Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors Not Ready for Prime Time

Sometimes, pictures really are worth a 1,000 words:

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Read all of the linked items at Halperin's blog.  Here is Hillary Clinton's statement.

NOW, for LARRY JOHNSON's commentary today, "Obama and His Advisors Not Ready for Prime Time", reprinted from No Quarter with his express permission (ALONG WITH a new YouTube video following Larry's commentary):

Thanks to Alegre for an insightful video clip that summarizes succinctly the inept incompetence of the Obama foreign policy team. Susan Rice, a senior Obama foreign policy advisor, who served on the National Security Council and later as the Assistant Secretary for African Affairs at the State Department under Bill Clinton.  We don't know for sure what Barack or Hillary would do with a "3 a.m." phone call, but we don't have to wonder about Susan Rice.  She sits on her hands doing nothing.

During her time on the National Security Council, as the senior person responsible for giving the President policy options on Africa, Rice reprised the role of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.  She sat by while more than one million Rwandans were butchered in a bloody genocide.  She let the phone ring and declined to offer any answer that would have saved lives.  And she is one of Barack's key advisors.

But Rice is wrong about Hillary.  Hillary is quite ready to answer the 3am phone call.  As someone who has been directly involved with such calls during the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations, I do know what I am talking about.

As I have said before, I have had the opportunity to brief Senator Clinton twice on terrorism and Iraq during the last three years.  During the course of my career at the CIA, State Department, and as a consultant, I have briefed in one form or fashion more than 60 members of Congress, a Vice President, and a President.  I have participated in briefings for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other senior military commanders.  I entered my first meeting with Hillary with strong reservations about her competence (based entirely on what I had heard and read in the media).  I walked out of that meeting very impressed.  Hands down, I found her to be the most impressive person I had had the privilege to brief.

Why was I impressed?  First and foremost, she listened.  I have briefed folks who get the 1000-yard stare--they drift off and start thinking about something else.  I also have briefed folks who get the panicked look from not understanding what I am talking about.  Hillary was different.  She listened intently, but she also grasped the substance and nuance of the issues we were discussing.  Second, she asked tough questions that showed me she was genuinely searching for viable policy options.  I had a similar experience with Senator Joe Biden, only that was during a hearing.

But unlike many members of Congress who rely on some aide sitting at their side to pump them with questions and information, Hillary could think on her own.  She did not need "Foreign Policy for Dummies."

Hillary also is one of the few members of Congress who understood the difference between Special Forces and and Special Operations Forces.  You would be shocked at the number of Senators and Representatives who are supposed to exercise oversight of the military and do not understand this basic point.

When we talk about the "3 a.m." call we are talking about crisis response operations.  Back in July of 1990, the United States was involved in a covert effort to resolve peacefully a coup that involved Libyan-backed terrorists.  We had quietly inserted U.S. personnel into the country, the situation was settled without further loss of life, and we were trying to figure out how to withdraw our personnel without exposing them publicly.  Our concern about how to cover their withdrawal was made moot when word came that Saddam had just invaded Kuwait.  We were taking down one crisis communications task force in the State Department Ops Center as a new one, dedicated to Iraq/Kuwait, was being formed.

What is not well known is that President Bush (senior), Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, and James Baker had been briefed two days earlier in the White House situation room on the impending invasion of Iraq.  They were warned that Saddam would likely invade unless the United States made a public declaration to warn him away.  The President and his advisors declined at the time to issue such a warning because they believed that if they did so and Saddam invaded, the U.S. would have no choice but to respond militarily.  With hindsight we now know that Bush, Cheney, Powell, and Baker screwed up that phone call.

When the phone rings and the President is alerted to the problem, you will want a President whose first instinct is to understand the implication of the threat for U.S. national interests.  I know that Hillary understands that point.  Barack, by contrast, did not even understand the importance of holding a hearing on NATO's role in Afghanistan even though he had the full authority to do so.

Once you hang up the phone you need a leader who understands the bureaucratic tools and resources that are available to be brought to bear on the problem.  On this point in particular Hillary is light years ahead of Barack.  Barack would be hard pressed to explain the difference between DIA, CIA, and NSA.  Hillary knows that Washington machinery intimately.

And finally there is the issue of advisors.  Let me state again for the record: I am not trying out for a spot on Hillary's foreign policy team.  I am not seeking a job in her administration.  I do not want to make the personal sacrifice required to go back into government service--I would have to take a pay cut and work too many long hours.  But Hillary is surrounded with a better group of foreign policy advisors.  Barack has the likes of Susan Rice and Tony Lake--two of the key folks who failed to respond in a timely matter to the disaster in Rwanda.  Hillary, by contrast, has Dick Holbrooke, who helped bring an end to the killing in the Balkans.

From No Quarter.

::::::::::::::



Display:


Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (2.00 / 11)

It's great that Hillary Clinton issued such a prompt statement on the terrible Times Square bombing.

Comments are most welcome.


by susanhu on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:57:43 PM EST

Thanks, Susan... (2.00 / 9)

It's good to know Hillary's on top of things. Once again, she's proven to us why she's ready to be our next President.


No way, no how, no McCain! :-)
by atdleft on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:12:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (2.00 / 0)

Yeah, those 'prompt statements' really put her on top of things.  

Anyone can come out with a statement, they are meaningless.  Just 'words,' as your side is fond of saying.

Saying that her coming out with a statement about bombing 'proves' she's ready to be president is sorta ludicrous; how does it prove that, exactly?  


by Cycloptichorn on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:16:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (2.00 / 7)

There are also words, besides a picture, in the story.  "Reading comprehension" is your friend.


by susanhu on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:18:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (1.33 / 3)

Nothing written in that story shows why she is ready to lead in any fashion.  I don't know why you responded the way you did, as it has nothing to do with my question at all.

Just more hackery from you, Susan, though most of us are used to it now.  By the way, are you going to admit that the NAFTA thing was completely fabricated?  My guess is no, since you wasted so much time pushing it.


by Cycloptichorn on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:20:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (2.00 / 1)

Regardless of the facts - Obama's disciples will continue claiming the Clintons initiated the NAFTA flap.


Hillary/Obama08
by annefrank on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 04:42:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (none / 0)

Wait a minute, Mr. Johnson said he talked with her twice and she impressed him as a good listener.

Can't you see why she would be good at answering the phone at 3AM from that as opposed to basing it on her judgement on the Iraq war vote?


by Statsman on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 06:18:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (2.00 / 0)

this diary is ridiculous...I think Hillary Clinton is quite capable and smart(depsite failing easiest bar in country) but this statement she made being used to spport this is ridiculous. You intrigue me Susan Hu


by pennypacker on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 06:01:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

she makes the right choice? (2.00 / 1)

All credible candidates are involved in foreign affairs, right now, what they say is listened to. When she was the front runner the violence in Iraq went down and the Iraqi government managed to agree on something. When Barack was ahead the violence went up and the Iraqi government threw out that compromise. Why? Hillary has a firm plan for exiting Iraq - no permanent bases, no occupation, all Americans out, all Iraqi's who've helped us out, cancel the no-bid contracts and open them for international investors who'll then have a financial stake in Iraq's success, reach out to Europe and Iraq's neighbors but exit Iraq whatever they decide to do. She has cosponsored a bill outlawing private armies like Blackwater. Obama isn't clear, he's, 'we'll get out as carefully as we went in carelessly,' but he supports private armies and has even cosponsored a bill to bring them under military law. He has not said anything about opening up contracts, and it looks like he might favor Blackwater type armies to protect American oil companies, which is a way of not giving back 'spoils of war' to Iraq.  He needs to speak clearly about his intentions, Iraqis are listening.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:56:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: she makes the right choice? (2.00 / 0)

Well, Hillary has to get them out Iraq, after she needs them for Iran!


by Socraticsilence on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 03:57:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (none / 0)

FOOL REMEMBER KATINA


Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 05:26:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (none / 0)

Hillary Clinton is the new Rudy Giuliani.   Using tragedy for the sake of political benefit.   Just ask the ghost of Benazir Bhutto, who cries everytime Hillary's supporters bring her up.


"Behold, I send you out as sheep amidst the wolves! Therefore, be as wise as a serpent, And as harmless as a dove."
by Setrak on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:26:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (2.00 / 1)

When Benazir died, BHO campaign said that Benazir was killed due to HRC's Vote . So it is BHO who is using personal tragedies for electoral votes


by indus on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:45:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (2.00 / 5)

It is presidential to speak out on such news.  Both Clinton and McCain know that.  Some people don't.  

And Larry's commentary is so spot on.  


by susanhu on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:17:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Susan... (none / 0)

 Be kind to BO. He has to find out where Times Square is first. Once he does I`m sure he will be just as responsive as he was after Katrina.


Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:38:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (2.00 / 1)

Interestingly, I haven't heard one single person mention the Times Square thing today, and our office is right on Broadway.  I guess in this town you need to knock down a building to get people's attention.

Nice insights from Larry today.  I like what he has to say about Hillary, and you certainly see this pattern from people who have professional dealings with her.  I'm not a fan of his bashing of Lake and Rice, because it comes across like he's pointing the finger at them to the exclusion of Bill Clinton.  I think Clinton deserves criticism for Rwanda, and I think the man himself would agree with that, but I don't believe he deserves to be smeared up and down over it.  And if he doesn't deserve it, then his subordinates certainly don't either.

If there's a reason to think they're incompetent, go for it, but Bill Clinton had the final say on all these issues and it strikes me as bad form to go there.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 04:56:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (2.00 / 0)

I issued a prompt press release about this terrible bombing too.

I guess that makes me a foreign policy guru too.

/snark


We are all complicit until we stop spying on citizens, restore the right to confront accusers and stop torture.
by Juan4All on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 05:48:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (2.00 / 1)

Maybe. If you are running for the presidency.

BHO was busing putting out a press release of getting $55 M and spending $50 M in TX and OH.


by indus on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:46:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (none / 0)

Maybe. If you are running for the presidency.

BHO was busing putting out a press release of getting $55 M and spending $50 M in TX and OH.


by indus on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:47:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Um, why? (none / 0)

I'm honestly asking.  Why is the fact that she issued a "prompt statement" great?

Apparently, Susan, you imagine that the dialogue around the country is going something like this:
"Wow, did you hear there was a bombing in Times Square?"
"Yeah, but there's great news!"
"What, you mean that no one was hurt?"
"No, Hillary Clinton issued a prompt statement!"

Doing ANYTHING in response to a bombing does not qualify as "great."  The bombing was bad.  I was happy no one was hurt.  I'm shocked that anyone found a politician commenting on the bomb to be "great."  


John McCain: Healthcare for Kids? In America? No way
by bosdcla14 on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 09:01:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (none / 0)

Here's a comment.  You are a piece of garbage and your writing substandard drivel.


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 10:32:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (none / 0)

I`m sure you are from dailykos because people on this site have better than grade 5 grammar.


Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 01:44:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama (none / 0)

If only there were a vetted Senator from the state that Times Square is in, I'm sure she would have been ready to deter an attack like this on her territory. Who the heck is the Senator of that state anyway. Unless of course, she were too busy fabricating lies and feeding them to foreign governments while pretending that those lies were actually coming from her superior opponent who will be POTUS in November. All said and done know, I suppose, HRC will just wait for Bush to craft a preemptive strike on Missouri, not read an intelligence reports on the plan because that would be "unpopular", all so that she can lock step behind Bush in another warrant-less war. Afterall, what's another 4,000 American service men and women killed, tens of thousands more injured along with civilians, and a couple of billion more dollars? She'll probably underfund this war at least, so that she can have money left for her and hubby's economy boosting NAFTA highway though.
*VOTE DEMOCRAT! - HRC or BHO* Obama '08 - Full of reason / Hillary '08 - Full of treason (Gallup Poll, March 26 2008) / McCain '08 - Diaper's full of Bushit.
by VT COnQuest on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:45:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Susan never learns (none / 0)

I wonder what's gonna happen when she loses...you world is gonna be turned upside down.

Larry will go back to obscurity writing on things he has no idea about.


by chicagogene on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:57:56 PM EST

Oh please... (2.00 / 6)

Are ad hominem attacks all you have now? You obviously don't know what you're talking about. But when it comes to national security issues, Larry & Susan DO.


No way, no how, no McCain! :-)
by atdleft on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:01:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Susan never learns (2.00 / 6)

Where is your candidate today anyway? Hmmm ...


by susanhu on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:19:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Susan never learns (2.00 / 2)

Too busy running for president...


by newhorizon on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 03:55:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Susan never learns (2.00 / 3)

What will happen if Obama loses?
Obama's followers say if he's "denied" the presidency they'll riot and boycott.

Response from Obama?  chirp, chirp


Hillary/Obama08
by annefrank on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 04:46:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama lacks in judgement to be President (2.00 / 5)

Excellent Dairy! Goes right to the heart of this campaign. Obama has to answer how he will be as commander in chief. And he has to prove he has it to be president during a time of crisis.


by moi moi on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:58:21 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 1)

Pardon me, with all due respect, this is a pile of crap. Seriously?  Times square?  this is proof that Hillary and McCain are ready?


Hillary Clinton is not a monster,....as far as I know.. We are all Hussein JUNIOR.. ///.. FEINGOLD/BOXER 2016
by Its Like Herding Cats on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 01:58:26 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 0)

Times Square Bombing + Obama + Times Square Bombing + Obama + Times Square Bombing + Obama + Times Square Bombing + Obama...

It all makes sense now!! Obama would be responsible for more Times Square Bombings!! At 3:20 am!!


unapologetic Obama supporter
by dantes on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:19:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary = McCain Lite (2.00 / 2)

Hillary is proving the point that Obama's campaign is starting to push..Huffinton Post

For seven years she aligned herself with Sen. McCain in putting all our eggs in General Musharaf's basked," Craig said. "And she aligned herself with Sen. McCain when they both criticized Barack Obama for taking action against al Qaeda leadership, which has taken safe havens in Pakistan. She aligned herself with Sen. McCain in supporting the Kyl-Lieberman resolution," which many Democrats fear raises the specter of war with Iran.


by JoeCoaster on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 04:45:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hillary = McCain Lite (2.00 / 3)

Does Obama really want to keep bringing up Kyl-Lieberman?  Since he skipped it to campaign, it just plays into the fact that "he was too busy" to do a lot of things.  I think it's a mistake for him to keep bringing it up.


by cmugirl90 on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 06:51:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 1)

Do you really think this trivial incident in NY is worthy of the attention of a presidential candidate that is not pandering to fear and inflaming post-9/11 perceptions in the electorate for their own political gain?  McCain and Hillary are birds of a feather.


by Shaun Appleby on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:00:16 PM EST

No... (2.00 / 4)

It's just important that someone who wants to be our next Commander-in-Chief be ready to handle the major security issues our nation still faces. And yes, it's important that our Democratic nominee be able to take on McCain when it comes to national security. Hillary is proving to us that she has what it takes. Is that why you all have nothing to say except for the usual personal attacks on Susan & Larry?


No way, no how, no McCain! :-)
by atdleft on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:04:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No... (2.00 / 0)

this was a major national security incident?


by the mollusk on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:10:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No... (2.00 / 0)

So only large bombings get Obama's attention?


by americanincanada on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 03:25:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No... (2.00 / 0)

How does this show she is 'ready to handle it?'


by Cycloptichorn on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:18:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No... (2.00 / 4)

As I said above, there were words, not just a screenshot, in the diary.  

Words that, by the way, come from the former Deputy Director of Counterterrorism for the U.S. State Department who was, before that, an analyst for the CIA.  And is an internationally known expert on counterterrorism (who trains our special forces) and is a frequent consultant on financial fraud as well.


by susanhu on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:21:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No... (1.00 / 1)

And, another gigantic shill for Clinton such as yourself.  Thanks, but no thanks.

His OPINION does not provide objective proof of anything at all.  He's made some pretty boneheaded comments since the start of the election race this year, and frankly, his credibility is way down b/c of them.

Not that I would expect you to care, b/c he's a Clinton supporter.  And that's what matters in the end.


by Cycloptichorn on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:25:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (1.00 / 1)

it is certainly worthy of a presidential candidate who represents NYC. Just as the recent shootings in ILL were worthy of statement from their candidate running for...oh wait...he didn't make one? Nevermind.


by americanincanada on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:13:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (1.40 / 5)

Actually dingus, Obama was at NIU 2 days after the shootings...

You can stay in Canada, EH!!!


by chicagogene on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:17:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

I see you have tons of respect for your fellow americans, abroad or not. perhaps those who voted for Obama in our abroad primary should rethink that if he shoud make the GE.

Obama may have made a statement but it was far later than it should have been. He should have made it immediately.


by americanincanada on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 03:23:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 1)

Facts matter:  He did speak out, albeit somewhat belatedly.


by susanhu on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:22:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 3)

This is Sen. Clinton's district, of course she's going to address it, and if she didn't comment on this, you would be saying "Where's Hillary - too busy running for president to do her job?".  


by AnnC on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:16:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

And the alignment with McCain in her response is coincidental?  You could practically swap their statements around and not be able to discern the Democrat from the Republican.  What is that if not further evidence of her well documented hawkish foreign policy?  We need a leader on this issue, not someone chasing the perceptions born of the worst fears of the American public.


by Shaun Appleby on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 08:48:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 2)

"Do you really think this trivial incident in NY is worthy of the attention of a presidential candidate that is not pandering to fear and inflaming post-9/11 perceptions in the electorate for their own political gain? "

Trivial? Your comment is profoundly offensive to first responders everywhere, and should be to many more citizens. Times Square is within the area I serve, and bombings place my life at risk, along with the lives of the people in my city.

Senator Clinton is supported by first responders all over the country because she really "gets it" about the death and mayhem that terrorism creates. She was there for us, anticipating the toxicity of the WTC disaster when the Bush/Giuliani administration was maintaining everyone was safe in an atmosphere polluted with asbestos, benzene and countless other carcinogens. She has done everything possible to help us, and continues to. She remembers what really counts. She has never exploited the role she played there, always giving us the top billing, and quietly supporting us.

She has proven who she is - honest, incredibly hard working and tenacious, assiduous in details, making the best possible conclusion to events, mastering the details and really listening until she deeply understands the situation, doing everything she can while maintaining everyone's dignity in the crisis. She has kept every promise she made to us, and done what she said she will do. She doesn't forget, anything.

That's why we first responders support her, why 28 senior military brass support her, and why we want her to have our backs.


by 07rescue on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:02:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

Oh, for pity's sake.  Why all the high dudgeon about it?  It caused less damage than a traffic accident but somehow it is national news?  Worthy of the pandering pontifications of our two hawk candidates who desperately want to leverage fear and angst?  How about the two bombings in Iraq on the same day?:


At least 54 people have been killed in a roadside bombing and a suicide attack within minutes of each other in Baghdad, according to police and medical officials.

Major-General Qassim Moussawi, spokesman for security operations in the Iraqi capital, said the blasts occurred in a shopping area in Karrada district, wounding another 120 people.

Scores die in twin Baghdad blasts Al Jazeera 6 Mar 08

I didn't hear any mention about that.  How do you think those first responders felt?  Crikies, no wonder 70% of Americans can't find Iraq on a world map.


by Shaun Appleby on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:59:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

"I didn't hear any mention about that.  How do you think those first responders felt? "

I am fully aware of the bombing in Bagdad, there were several other bombings in the world today as well, including a Jewish seminary bombing that killed 8 students. First responders in NYC stay abreast of all terrorist activities around the world because they may have direct implications for our own state of readiness for attack right here. I thought the Bagdad bombing  was off topic for this discussion, and am unclear as to what point you are trying to make by bringing it up here.

There are many events we are made aware of that never make it into the news, either, you might be surprised. You underestimate the awareness and concerns of the first responder community, we are extremely concerned about the importance of national policy on our responsibilities, and frankly, we are working with a great deal more information than the average citizen who does not receive the constant bulletins and alerts we do, updating us on international events. This information, which elected officials also receive, and more, helps to shape our views and may explain some of the policy disagreements between you and I. We are working from different data sets.

The danger presented by today's bombing has far more to do with how it raises the threat of further incidents, which may not be restricted to property damage, along with the obvious implication that  this type of event demonstrates how vulnerable we are to far more deadly attacks. You personally are not charged with keeping people safe on NYC streets, so it's significance is far less to you. But a bombing  in Times Square is not equivalent to a traffic accident. You have no leg to stand on there.


by 07rescue on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 09:38:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

Yeah, terrific.  You're unclear as to what point you are trying to make by bringing it up here?  A plate glass window in NYC is more important to you that 54 dead in Iraq.  Why am I surprised.  You're a hero.


by Shaun Appleby on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 11:04:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

"Yeah, terrific.  You're unclear as to what point you are trying to make by bringing it up here?  A plate glass window in NYC is more important to you that 54 dead in Iraq.  Why am I surprised.  You're a hero."

And you are sitting at a computer keyboard casting blanket aspersions on people you do not know,  insulting Americans who actually care about bombs going off in major cities, pretending you know best what the relative importance and ramifications are of events you are ignorant of and do not understand. I'm not in the least impressed. You are offensive in your demeaning insults, and grandiose in your fantasy that you know better than other Americans, and that your opinions should prevail.

You have never seen 54 people dead, have you? I have, and I guarantee to you that it means far more to me than it ever will to someone who has never seen it. All I see you doing about it is exploiting the event to try to score some insulting point on a blog, to further your political agenda, while real people who do care get out there and put their lives on the line to save your behind and make the streets safer for you. I'm out there actually doing my best to make sure 54 people or many more do not die in my city, while you are  hiding behind a computer typing to some unknown audience to insult them anonymously and get away with saying things you would never have the courage to say to their faces.

You have words with no actions to back them up. All hat and no cattle. Sounds like that's the Obama way.

Have I made myself clear?


by 07rescue on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:47:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

You're not doing anyone any favours by perpetuating the climate of fear that these national security crises have created in the American psyche.


by Shaun Appleby on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 05:11:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

Hillary's foreign policy team is Bill's foreign policy team.  Its a team that supported the War in Iraq and had a mixed record at best while Bill was President.

Hillary offers nothing but a continuation of the strong and wrong foreign policy that has characterized the Bush Administration.  Wrong on Iraq, wrong on Iran, wrong on Latin America (especially Colombia, Cuba, and left-of-center leaders), wrong on meeting with controversial world leaders.


by WellstoneDem on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:03:35 PM EST

WRONG! (2.00 / 4)

Hillary's foreign policy team is Bill's foreign policy team.  Its a team that supported the War in Iraq and had a mixed record at best while Bill was President.

Who are you, Sean Hannity? So now it's Hillary's fault that Bush misled this nation into war? And btw, quite a few antiwar leaders have already endorsed Hillary- Ambassador Joe Wilson & Fmr. CIA Agent Valerie Plame, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) just to name a few. Oh yes, and Bill Clinton's administration had a "mixed record" on foreign policy? So a peace deal in Northern Ireland was nothing? Stopping the madness in Former Yugoslavia was nothing? Living in peace with the rest of the world was nothing?

Wow, way to rewrite history!


No way, no how, no McCain! :-)
by atdleft on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:10:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WRONG! (none / 0)

First off, I didn't blame Senator Clinton exclusively for the Iraq War though she is partly responsible as a result of authorizing it.  I was simply making note of the fact that the big hitters on Clinton's foreign policy team were on record supporting the invasion.  Thats not solid judgment.

Second, did I say the Clinton administration had a terrible record?  No.

I said it had a mixed record.  

It failed in Rwanda, it failed in Somalia, it introduced a terrible policy in Colombia, it furthered a dumb Cuba policy and advanced it with "Wet-foot, dry foot" while simultaneously refusing Haitian refugees, it gave China most favored trade status without pushing for any human rights reforms, and didn't get environmental and labor standards directly included in NAFTA.

President Clinton did well in Europe, otherwise, not so great.


by WellstoneDem on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 03:05:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 0)

I guess Hillary needed to say something since she's the Senator from New York.  And John McCain needed to say something because fear is all he's got.  Beyond that, it's about electoral politics and appearances and responses and whatnot.  

But, personally, I think allowing ourselves to be terrorized is the only sure way to lose to the terrorists, as they say.  Key sentence from the New York Times (paraphrasing) "No one was injured, no one was killed, it was similar to other bombings at recruitment centers in 2005 and 2007."  

Funny, I don't remember hearing about it back then.  Oh yeah, that's because there wasn't a presidential election going on and the need to pander to people's sense of insecurity wasn't quite as strong.


by the mollusk on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:09:17 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + (2.00 / 5)

You seem to have contempt for Sen. Clinton's 8 years as first lady, traveling to over 80 countries and gaining invaluable diplomatic experience. I assume you also don't think her 7 years in the U.S. Senate (including an actual terrorist attack in her district) don't qualify her either. Then can you please explain to me how Sen. Obama's 0 years gaining diplomatic experience and 3 years in the U.S. Senate quality him for a crisis?


by AnnC on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:11:59 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + (2.00 / 0)

What the hell does 9/11 being in her district have to do with ANYTHING?

She didn't stop it; she didn't materially change things in any way.  This is a Rudy Guiliani argument, a specious one.  


by Cycloptichorn on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:17:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + (2.00 / 4)

Well, of course she didn't stop it - she's not psychic.  But as the Senator for NY she had to deal with the aftermath in her district.  She has worked diligently to get the first responders the medical care they need - even as our government tries to deny the cause of the many health problems of the 9/11 responders. And she does it without the grandstanding of Rudy.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2 007/09/11/355608.aspx

As for what 9/11 has to do with anything, I was answering a comment from rssrai about HRC's ability to respond to a crisis - and I am still awaiting the answer to my question.


by AnnC on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:45:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + (2.00 / 0)

Well, he was right about going into Pakistan to take out terrorists with actionable intelligence. That's the same policy that just got Abu Laith al-Libi blown up a mile away from a Pakistani military base. Of course, Hillary would never do anything like that. She's been very vocal about how dumb it would be for the US to do anything like this.

http://www.newsobserver.com/505/story/91 8829.html


unapologetic Obama supporter
by dantes on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:25:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + (none / 0)

BHO went to Africa- that Counts for something.


by indus on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:49:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So I'm assuming, (2.00 / 1)

by implication, that Clinton and McCain both gave timely responses, and Obama has yet to give one? You didn't say so specifically, but I don't see a statement by BO in there anywhere.


by georgiapeach on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:19:51 PM EST

Re: So I'm assuming, (2.00 / 1)

The implication is that Clinton and McCain are in the fear mongering business and Obama is not.

NYT Frontpage - "Police Investigate Small Blast in Times Square"

Very, Very Scary!


by JoeCoaster on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:36:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rwanda? They want to bring up Rwanda?? (none / 0)

Back before we were divided by our primary preference, we all agreed that the United States' failure to act in Rwanda was a disgrace that should haunt our conscience forever.

Rwanda should NEVER be used to "score points" in a campaign. NEVER. Larry Johnson should know this. And if we're talking about a failure to act, Bill Clinton was president. As much as I've always deeply admired Bill, that for me was the one true blight on his record.

The point is, there's more than enough blame to go around for our non-response to Rwanda, and it's shameful to exploit it that way.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:27:16 PM EST

Huh? (none / 0)

Nothing that you wrote addresses my point in any way. I have stated that it is, at the least, hypocritical to use Rwanda as a weapon against Obama when Bill Clinton was president when it happened.

You respond with a diatribe about how Clinton deposed Cedras and Obama is involved with a civil war in Kenya (or whatever). Complete non sequiturs.

My point was that Rwanda is one of our nation's great shames, and it should not be used for political attacks by anyone. But if it is, the Clintons are about the last people who should try it.


by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 11:51:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 2)

Wow.  Just...just WOW!  

Bill Clinton's failure to do anything to stop the Rwandan genocide is not his fault.

Hear that, people?  It is not Bill Clinton's fault that the US did nothing to stop 1,000,000 people from being murdered!

It is TOTALLY the fault of some other guy.  Maybe that guy who commanded our military.  Yeah...it was that guy's fault.


No way. No how. No McCain.
by freedom78 on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:42:11 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

"During her time on the National Security Council, as the senior person responsible for giving the President policy options on Africa, Rice reprised the role of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.  She sat by while more than one million Rwandans were butchered in a bloody genocide."

First of all, Susan Rice did not become Senior Director for African Affairs at the NSC until 1995.  The Rwandan genocide occurred in 1994.  At the time of the genocide, she was a deputy to Richard Clarke.

Second of all, if you're blaming advisers, Madeline Albright (and adviser of Senator Clintons) was one of the members of the NSC at the time of the crisis (along with Anthony Lake, who advises Obama)

Finally, advisers provide the relevant information to the President and suggest policy; it is up to the President to make sure he/she gets all the relevant information and then make a decision.  To try to play off one of the Clinton Administration's major foreign policy failures as the fault of a woman who ranked no higher than deputy at the time is ridiculous.


by WellstoneDem on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:52:29 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 3)

Thank you for including Larry's insightful diary. I had just commented that it needed to reach a wider audience only to then come here and find it.

As usual Susan, you, like Hillary are right on top of things, ready to respond.


by Fleaflicker on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:55:50 PM EST

Re: Obama Not Ready for Prime Time (2.00 / 4)

The best endorsements of Hillary Clinton's ability  are statements from the twenty-two generals who are supporting her.  

And to that genius who keeps posting that those men are simply appointees of Bill Clinton's: WRONG.  Four Star General Wesley Clark was ranked before he was designated Supreme Allied Commander of NATO.  Clark has said that HRC is ready today to be Commander-in-Chief.   As have the others, many of whom received their rank by George Bush I.

How many generals have endorsed Obama?  Two.


by miriam on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 02:59:17 PM EST

Re: Obama Not Ready for Prime Time (2.00 / 0)

The vast majority of the generals supporting Hillary  achieved high rank under Bill. Clark, while a good guy, was appointed SACEUR by Clinton. Plain and simple. Wikipedia it if you'd like - most have personal pages.


by amiches on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 03:55:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Not Ready for Prime Time (2.00 / 1)

As has been blogged multiple times, Obama has received far more financial support from people in the military.


by mainelib on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 06:54:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Not Ready for Prime Time (none / 0)

No, mainelib, you don't get it. Those troops don't matter. The ones that matter are the retired ones that Bill gave good jobs to.


by amiches on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 08:57:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

The HRC team is full of words, and they're often senseless and poorly considered:

http://debatableland.typepad.com/the_deb atable_land/2008/03/clinton-and-kat.html

How do you explain this one?


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 03:55:55 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 2)

I certainly don't explain it using some wingnut's opinion on his blog when even the people commenting don't agree with him.


by americanincanada on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 05:28:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

Some is opinion, but the underlying historic record is what it is, and the HRC team put out a dumb statement.

Can I assume that you actively reject the false right wing BHO hack jobs that HRC supports cut and paste from Sweetness & Light to myDD.  The Rec list is constantly full of these things.  Have you noticed how the anti-BHO forces on myDD totally ignore the right wing attacks on HRC when they are mining S&L for their material?  This manipulation gives the false impression that the right doesn't have a ton of new attack material aimed at HRC.

And I hope you reject the HRC campaign feeding the right wing nuts with lies like the fake madrassa story.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/o bama.madrassa/


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 06:29:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

Obama is so clueless.  He has not demonstrate any ability accept being eloquent.

Maybe he's just busy running for president.


by JoeySky18 on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 04:02:17 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing (2.00 / 1)

I don't have any comment on the whole political implication, but just that this is utterly disgusting that someone would have the desire to bomb a military recruiting office.  Just disgusting and cowardly and I hope said individual, along with co-conspirators, get prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law as domestic terrorists.


by toonsterwu on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 04:14:27 PM EST

wow (2.00 / 2)

putting the word bomb and obama with a plus in between in a title it. It does not get any more Fox news then this.


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 04:59:07 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 1)

Why is venom like this tolerated?


What would LBJ do?
by Socks The Cat on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 05:21:42 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

she just gets worse and worse


by BlueinColorado on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:43:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 1)

Susanhu, these anti-Obama dairies are not making the case for Hillary very well. I can come up with several reasons to support a Clinton presidency without even mentioning Obama.
Playing the terrorism card feeds into the fear & smear tactics of GOP campaigning. What you're doing is giving credence to Bush's terrorism rhetoric which. It's this mentality that has scared the electorate into thinking we have to bomb everyone who might be a threat just to be, "safe."  
As for the commenter using crash language towards Susanhu, you're antics are uncalled for and you should apologize immediately.
 
by hnic357 on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 06:14:32 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 2)

Absolutely.  This reminds me of the Bush re-election campaign.


by mainelib on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 06:55:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (2.00 / 0)

This incoherent mess is the top-recced diary?

I often disagree with the front page diarists, but his should be embarrassing to everyone concerned here.


by BlueinColorado on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:45:00 PM EST

Typical of the Clinton's (none / 0)

to blame the underlings for Rwanda. The policy came from ABOVE. No one was to mention the word "genocide" b/c Bill was too "busy" doing god knows what.


by highgrade on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 07:48:25 PM EST

Larry Johnson credibility (2.00 / 1)

Whilst susanhu is driving people to noquarter to exploit Hillary fever for ad revenue, I'd like to point out that the author of the article, Larry Johnson, wrote an article 2 months prior to 9/11 about how the U.S. had little to fear from terrorism.

Judging from news reports and the portrayal of villains in our popular entertainment, Americans are bedeviled by fantasies about terrorism. They seem to believe that terrorism is the greatest threat to the United States and that it is becoming more widespread and lethal. They are likely to think that the United States is the most popular target of terrorists. And they almost certainly have the impression that extremist Islamic groups cause most terrorism.... None of these beliefs are based in fact.... While terrorism is not vanquished, in a world where thousands of nuclear warheads are still aimed across the continents, terrorism is not the biggest security challenge confronting the United States, and it should not be portrayed that way.

(via the NYT)

Keep that in mind while evaluating his opinion of who would be most prepared for meeting our national security challenges.


by mattw on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 08:11:44 PM EST

Re: pandering (2.00 / 1)

When this is all over, in a year or so, I'll post this again for everyone to see how tragic some of the cheerleading became (on both sides, but this diary is as bad as it gets). Shame on you Hu. I hope you're ashamed when you see this in a year.


by thewholeofthemoon on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 08:21:54 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

Hillary Clinton is a shameful human being who will never be president.  All she and her supporters have done this week is make President McCain more and more likely by the day!  Nice work dummies!


by Democrat in Chicago on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 08:34:43 PM EST

Poor Giuliani. (2.00 / 1)

Hillary's stealing all his best lines.




Democratic Candidate, US Senate, Wisconsin 2012
by benmasel on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 10:50:01 PM EST

Obama and His Advisors Not Ready for Prime Time (2.00 / 1)

It is amazing how Ms.Rice gets blame about HC husband failure to act while millions of black people got slaughtered. I think this campain may succeed where many have failed, and that is to get African American to leave this party and become independents.


by yarddon on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 11:11:03 PM EST

Attention Obama Supporters!!!! (none / 0)

So, let me sum up this devastating diary for all you head-in-the-sand Obama supporters:

Hillary and McCain put out statements QUICKLY

Susan Rice is not ready to be Commander in Chief

Hillary Clinton listened well to Larry Johnson

HRC understands some military terminology

Bush, Cheney, Powell, and Baker messed up

Larry Johnson doesn't think that BO knows the difference between the DIA, CIA, and NSA

Larry Johnson likes one of HRC's advisors better than two of Obamas.

As they say in Tennis - Game, set, and match. Why does Obama even stay in the race? Clearly he's not fit to be Commander in Chief like Hillary and John are.

Keep up the great work, Susan!  Can't wait for your next post!


by grover738 on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 11:28:37 PM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (1.00 / 1)

I am not surprised Obama failed to issue a statement, for her regularly cavorts with those who make and detonate bombs.  Does anyone remember William Ayers, the member of the Weather Underground with whom Obama sat on a Board in 2002?  Ayers, the domestic terrorist, also helped launch Obama's political career in 1996.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:08:06 AM EST

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (none / 0)

Obama put out a statement very quickly in response to the terrorist attack in Israel.


by mainelib on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 09:55:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Times Square Bombing + Obama and His Advisors (1.00 / 1)

Not only does Obama fail to issue a statement on this tragedy; his wife, who in my opinion does not sufficiently love her country to hold the office of First Lady, utters unpatriotic statements.  Clearly neither of them are incapable of representing our country and our values.  Perhaps they should join Ayers and pine for the days of the Weather Underground.


by truthteller2007 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:10:09 AM EST

Good film, though a little dark. (none / 0)

The points are all true, and relevant to the complete fake that Obama is.   However, it could be done without the dark music and cartoons.


Reasonable people can disagree.
by mnicholson0220 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:41:34 AM EST

Why presidential candidates respond (none / 0)

It's important for serious presidential contenders to issue statements on what could possibly constitute threats to the United States -- it demonstrates to terrorist organizations foreign and domestic that post "regime change" the act will not be forgotten.

Why didn't Obama issue a statement?
i think he was too busy running for president.

Still waiting to see him think like one.


Sexism is real.
by grassrootsorganizer on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:38:44 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.