Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Edwards must not have been listening yesterday
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, August 02, 2007

Tim Dickenson of Rolling Stone, reports on a John Edwards event he attended in San Francisco (question: does that make him a partisan hack?).

After complementing Edwards performance (he's "awesome on the stump") and noting he dished out plenty of red meat with attacks on 'big oil', 'big pharma' and insurance companies he quotes Edwards as saying:
“What Giuliani is, is George Bush on steroids.”
Really? Edwards must have missed the Obama speech yesterday.

Speaking of irony, wasn't it Obama who was calling Hillary Clinton "Bush/Cheney lite" after their recent little spat over entertaining talks with the head of rogue nations? Well as our more lefty commenters like to remind everyone concerning Pakistan, Bush has said "no option is off the table". And it would appear Obama agrees. Note to Obama campaign - you might want to drop that Bush/Cheney lite thing.

Another interesting question that's been raised and I'd love to see discussed - who was Obama trying to impress with his Pakistan strategy?

Certainly not Democratic primary voters, unless I've completely misread them to this point.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

The objective, no doubt, is to have Senator Obama pander to the base, without seeming to pander to the base. The actual strategy in such efforts can be complex and is usually undertaken in a series of trial balloons followed by corrections. I’m guessing that the immediate comparisons with President Bush are not where his handlers wished to go on this one.

One of the lessons of the Kerry loss is that voters want someone in the White House who will be strong on defense. Senator Obama does not have military experience; hence he is going to have to somehow project a stronger image on defense.

Hard to keep track of real issues in all of this electioneering. For example:

Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) stood up to Rep. Pelosi:
“In a time of war, we should not be positioning ourselves for political advantage.”
This is the kind of thing that I would like to see more Democrats saying - and practicing instead of pandering to the polls.

Written By: &amp
URL: http://
Of course lost in all this is that both Edwards an Hillary agree with Obama

Clinton, in an interview with the American Urban Radio Network, stressed the importance of the Pakistanis "taking the actions that only they can take within their own country."

But she did not rule out U.S. attacks inside Pakistan, citing the missile attacks her husband, then-President Bill Clinton, ordered against Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998.

"If we had actionable intelligence that Osama bin Laden or other high-value targets were in Pakistan I would ensure that they were targeted and killed or captured," she said.

"My belief is that we have a responsibility to find bin Laden and al Qaeda wherever they operate," Edwards said on camera. "I think we need to maximize pressure on Musharraf and the Pakistani government. If they can’t do the job, then we have to do it."

Maybe he wasn’t trying to impress anyone, but was just articulating the stardard Democratic line of thinking
Written By: Jeff
URL: http://
Yeah, the Democrats are always tough so long as there are no boots on the ground. It is easy for them to say they will react when they are referring to lobbing a few Tomahawks in the vicinity of a threat. Then they can walk away satisfied they "took care of the threat". (Insert visual of Obama, jacket off and short sleeves rolled up, wiping his hands off on each other smiling to the camera and saying "Any questions? That’s the kind of leadership we have been lacking all these years!")
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
McQ, do you disagree that, authoritarianism-wise, Guiliani is George Bush on steroids?
Written By: Retief
URL: http://
McQ, do you disagree that, authoritarianism-wise, Guiliani is George Bush on steroids?
I don’t know, has he said anything lately about invading Pakistan?

I think it is a dumb line offered by a clueless candidate who sees what little chance he ever had for the nomination slipping away and felt compelled to offer a little red meat to the masses during a stump speech. And its timing was convenient to pointing out that the only person at the moment acting like "George Bush on steroids" was Barack Obama. But I guess, for the irony impaired, that’s just not evident enough in the post.
Written By: McQ

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks