Posted on 09/15/2008 5:01:12 PM PDT by Roscoe Karns
McCain Responds to Obama's Reported Undermining of the Commander-In-Chief During Wartime [Andy McCarthy]
The McCain Campaign has issued a statement responding to the report from Amer Taheri (see today's web briefing) that Sen. Obama secretly negotiated with the Iraqi government regarding U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. McCain spokesman Randy Scheunemann stated as follows:
At this point, it is not yet clear what official American negotiations Senator Obama tried to undermine with Iraqi leaders, but the possibility of such actions is unprecedented. It should be concerning to all that he reportedly urged that the democratically-elected Iraqi government listen to him rather than the US administration in power. If news reports are accurate, this is an egregious act of political interference by a presidential candidate seeking political advantage overseas. Senator Obama needs to reveal what he said to Iraq's Foreign Minister during their closed door meeting. The charge that he sought to delay the withdrawal of Americans from Iraq raises serious questions about Senator Obama's judgment and it demands an explanation.
“My concern is that the Bush administration—in a weakened state politically—ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it was my administration or Sen. McCain’s administration,” Obama said. “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made.”
Thanks for finding that! This agrees in major ways with what is charged the NY Post article.
Thanks for posting that info. Since when does Congress get involved in troop movements and agreements to withdraw?
I am getting to have a hatred toward Obama that will not quit. It has surpassed anything I felt against Clinton and is on a level with Kerry and Carter but about to sink even lower then those two.
So this ZERO went to Iraq and told them not to negotiate with the Bush Administration because he was going to be President? At least that is the way I read it from the quote.
I hope it does not. I would rather run against Obama/Biden than Clinton/Richardson.
Obama’s obvious defense will be that this has been out thee for three months and is only now being raised. Not a completely invalid point except that now we ha statemnt by the person on the other side of the conversation. Also, we need to check what was said AFTER his visit since this is a conversation before he went to Iraq. I may be misinformed but I believe the Iraqi Foreign Minister was referring to a conversation held face-to-face while Obama visted Iraq.
At the same time no less! LOL
You should see:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2083101/posts
and I quote:
He said he told Zebari that negotiations for a Status of Forces agreement or strategic framework agreement between the two countries should be done in the open and with Congress’s authorization and that it was important that that there be strong bipartisan support for any agreement so that it can be sustained through a future administration. He argued it would make sense to hold off on such negotiations until the next administration.
“My concern is that the Bush administration—in a weakened state politically—ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it was my administration or Sen. McCain’s administration,” Obama said. “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made.”
We have grown used to Bush and his soft touch. McCain is not Bush and does not suffer fools gladly.
Need to get verification from adminstration.
Actually McCain needs the barracuda to take this one and tell it like it is - no holds barred.
Possible they were trying to get their ducks in a row in order to respond with any sort of authority.
McCain continues to surprise me. If he keeps this kind of thing up, he’ll make a fine president.
“I imagine that someone has indeed put in a call to the Iraqi government to see if this was in fact true, before running with it.”
Exactly!
Pssssst......the reason the Obama Campaign and the left wing media want to ‘focus’ on the writer of this article:’ Amir Tahiri’ is because the left just loves to champion the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Hoshyar Zebari...who ACTUALLY SAID THIS STUFF IN AN INTERVIEW WITH THE NEW YORK POST!! LOL
Here is the media love for ZEBARI in action (flashback..posted early this morning)
See post: #249 in this thread.
WP:
“.....To do that, the Democrat needs to listen more to dedicated Iraqi leaders like Hoshyar Zebari, the foreign minister — who, it seems, didn’t hold back during their telephone conversation.
Mr. Obama laid out his current strategy for Iraq in November 2006, shortly before announcing his candidacy for president. At the time, Iraq appeared to be on the verge of a sectarian civilian war, and Mr. Obama was trying to distinguish himself in the Democratic primary race by offering a timetable for withdrawal. Nineteen months later, the situation in Iraq has changed dramatically, with violence down 75 percent from its peak and the Iraqi government and army in control of most of the country. But Mr. Obama has not altered his position: He still proposes withdrawing most U.S. troops according to a fixed timetable, set to the most rapid pace at which commanders have said American forces could be pulled out.”
Mr. Zebari’s Message
Iraq’s foreign minister has a chat with Barack Obama.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008; Page A14
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/17/AR2008061702034.html
I actually have to give credit to XEHRpa, they posted an article earlier, but it was completely relevant to this discussion.
I don’t want this to completely sink him yet. I’d rather he be defeated than forced to withdraw.
OBAMAGATE is getting hugh and serious now. Keep pushing! don’t let up till nov 5th.
Opps..forgot to add the link to this:
“See post: #249 in this thread.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2082538/posts?q=1&;page=251
What are the rules if a candidate backs out? Would the VP pick become the Presidential candidate as if they were already POTUS? Or would the DNC put forth another candidate?
What are the rules if a candidate backs out? Would the VP pick become the Presidential candidate as if they were already POTUS? Or would the DNC put forth another candidate?
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.