Note to Senator McCain: You are a U.S. Senator. You have served in politics 
for over a Quarter Of A Century. When you say stuff, IT IS BEING RECORDED.
RUBIN: “Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?”
McCAIN: “They’re the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it’s a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that.”
That is all.
Love it. I hope Obama mentions this when he hits back McCan’t Make Up His Mind.
What? McCain shares the same view as that crazy DhIMMi MoOnBaT Jimmuh Cahtuh!?!@!1?? OH NOES!!!
Oops…
Farris, please tell me something.
From your link,
What is so wrong with that?
Not really an endorsement of Obama, but yet another world leader who has more respect and esteem for him than for our current president.
I for one would like our President to be respected even by people or governments that we disagree with.
Yes, and here’s the next thirty-three seconds of that same interview:
Rubin: So should we the United States be dealing with that new reality through normal diplomatic contacts to get the job done for the United States?
McCain: I think the United States should take a step back, see what they do when they form their government, see what their policies are and see what ways we can engage them; and if there aren’t any then their may be a hiatus. But I think that part of the relationship is going to be dictated by how Hamas acts, not how the United States acts.
So when asked point-blank about using diplomacy with Hamas, McCain’s response it that we should step back and see what Hamas does, and if there aren’t any ways to engage them then we don’t. This is hardly the “I would meet with [insert name of dictatorship here] without any preconditions” that Obama has espoused.
Rubin cherry picked statements from his interview with McCain and wrote an op-ed around them. And Oliver dutifully lapped it up and passed it on with his own pithy comments like the faithful Obama acolyte that he is.
What is so wrong with that?
Not really an endorsement of Obama, but yet another world leader who has more respect and esteem for him than for our current president.
First of all, please explain how “actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will (win) the election” is not really an endorsement of Obama.
As for what’s wrong with that, let’s see what Obama himself has to say about it:
“That’s why I have a fundamental difference with President Carter and disagree with his decision to meet with Hamas,” Obama said. “We must not negotiate with a terrorist group intent on Israel’s destruction. We should only sit down with Hamas if they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel’s right to exist and abide by past agreements.”
“Hamas is not a state. Hamas is a terrorist organization,” he said.
Seems Obama doesn’t consider the Hamas spokesman a “world leader” whose respect we should seek, unlike you.
Last sentence of 3:02 should not be in bold. A preview button would be nice.
“McCain’s response is that we should step back and see what Hamas does, and if there aren’t any ways to engage them, we don’t.”
Which, according to the statement of Obama that you (Dave in SoCal) yourself quoted from is exactly what Obama’s position is: “We must not negotiate with a terrorist group intent on Israel’s destruction. We should only sit down with Hamas if they renounce terrorism, recognize Israe’s right to exist and abide by past agreements.” Not exactly a statement lacking in preconditions.
Dave in SoCal’s take on Barack Obama’s statement seems to be that Obama said “We should sit down with Hamas.”
Who said we or he is seeking their respect? Fine, he’s a spokesman and not a world leader. Gotcha. Still, I think they would be more amenable to the conditions we seek if they respect our leaders OR spokespeople.
That would be a refreshing change.
You’re missing the point daniel.
Rubin’s op-ed (and Oliver’s post above) cherry-picked McCain’s statements and tried to make the false claim that McCain supported diplomacy just like Obama’s did back in July 2007 when he said he would meet “without preconditions”.
My 3:02pm quote from Obama is a recent one, and shows how his policy has gone from meet “without preconditions” to “only meet if they fulfill several preconditions”. In other words, he’s swung 180 degrees from his previous position in his recent attempt to sound tough.
Incidentally, Obama’s current position is the same one that the Bush administration has been following all along. The one that Obama spent a lot of time last year denigrating.