring federal spenders like Obama home as opposed to trying to send people like him to the Oval Office. The people need to get in the faces of members of Congress, demanding a stop to constitutionally unauthorized federal spending while appropriately lowering federal taxes - or get out of DC.

Lincoln put it this way.

"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln, Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas, 1858.

Yes, the socialist Tomasky cites the socialist Halperin as the authority on swallowing Obama campaign talking points, and POW! BAM! POP! it’s all over, decided for Obambi by TKO.

This does indicate why the hysterical reaction from Obama, Reid, Pelosi, et al..... they’re all convinced that if they fight back loud and hard anytime the slightest hint of Democrat Quisling foreign policy is aired, they will be avoiding a “Swift Boating” fate for Obambi.

The Rs will have to fight loud and hard, too, to try to keep the MSM from swallowing the Obama talking points quite as eagerly as this tool from al-Guardian wants us to......

Good find! I was looking everywhere for a McCain response to the Obama foreign policy. It looks as though the press had to ask the question about McCain's “hypocracy” in comments he made two years ago before they could get any reaction about Obama’s comments. I don't see McCain doing any direct attacks against Obama. He seems to be letting surrogates do the dirty work, while he plays Rope A Dope.

The press, on the other hand, is doing everything it can to make it appear as a war on words between McCain and Obama. If this is war, I hate to see what it will be when McCain really takes Obama to task.

Actually, I remember that McCain said something about this the very day of Bush’s Knesset speech.

It was brief but pointed...something to the effect of Obama needs to explain why he wants to meet with Iran’s leader without preconditions. He said it the very day Obama blasted Bush’s remarks.

Then later, maybe the next day or two, the Obama campaign distorted something McCain said about Hamas awhile back. Then McCain and Obama went at it again.

Sorry, I don’t have the first remark link, but I saw it that day on FNC.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.