.GOP calls Obama timid as he seeks footing on Iran
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama stuck to his carefully tailored response to Iran's internal crisis Sunday despite pressure from Republican critics, as he continued to speak up for protesters' rights without making specific demands on Iran's hard-line leaders.
"The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States," Obama said in an interview released Sunday. "We shouldn't be playing into that."
The president spoke Friday during an interview with CBS News' Harry Smith. It will be broadcast Monday on "The Early Show."
Obama's measured statements so far attempt to speak up for human rights while preserving U.S. options and lessening the chance that he becomes a scapegoat for the cleric-led government, which has blamed the West for stirring up street protests that turned into bloody clashes with police and militia.
Obama kept a public silence Sunday, although a spokesman said he discussed Iran with foreign policy advisers in the Oval Office for more than 30 minutes. He later went golfing in Virginia.
Tehran's streets fell mostly quiet for the first time since a bitterly disputed June 12 presidential election, but there were reports that government forces appeared to be pressing arrests of defiant protesters after the official death toll swelled to at least 17.
The White House did not book any surrogates on the Sunday talk shows to defend or explain the administration's approach. Republicans used their broadcast appearances to call the president timid or feckless, while the Democrat who leads the Senate Intelligence Committee said the U.S. had no hand in the disputed election.
Like other Democrats who spoke Sunday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein backed the president's approach.
"It is very crucial as I see that we not have our fingerprints on this," she said, "that this really be ... truly inspired by the Iranian people. We don't know where this goes."
A day earlier, Obama invoked the American civil rights struggle to condemn violence against demonstrators, some of whom have carried signs in English asking, "Where is My Vote?"
It was his strongest statement on what has become the most significant challenge to Iran's ruling structure since the Islamic revolution 30 years ago, but it stopped short of demanding a recount or new election, as many of the demonstrators seek.
He avoided mentioning either incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or his principal challenger by name, and said nothing about his oft-repeated campaign promise of a fresh start in diplomatic talks with the main U.S. adversary in the Middle East.
Obama has tried to hold a middle ground as the crisis unfolds, and found the ground shifting by the day. His advisers say any thunderous denunciation of Iran's rulers would invite them to blame Western interference and might worsen the violence instead of end it.
Both the House and Senate voted overwhelmingly last week to condemn an official crackdown on the mostly peaceful demonstrations, a stronger action than the White House has yet taken.
"The president of the United States is supposed to lead the free world, not follow it," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "He's been timid and passive more than I would like."
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and others noted that Western leaders, including French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, have demanded a recount or more forcefully condemned the government crackdown.
"I'd like to see the president be stronger than he has been, although I appreciate the comments that he made yesterday," McCain said. "I think we ought to have America lead."
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said a slow or muted U.S. response risks undermining the aspirations of Iranian voters to change or question their government.
"If America stands for democracy and all of these demonstrations are going on in Tehran and other cities over there, and people don't think that we really care, then obviously they're going to question, 'do we really believe in our principles?'" Grassley said.
Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar, a moderate Republican who holds the party's top position on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, seemed to echo Obama's caution.
"The challenge continues, which is going to come to a conclusion one way or another," Lugar said. "Either the protesters bring about change or they're suppressed, and it's a potentially very brutal outcome at the end of the day."
Obama on Saturday challenged Iran's government to halt a "violent and unjust" crackdown on dissenters, and he quoted Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."
"Right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian people's belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness," Obama said.
The statement calling for an end to violence against demonstrators followed days of agonizing among his staff over what to say and how strongly to say it.
It also followed a false note from Obama last week, when he said he saw little difference between Ahmadinejad, the hard-liner who claims a landslide re-election mandate, and his conservative but pro-reform challenger. That left the impression that Obama discounted the votes of Mir Hossein Mousavi's supporters or the bravery of protesters who marched to say their votes were stolen.
Ahmadinejad claimed victory by an overwhelming margin following a lively campaign that many analysts predicted would yield razor-close results. The speed with which his victory was announced and vote claims in areas where he was at a clear disadvantage outraged Mousavi's backers.
Democrats in the Senate say Obama has struck the right balance.
"He's got a very delicate path to walk here," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn. "You don't want to take ownership of this."
Dodd and Graham appeared on ABC's "This Week," McCain was on CBS'"Face the Nation," and Feinstein, Lugar and Grassley spoke on "State of the Union" on CNN.
MyWay
I think the GOP, is stuck on stupid.
"The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States," Obama said in an interview released Sunday. "We shouldn't be playing into that."
The president spoke Friday during an interview with CBS News' Harry Smith. It will be broadcast Monday on "The Early Show."
Obama's measured statements so far attempt to speak up for human rights while preserving U.S. options and lessening the chance that he becomes a scapegoat for the cleric-led government, which has blamed the West for stirring up street protests that turned into bloody clashes with police and militia.
Obama kept a public silence Sunday, although a spokesman said he discussed Iran with foreign policy advisers in the Oval Office for more than 30 minutes. He later went golfing in Virginia.
Tehran's streets fell mostly quiet for the first time since a bitterly disputed June 12 presidential election, but there were reports that government forces appeared to be pressing arrests of defiant protesters after the official death toll swelled to at least 17.
The White House did not book any surrogates on the Sunday talk shows to defend or explain the administration's approach. Republicans used their broadcast appearances to call the president timid or feckless, while the Democrat who leads the Senate Intelligence Committee said the U.S. had no hand in the disputed election.
Like other Democrats who spoke Sunday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein backed the president's approach.
"It is very crucial as I see that we not have our fingerprints on this," she said, "that this really be ... truly inspired by the Iranian people. We don't know where this goes."
A day earlier, Obama invoked the American civil rights struggle to condemn violence against demonstrators, some of whom have carried signs in English asking, "Where is My Vote?"
It was his strongest statement on what has become the most significant challenge to Iran's ruling structure since the Islamic revolution 30 years ago, but it stopped short of demanding a recount or new election, as many of the demonstrators seek.
He avoided mentioning either incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or his principal challenger by name, and said nothing about his oft-repeated campaign promise of a fresh start in diplomatic talks with the main U.S. adversary in the Middle East.
Obama has tried to hold a middle ground as the crisis unfolds, and found the ground shifting by the day. His advisers say any thunderous denunciation of Iran's rulers would invite them to blame Western interference and might worsen the violence instead of end it.
Both the House and Senate voted overwhelmingly last week to condemn an official crackdown on the mostly peaceful demonstrations, a stronger action than the White House has yet taken.
"The president of the United States is supposed to lead the free world, not follow it," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "He's been timid and passive more than I would like."
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and others noted that Western leaders, including French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, have demanded a recount or more forcefully condemned the government crackdown.
"I'd like to see the president be stronger than he has been, although I appreciate the comments that he made yesterday," McCain said. "I think we ought to have America lead."
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said a slow or muted U.S. response risks undermining the aspirations of Iranian voters to change or question their government.
"If America stands for democracy and all of these demonstrations are going on in Tehran and other cities over there, and people don't think that we really care, then obviously they're going to question, 'do we really believe in our principles?'" Grassley said.
Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar, a moderate Republican who holds the party's top position on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, seemed to echo Obama's caution.
"The challenge continues, which is going to come to a conclusion one way or another," Lugar said. "Either the protesters bring about change or they're suppressed, and it's a potentially very brutal outcome at the end of the day."
Obama on Saturday challenged Iran's government to halt a "violent and unjust" crackdown on dissenters, and he quoted Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."
"Right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian people's belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness," Obama said.
The statement calling for an end to violence against demonstrators followed days of agonizing among his staff over what to say and how strongly to say it.
It also followed a false note from Obama last week, when he said he saw little difference between Ahmadinejad, the hard-liner who claims a landslide re-election mandate, and his conservative but pro-reform challenger. That left the impression that Obama discounted the votes of Mir Hossein Mousavi's supporters or the bravery of protesters who marched to say their votes were stolen.
Ahmadinejad claimed victory by an overwhelming margin following a lively campaign that many analysts predicted would yield razor-close results. The speed with which his victory was announced and vote claims in areas where he was at a clear disadvantage outraged Mousavi's backers.
Democrats in the Senate say Obama has struck the right balance.
"He's got a very delicate path to walk here," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn. "You don't want to take ownership of this."
Dodd and Graham appeared on ABC's "This Week," McCain was on CBS'"Face the Nation," and Feinstein, Lugar and Grassley spoke on "State of the Union" on CNN.
MyWay
I think the GOP, is stuck on stupid.
posted by madtom at 8:58 PM
7 Comments:
We'll see. If America can't side with those seeking liberty because we hope it will convince the tyranny to let us talk them into giving up nuclear weapons, you may want to consider which position you find yourself stuck. Just a statement about the innate desire for human beings to live free--- forget about the individuals involved. Some number of those protesters are risking life for liberty, and our President is selling them down the river. But, I don't think he shares their beliefs, so I don't expect him to do anything different--- until it costs him politically.
It wouldn't matter if Obama came out and declared the protesters as the Rightful Rulers of Iran and started sending them weapons; the Pro Human Pain and Suffering Party and it's toxic supporters will attack Obama on this issue, just as they attack him on every issue.
It is their playbook their Art of War. Always blame Barack, Always declare him weak, Always imply he is a secret muslim subservient to islamic laws...
You know that's bullshit. O would be attacked by the Left, not the Right if he were to do what you suggested. Who is attacking O for expanding Afghanistan? Continuing in Iraq? O is doing what O does--- sets himself as above all and plays all sides. He votes "present". Addressing the tyrant in Iraq as Supreme Leader and a reasonable man and his regime as legitimate as his own while at the same time suggesting those seeking liberty have a friend in him. He does that on ALL issues. And if all you can do to defend his acts is point to criticism like mine as unprincipled, then you are a suitable O cultist. It's Bush and Fox! How pathetic.
So now you want a speech? You didn't give him any credit for the Cairo speech, which was the most likely spark that started this fire, why would we believe you now that you would credit him no matter what he did. As a matter of fact, you belittled that speech. Now you want more. Which is it?
And on this same track, can you name the people you support in Iran? Can we have a list of the Jeffersonian?
Your not suggesting that Mousavi wanted anything more than to take power for himself? Do you think he would allow street protesters, you think he would challenge the power of the Ayatollah, or swear allegiance to him?
And you know that if Mousavi had won that election we would be worst off, Obama would had ann excess to start negotiations, or even sign a surrender document.
And on the ugly side, it's is painful to watch, that poor girl Nene had not even died yet and the GOP is trying to use her death to score political points with her blood, after having done nothing to earn it. It's embarrassing, thank god I'm not a republican, I would not know how to hide my face...
I don't even know people who are 'Republican' anymore. They would probably have to vote that way, considering the alternatives. The girl is the symbol as was the tank guy in China. I don't think its about political gain for everyone. Some people are sincere about their passion for liberty-- though some seem unable to see anything any other way than political. And I noticed yesterday, CNN is the one playing the video over and over. Fox has shown it, but they blur the girl's face and the blood. I'd leave it to her family to decide how and when it should be shown, but that isn't possible. If it were my daughter, or me, I'd want it shown in an endless loop.
I want O to say what he said in part of the Cairo speech. The part about innate desire for freedom, human rights, etc. Of course, playing all sides as he always does, he then turned around and offered respect and friendship to regimes that provide the exact OPPOSITE of all those things and did it practically in the same breath! He clearly thinks he can 'vote present' and then charm the mullahs. To try is shameful. To think it possible is dangerously naive. What I want is a declaration that we no longer see the military dictatorship in Iran as legitimate, and for O to use his global political capital to put some real pressure on it. Time to block all oil out and all gasoline in until they cooperate fully with UN resolutions on their nuke program. Use the dissatisfaction of the Iranian people with the thugs. Use the belligerence of Europe to get them on board. The 'Great Satan' isn't us, and now that they can clearly see who is today, we should clamp down hard. Instead, we express 'concern' so as not to anger the thugs? When has that ever worked? For things to change and for eventual all out war to be avoided, civil war in that region on some level is inevitable.
I sort of hate to say this, but I was watching that news conference from yesterday, and I realized what O is doing. He's playing you people, and your walking right into his trap...There is a technical term for what he's doing, but I can not remember what it's called, the only thing that comes to mind, is a bait and switch, but it's where he's going to change peoples perceptions, so it's sort of bait and switch in your brains....Maybe there's some experts out there that remember the correct term. Needless to say, you guys are walking right into his trap. Watch your step.
Who knows, maybe they are playing along willingly, after all control of the US economy is a big prize.
Post a Comment
<< Home