I think Clinton captured a huge portion of the PA Jewish vote with her statements about obliterating Iraq if they attack Israel. It was last minute stuff and presents her as being tough on the bad guys, which works great with moderates but won't work at all with misogynist Republicans and conservatives who scorn her. They'll laugh at her for trying to look tough, especially compared to POW McCain, the real thing.
Take a look at the pictures of elderly white women in PA hugging Hillary. When undecided (and uninformed) whites see that picture, they feel good about Hillary and forget about the awfulness we went through on account of Bill's antics in the oval office. They trust and admire her. They'll forgive her mistake about Bosnia because they see it more as an embellishment than an outright lie. They've never seen the bizarre imagery like the Hillary cackle videos or the "angry bitch" Hillary stuff that the right wing will bring out next fall. Those videos will make our side give up in despair while energizing their conservative base. McSame will beat Hillary easily.
On Obliterating Iran
Hillary's "obliterate Iran" comment actually kept me up last night. Surely this represents a new low, even down here in the gutter Clinton is trying to claw her way out of. The ugliness of the Clinton campaign is now to the point where it is damaging not only Obama, the Democratic Party, and Clinton herself. This comment will have an impact on the view of America all over the world, and even possibly on the course of world events.
"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," she said. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them." - Hillary on ABC on Tuesday
Today's news quiz:
1. When was the last time you heard an American political figure talk about obliterating another country?
2. When was the last time you heard any political leader in the world talk about obliterating another country?
What did you get for #1? I would be interested to hear your answer in a comment to this post. For #2, I get Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map."
Many voices in American politics responded by saying that Ahmadinejad should be ostracized from the community of responsible world leadership (sic), and that such statements coming from a head of state place a country in the category of "rogue state."
What ensued in the Middle East was a debate about whether Ahmadinejad's comment had been mistranslated. What precisely did it mean to wipe Israel off the map? Did it mean ending the particular Constitution of Israel as a state which constitutionally raises Jews to be first class citizens and others to be second class? Or did it mean killing every last Jew in Israel? Or something else? In my view, Jews in Israel may be forgiven if they find such splitting of hairs to be offensive.
So, what precisely did Clinton mean when she said, "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran... We would be able to totally obliterate them"?
Obliterate: a: to remove utterly from recognition or memory. b: to remove from existence : destroy utterly all trace, indication, or significance of.
Does she mean annihilating Iranian military capability? Or killing every last Iranian in Iran? In my view, Iranians in Iran may be forgiven if they find such splitting of hairs to be offensive.
The fact of the matter is that both Ahmadinejad and Clinton made their incendiary statements for calculated domestic electoral advantage. (Many Americans don't realize that the Iranian president is elected too.) In Clinton's case, she was hoping that her statement might add a half a percentage point or so to her total in a single state in a primary election.
There you have it. Clinton lobbed a time bomb into the Middle East tinderbox, on the off chance that it might win her a half a percentage point or so to her total in a single state in a primary election.
This from a candidate whose mantra for months has been that she, as opposed to her opponent, is experienced in world affairs and is ready to be Commander-in-Chief from day one.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
All the candidates are starting to look really bad to me.
Hillary says she wants to obliterate Iran with nukes, but she'd never do it. She may attack Iran but nobody's stupid enough to use nukes on oil and natural gas rich Iran while we are paying almost $4.00 for gas (at least in California). But it looks like talk about Genocide against Muslims (in this case Persians), seems be acceptable now.
Obama doesn't think enough people in the world are starving -- he wants to burn more corn..., and if that weren't insane enough, he blames high gas prices on Washington, despite that fact that worldwide demand for oil is going up and supply has remained relatively flat since 2005.
Either he lied or he's ignorant.
McCain wants a gas tax holiday. Money for mass transportation (the only real answer), comes from that minimal gas tax. We need to rebuild cities based on the foot, and build light rail.
All we can do is vote for the lesser of the evils. Mrs. Genocidal maniac claims to want to destroy oil and gas wells to protect a country that can defend itself. We have a man who thinks more people need to starve. And an idiot who thinks mass transportation is not the answer despite the fact Mexican, North Sea oil production are in terminal decline.
I'm hoping Al Gore will save us from these idiots.
Just because someone acknowledges that growing more corn for ethanol is a useful way to help wean the U.S. off foreign oil doesn"t mean they think more people should starve. If you don"t think burning ethanol from corn is a good idea, don"t buy the gas. I ride a bike to work. Do you? I don"t like the idea of using corn for ethanol, but I dislike even more the affects our economy of being dependent on foreign oil. If you feel strongly about this, why not work on an alternative solution, instead of jumping to the conclusion or just misstating that Obama wants more people to starve. Or how about coming up with a better way to move people and products around the world besides using petroleum products. Or work on getting more starving people fed. If all that is too hard, try getting rid of your car as a first step to walking your talk.
If you can"t figure out that Barack Obama doesn"t want people to starve, you"re not paying attention to his words and actions.
Iran can fight back, trust me:
http://irannegah.com/Video.aspx?id=629
She's chasing those McCain voters again. And she sounds like a reckless lunatic ... again. This is who we're supposed to want answering the phone at 3 a.m.?
It may be that I'm just loopy from watching too much MSM campaign coverage (flag pins, weathermen, preachers, geesh) but I actually found Clinton's comments kind of refreshing. Compared to the nonsense that Neocons are trying to spin about Iran as a threat to world peace, bent on domination, and needing to put a missile shield over Europe for their safety. Senator Clinton was just saying what every leader in the pentagon and in the Iranian government knows. The US has an overwhelming superiority in weapons and is just insane enough to use them. Iran would have to be truly insane (I'm not talking holocaust denial insane, I'm talking "say hello to my li'l friend!" insane) to make an attack on Israel which is why they never would.
Er...and she also said she'd create a nuclear umbrella over our ISLAMIC allies in the Middle East...er...that's both dumb AND dangerous...think Russia currently selling nuclear technology to Iran...I think Hillary Clinton just sealed the deal - Iran will have nukes or we will go to war with them. She left no other options on the table for them.
I BEG YOU. I beg you, anyone who's reading, Hillary Clinton's comments should be known by everyone. The press should do it's job on this!!!!
The world is freaking out over this. Please spread this. Hillary Clinton CANNOT BE TRUSTED to be Commander-in-Chief, her comments about obliterating Iran, her proposal for Middle East nuclear umbrella, her unwillingness to negotiate with Iran. She is a danger to this nation. She has already hurt us.
Some quotes from world papers:
The Standard, Hong Kong: Hillary would be willing to `obliterate' Iran
TV3 News, New Zealand: Clinton: US could "obliterate" Iran, if it attacked Israel
BBC News, UK: Clinton's poll day threat to Iran
The Province, Canada: Clinton would nuke Iran if Israel attacked
The Observer, UK: Incendiary talk
Bombay News, India: Clinton threatens Iran during TV interview
Agenzia Giornalistica Italia, Italy: HILLARY CLINTON: WE'LL WIPE OUT IRAN IF IT ATTACKS ISRAEL
Antara, Indonesia: CIDES protests Hillary`s anti-Iran statement
Australian IT, Australia: Clinton resorts to fear tactics
UK minister Lord Mark Malloch-Brown has spoken out against her comments:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jEp2ukq1nzsx5QXn7Khdn7AqDPmg
Please, if you care about this country - get this out there.
Thank you for this. It is amazing to me that the media in our country is ignoring what she said.
We're too busy with lapel pins, reverend wright (but not Senator Clinton's right wing prayer group) and Senator Obama scratching his face.
With Sen. Clinton's lurch to the neoconservative right and its apparent endorsement by the PA electorate, accompanied by the corporate media's continuing assault on reason, I've lost interest in the current Presidential election. What happens, happens. At 66 I'll probably be dead before the collapse of the country, anyway. To Hell with it. Apres moi, le deluge.
As long as our SSBN fleet remains untouchable, we're fine, Israel is fine, and the Iranians know it. There's no need for a foolish outburst from a doomed campaingn.
Hillary certainly doesn't speak for all Jews or Israel. This harsh rhetoric only fans the flames of hatred of the United States by Muslims in the Middle East and creates resentment among non-Jewish Americans. I'm a liberal Jewish American who supports Israel, but I believe Hillary Clinton is way out of line. I wholeheartedly believe that Israel should maintain a strong defense, but the U.S. has no place meddling in the affairs of Middle Eastern countries whether it's Israel, Iran, Iraq, or even Kuwait.
What should the United States do if an Ally is attacked with a nuclear weapon. Just say Oh!! well. We should obliterate Iran, if they attack Israel with a nuclear weapon. There must be consequences for aggressive action. Should we just shrug our shoulders when 7 to 10 million people are wipe off the map. I'd rather Clinton take us back to Mutual Assured Destruction than preemptive war. It worked very well with the former Soviet Union. If, she can reach an accord with the Arab states to stop their nuclear weapon quest. In return all we have to do is add them to the list of countries under our umbrella of protection more power to her. Do you think if Western Europe was attacked with a atomic weapon America would sit on our thumbs. No, we would wipe the aggressor off the map.
Hillary Clinton had no intention of nuking Iran. She was just buying votes. I have Jewish friends in PA who told me they switched their vote to Clinton because just before the vote she said she'd obliterate Iran if they bombed Israel. Twenty five percent of our country's USAID money goes to Israel, and they wanted reassurance that the next President will keep giving our tax money to them. Clinton knows just what to say to get votes. She's a smart politician, but she's still a cheater.
How is Iran going to strike ISrael? with the NON-Existent nukes they have? What about ISrael, they have 200 nukes. Who is the threat to who?
IRAN DOES NOT HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!!!!!!!!!!! Hillary Clinton threatening nuclear annihilation makes them want nukes EVEN MORE.
If you buy into Hillary Clinton's deterrence bluster - YOU ARE A FOOL. She has ratcheted up tensions with Iran and she has further damaged our world standing and SHE ISN'T EVEN PRESIDENT YET.
A nuclear umbrella in the Middle East is the DUMBEST IDEA I've ever heard. Guess who is allied with Iran? Hint: Russia.
If people like you are voting - we are SCREWED.
You're totally right. I mean, Iran exists in its own little universe, so raining nuclear death on them won't have any negative side effects. I mean, our erst-while allies in their vicinity (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan) certainly won't have any issues with the radiation or fleeing hordes of dying refugees. Since the fallout (literal fallout) will obey national borders, our armed forces in the region and the innocent people in surrounding countries won't have to worry. Who am I kidding, there are no innocent people in that region, right?
And we certainly don't have any scientific literature suggesting that there might be long term ecological damage, world wide, from a limited nuclear strike, let alone a nuclear holocaust.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-12/uoca-rnw121106.php
"we would wipe the aggressor off the map." ???
If it is done with NUCLEAR WEAPONS that will be the end for us all. Trace8089 is part of the madness.
The statement of President Ahmadinejad that was apparently intentionally mistranslated was that the regime in Jerusalem was on the way out. Seems many here, including myself, have said similar and more about the one in Washington.
"With God's help, the countdown button for the destruction of the Zionist regime has been pushed by the hands of the children of Lebanon and Palestine. By God's will, we will witness the destruction of this regime in the near future,"
He did not elaborate.
"apparently intentionally mistranslated" ???
YES just the way our own MSM does. You really can't trust the MSM anymore, not at all. Today they just put out propaganda.
She is in more ways than anyone can count unfit for command. To even have her and McCain CONSIDERED for the presidency means that this country is over. As surely as if we had been hit by 1000 nuclear missles, this country is over. Our leaders are now competing on how bloodthirsty they are. They are competing for how many dead bodies they can each pile up. It's disgusting and disgraceful. If Bush fails to kill the country off entirely, the Clintons will do the rest. Maybe I'll learn Dutch.
Yeah? We got the Dutch in our crosshairs, too ;-)
She's a GOLDWATER GIRL....
But, truthfully, ladies - did you EVER think you would hear a DEMOCRATIC WOMAN RUNNING FOR POTUS THREATEN TO OBLITERATE ANOTHER COUNTRY WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS FOR POLITICAL GAIN?
"We ain't in Kansas anymore, Toto".....
~The OTHER Dorothy~
I've heard of "rollback," "regime change," and even the ever-so-dubious "restoration of democracy," but I have never heard of an American political leader calling for the obliteration of another country and I majored in history. This is a new low that makes George W. Bush seem kind of decent.
No, it doesn't make George W. Bush seem kind of decent. It makes Hillary seem like Bush. Or Rice, the "coward" baiting you-know-what idiot. They are 3 models for our children to watch and learn.
As a woman I don't fall for this "she's gotta act like a tough guy" mindset. Her remarks about Iran were irresponsible and over the top.
She made similar remarks on Olbermann the night before. And long after we had invaded Iraq, she was outspoken on her support of the war. How can her supporters defend this? Are they warmongers too?
Nah, not a warmonger. Oh, hmm.
You don't get it. Hillary HAS to come off sounding tough. She's a chick, afterall. Mideast culture only respects male sabre rattling.
Anyway, it's all just political chatter for the masses.
Tubby, would you defend Condi if she said the identical statement?
And if, according to you, a woman has to threaten nuclear annihilation of an entire country to get the respect of Middle Eastern leaders, do we really need a woman president right now when that area is such a huge problem?
Personally, I don't think a female (or male) candidate for president has to talk like she can't wait to push the button to be an effective world leader. What do you think the reaction to the rest of the world is when they hear statements like this coming out of the mouths of American politicians? I don't think dominating the world through fear is ever a good approach.
"CHICK"?? How dare you. Just because you are probably obese, does not give you the right to denigrate others. Go 'chick' yourself!
You hope, tubby. but don't worry the radiation will have dimished some by the time it blows over the US.
Radiation from non-existent Iranian nuclear weapons. Doesn't sound dangerous to me.
BassMonk, it is from OUR nuclear weapons, right? The USA is the one dropping the nuclear weapons.
Personally, I believe if the USA used nuclear weapons, that would be the last straw for the rest of the world, and they WOULD invade America to kill us before we do more damage. And we have NO WAY to defend ourselves at home. The National Guard is in Iraq.
Loading comments…
Before the largest crowd of his campaign, Democratic presidential contender Barack...
**UPDATE 7/25** ThinkProgress now reports that the bar...
John McCain's famously cozy relationship with the press is getting a bit testy. Taking questions in...
There is one more John McCain gaffe that...
As we have observed throughout the last several years,...
In a flagrant political act, the State Department has...
Posted April 23, 2008 | 12:36 PM (EST)