Friday night fight II

posted at 10:03 pm on December 28, 2007 by Bryan

Round one was a red on red affair. For round two, we have some blue on blue action.

In the bottom feeder bracket, Sen. Chris Dodd takes on Bill Richardson’s asinine call for Pervez Musharraf to resign in the wake of Bhutto’s assassination.

Dodd did not spare even Bill Richardson, who said yesterday after the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan: “President Bush should press [Pakistani President Pervez] Musharraf to step aside, and a broad-based coalition government, consisting of all the democratic parties, should be formed immediately. Until this happens, we should suspend military aid to the Pakistani government.”

Though Richardson often touts his foreign policy experience — he was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under Bill Clinton — Dodd dismissed Richardson’s proposals in strong terms.

“I think that is a dangerous idea, and I am sort of surprised Bill Richardson would make that recommendation,” Dodd said. “Can you tell me who is going to then be controlling the keys to the nuclear weapons in Pakistan when Musharraf is not there? And if you can’t answer that question, then be careful what you wish for.”

Dodd went on: “The idea of dumping Musharraf and cutting off aid, which I think Bill Richardson also suggested, is the worst possible thing we could be doing right now. That is the height of danger.”

Call that one for Dodd in a TKO. Richardson should leave public life after making that comment. It’s about 10 times worse than anything any other candidate said on the issue.

In the heavyweight division, it’s a three-way. Barack Obama declared that Hillary Clinton’s vote to authorize force in Iraq made her somewhat responsible for Bhutto’s murder. John Edwards calls that line “ridiculous.”

In a wide-ranging, free-wheeling interview with Democratic presidential hopeful John Edwards with ABC News Friday afternoon, the former North Carolina senator labeled “ridiculous” comments made by the Obama campaign that seemed to link former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s assassination to Sen. Hillary Clinton’s vote to authorize the use of force against Iraq, embraced Sen. Barack Obama’s politics over Clinton’s, and said an anti-Obama flier from a pro-Clinton union was “misleading” and “deceptive.”

He went further.

Edwards also detailed his conversation with Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf from Thursday in which he told that country’s leader he needs to allow “independent international inspectors into Pakistan to determine the facts of what happened around the former prime minister’s assassination. That kind of transparent process is the only way there’s going to be any credibility.”

Hillary agrees that there should be an “independent international” investigation of some kind. Obama was on CNN’s Situation Room earlier tonight and said that he does not.

My question is, who will conduct the “independent international” investigation? There’s been an “independent international” investigation into the Hariri assassination for, what nearly 3 years now.

A liberal blogger surveys the scene and asks, if Hillary’s Iraq vote makes her complicit in Bhutto’s death, aren’t Edwards, Biden and Dodd just as guilty as she is?

You’d think so, which is probably why Edwards called Obama’s line “ridiculous.” If he had voted the other way on Iraq, he probably would have sided with Obama.

Edwards also said Obama is “living in never-never land,” but not for his naive foreign policy views. Edwards says Obama is living in a fantasy because Obama actually thinks American corporations should have some say in what the government does to their industries. Edwards would prefer to fight-fight-fight and dictate terms. To corporations, not to actual enemies of the country.

Friday morning at a forum for undecided voters in Independence, Iowa, Edwards repeated his implicit criticism of Obama, saying any candidate who thinks he or she can invite corporate America to the table and achieve real results for Americans “is living in never-never land.”

So he believes Barack Obama lives in never-never land?

“If he believes that, yes,” Edwards said. “It’s a little hard for me to tell sometimes based on the way he talks about this. I’ve heard him say he would give stakeholders a seat at the table. I assume he’s talking about oil companies, drug companies and insurance companies.”

And Obama swings back.

In response, the Obama campaign pointed to an interview Edwards gave to the liberal website MyDD.com in Feburary, where Edwards was asked if he’d bring into the healthcare debate “both corporations and labor and healthcare groups and doctors” and he responded “I think you try to bring everybody to the table. You want their participation, you want to make the system work for everybody.”

Bottom line: None of these people should be president.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

My question is, who will conduct the “independent international” investigation?

Might I suggest…

Ugly on December 28, 2007 at 10:08 PM

Bottom line: None of these people should be president.

May you be right, you good man! May America wake up from its slumber. Shopping season is over. It’s time to get really serious. Yesterday should be another loud/clear wake up call. This is not a party we’re planning for.

Entelechy on December 28, 2007 at 10:16 PM

I guess Obama is trying to get the nutroots that would have otherwise voted for Russ el-Feingold (Moonbat-Al Qaeda). He was the one that opened the “Blame the Iraq War” can of worms

steveegg on December 28, 2007 at 10:17 PM

I suspect the actors on all of the CSI shows could do a better job investigating the crime than the “independent international” investigation

Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on December 28, 2007 at 10:19 PM

I agree with two things:
1) None of the dems and few of the republicans are qualified to be president.
2) Rambo gets my vote for investigator in chief.

jdsmith0021 on December 28, 2007 at 10:21 PM

Bottom line: None of these people should be running for president.

That’s better.

fogw on December 28, 2007 at 10:21 PM

Never-neverland? Great….now there are three Americas.

I can understand a voter looking at Hillary or Obama and picking one as their candidate. I can’t understand anyone doing so with Edwards. He makes the hair stand up on my neck. Anyone with an Edwards sticker on their car needs to seek out a different doctor and get a second opinion.
.

Limerick on December 28, 2007 at 10:22 PM

“None of these people should be president”.

Yes Bryan you are correct,thats the clearest thinking
I’ve seen all day.

“Independant international investigation”,Sounds like
the way ConHillary will run her campaign,er I mean the
way Bill ran his eight years,special prosecutor this,
and special prosecutor that.

canopfor on December 28, 2007 at 10:27 PM

Though Richardson often touts his foreign policy experience — he was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under Bill Clinton

I watched this interview with Richardson on the daily show. It really is pathetic and telling. Richardson talks about how he showed Saddaam Hussein the bottom of his shoe and Saddam got offended and that he had no idea that that was an insult.

Are you that misinformed and delinquent to NOT know that that is an insult to a muslim? Much less a baathist?

Pathetic

broker1 on December 28, 2007 at 10:31 PM

So much bloodier than boxing.

terryannonline on December 28, 2007 at 10:33 PM

May you be right;
Entelechy on December 28,2007 at 10:16pm.

Entelechy:Amen to that.

canopfor on December 28, 2007 at 10:33 PM

The Democrat candidates have found themselves in the only place they could have been heading: self-imposed disaster. In their blind ambition to discredit free market capitalism, the War on Terror and President Bush — and all in the name of courting the ignorant and/or radical elements of their party, they have used the murder of a politician in a troubled country as a catalyst to descend into ugly opportunism.

Ironically, some of the charges they level at each other ring true. Just wait until tomorrow, a new poll will come out. They’ll shuffle the deck and be playing the same hand their “opponent” is playing today.

RushBaby on December 28, 2007 at 10:36 PM

Maybe Hillary would like Janet Reno to give it a go,
as an investigator,(apologies to all at this time of
night for uttering her name.)haha.

canopfor on December 28, 2007 at 10:37 PM

Obama is a dumb-a$$. He has had the Wicked Witch of the West on the ropes for a few weeks now. Then he comes up with this little pearl of wisdom? Merry Christmas Hillary! Let’s see if she takes advantage of it.

conservnut on December 28, 2007 at 10:40 PM

By the way Bryan, that screen cap looks like an inkblot. And when I really look at it for a while I see…..Never mind.

conservnut on December 28, 2007 at 10:42 PM

Wasn’t Bill “the brain” Richardson the Secretary of Energy when top secret documents from Los Alamos found their way into the hands of the ChiComs?

And didn’t the guy who stole the docs cop a plea, and get off scott free thanks to Janet Reno?

Being a loser, a resume enhancement for Dems.

fogw on December 28, 2007 at 10:43 PM

(apologies to all at this time of
night for uttering her name.)haha.

canopfor on December 28, 2007 at 10:37 PM

You still have a day or two to make it up to us before we ring in the New Year. :)

RushBaby on December 28, 2007 at 10:43 PM

Time for a little break! Saturday night videos brought to you by VAW-113 Black Eagles. If you have never seen their work on the USS Ronald Reagan you are in for a treat.

Turn up the volume!

broker1 on December 28, 2007 at 10:46 PM

Hillary agrees that there should be an “independent international” investigation of some kind.

Who will investigate the investigators?

Kini on December 28, 2007 at 10:57 PM

broker1 on December 28, 2007 at 10:46 PM

That was PHAT!

Kini on December 28, 2007 at 10:59 PM

Bryan — I like your bottom line…

D2Boston on December 28, 2007 at 11:00 PM

I’m with Krauthammer on this lot. Hillary is the smartest of the lot. Which isn’t saying much. And she can probably be trusted, like her husband, to occasionally do the right thing for the wrong reasons (i.e. popularity/power).

All three of the top Dems are basically first-term senators who have done nothing except run for President since they were elected. They are professional candidates, who know how to do nothing but campaign.

On the GOP side, the contrast is striking:

1) Former mayor whose leadership saved the nation’s biggest city
2) Decorated war hero and one of the handful of undisputed leaders of the senate
3) Several governors, including one who ran the Olympics, with considerable business experience
4) Another ex-senator, who had a successful acting career outside of politics
5) Even the resume’s of Ron Paul, who has a medical degree, and Huckabee, are arguably more impressive than those of Hillary/Obama/Edwards. And they’re all clueless dolts.

LagunaDave on December 28, 2007 at 11:07 PM

Bottom line: None of these people should be president.

And how. *cheers*

Hawkins1701 on December 28, 2007 at 11:08 PM

That was PHAT!

Kini on December 28, 2007 at 10:59 PM

Glad you liked it. Its good to see our troops having some fun.

broker1 on December 28, 2007 at 11:08 PM

broker1 on December 28, 2007 at 10:46 PM

Great video.

BacaDog on December 28, 2007 at 11:08 PM

Dodd and Biden are the only experienced adults (responsible) in the Dem primaries, yet they’re running last in the primary polls, and their chance of being nominated is nil. Instead, we’ll get either a spouse or a rock star.
It makes you think America needs a NEW Democrat Party.

petefrt on December 28, 2007 at 11:09 PM

broker1 on December 28, 2007 at 10:46 PM

Loved it!

conservnut on December 28, 2007 at 11:13 PM

Glad you guys liked the video. Figured we needed a little respit from todays threads. Pretty heated.

broker1 on December 28, 2007 at 11:14 PM

There was a lot of sand being thrown around in the sandbox tonight.

Mojave Mark on December 28, 2007 at 11:18 PM

There was a lot of sand being thrown around in the sandCatbox tonight.

Mojave Mark on December 28, 2007 at 11:18 PM

Neutered, er fixed. =`-`=

Kini on December 28, 2007 at 11:24 PM

Just another knock on the door to Richardson’s failed campaign…by the way..he still won’t answer.

[but at least he will have ALL the troops home within a year's time].

Giuliani, Romney, McCain…OK.

They all have their respective weaknesses.

Huck….No Way !!

Electing the Huckster in the GOP primary is the fastest way to seat Lady Macbeth squarely in a white house chair that Bill probably performed unspeakable acts on.

And I personally liked Bill for the most part.

That says alot.

Thanks for the post Bryan.

awake on December 29, 2007 at 12:11 AM

Dodd and Biden are the only experienced adults (responsible) in the Dem primaries……
It makes you think America needs a NEW Democrat Party.

petefrt on December 28, 2007 at 11:09 PM

I agree with you, petefrt, but the one thing that scared me majorly about Biden (and Dodd, I think) was in the DesMoines Register ‘debate’ when the question was about the budget. Biden specifically said he’d strip a chunk of the military budget by scrapping the F-22 Raptor program, de-commission the USS Nimitz, disable Star Wars and the Strategic Air Defense Initiative, the B2 Bomber, scrap our Nuclear Weapons arsenal, and that wasn’t all. That’s just all I can remember he named specifically, but it wasn’t all of it. That sent shivers down my spine.

Scary… just plain scary.

MsUnderestimated on December 29, 2007 at 12:26 AM

Hate to be an on-line editor, but shouldn’t this round be “red on red” (enemy on enemy)?

steveegg on December 29, 2007 at 12:34 AM

Major geopolitical events like the Bhutto assassination during a primary election lets you look into a candidate’s mind.

TheSitRep on December 29, 2007 at 6:45 AM

Just another knock on the door to Richardson’s failed campaign

For vice-president?

peacenprosperity on December 29, 2007 at 7:42 AM

If this is the best they can come up with…MOMMY! I’M SCARED!

SouthernGent on December 29, 2007 at 12:46 PM

Major geopolitical events like the Bhutto assassination during a primary election lets you look into a candidate’s mind.

TheSitRep on December 29, 2007 at 6:45 AM

Very well said. Been trying to say the same ever since it happened. I just fear that we know this but that the average Jane/Joe don’t care too much. Hoping that the Iowa folks are this deep and serious.

Entelechy on December 29, 2007 at 3:14 PM

Agreed all. When the evil nature of the world we live in rears its ugly head the Dhimmicrats look like a bunch of naive school kids in civics class.

Mojave Mark on December 29, 2007 at 10:49 PM

You still have a day or two to make it up to us before we ring in the New Year.:)

RushBaby on December 28,2007 at 10:43PM.

RushBaby:Agreed,to you and Entelechy,to clear that
botched joke attempt on the B-ONE,when I said
could we paint candy-stripped J-DAMS 2,000 pound ordanace
and drop them on the Taliban for Christmas,yup,to you both
sorry.

canopfor on December 29, 2007 at 11:29 PM

What a Rorschach Blot.

All I see is a large tush and legs of a female in spiked heels-still looking for the whips and chains.

MSGTAS on December 31, 2007 at 8:12 AM