Home › Blogs › Warner Todd Huston's blog ›

Kissinger Says Obama Wrong on Kissinger's Position in Debate Tonight

Submitted by Warner Todd Huston on Fri, 09/26/2008 - 23:28

Here is something that the media should focus on. In the debates tonight, Barack Obama said that even Henry Kissinger agreed with Obama that on a presidential level a diplomatic meeting with as rogue a leader as Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a good idea. McCain immediately said that this was not true, but the issue wasn't further addressed in the debate.

Well, now Henry Kissinger himself is attempting to set the record straight. Kissinger says that Obama was wrong, McCain was right. Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard has a short post to this effect on his TheBlog entry.

Kissinger Unhappy About Obama

 Henry Kissinger believes Barack Obama misstated his views on diplomacy with US adversaries and is not happy about being mischaracterized. He says: "Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain. We do not agree on everything, but we do agree that any negotiations with Iran must be geared to reality."

Well, that about answers to that Obama lie.

This reply by Kissinger should find greater exposure to show that Obama really is out of his depth on foreign policy issues. Let's hope the Old Media corrects the record.

 

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

5
Your rating: None Average: 5 (3 votes)

Comments

5 STAR, BUT WHY IS IT TWS 'EXCLUSIVE'?

Submitted by Freedoms Truth on Fri, 09/26/2008 - 23:44.

Why is this only on the Weekly Standard?

Are you telling me this won't be on the FRONT PAGE of the NEW YORK TIMES tomorrow? (do I need a sarcasm tag)  This is a gaffe ten times BIGGER than Palin, er, Gibson, not knowing the Bush doctrine!

A guy in a debate says "all these famous guys vouch for me" and they DONT. And they say the obvious thing, which is that a President meeting a despot without preconditions is foolish and naive and does indeed give these leaders credibility they dont deserve.

 

If they mention it

Submitted by Warner Todd Huston on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 00:54.

If they mention it, it will be once and then they'll let it fade away. If McCain had said such a thing, though, it would be all the media could talk about for days on end.

WRONG - Obama was correct

Submitted by Super K on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 06:28.

Sorry, Obama indeed WAS correct.

The argument between Obama and McCain tonight was not about whether the talks would be on a presidential level -- the argument was whether there should be preconditions. Just read the transcript:

OBAMA: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who's one of his advisers, who, along with five recent secretaries of state, just said that we should meet with Iran -- guess what -- without precondition.

Obama is talking about preconditions, and only preconditions -- NOT direct meetings with the president. More:

OBAMA: Look, I mean, Senator McCain keeps on using this example that suddenly the president would just meet with somebody without doing any preparation, without having low-level talks. Nobody's been talking about that, and Senator McCain knows it. This is a mischaracterization of my position.

    When we talk about preconditions -- and Henry Kissinger did say we should have contacts without preconditions -- the idea is that we do not expect to solve every problem before we initiate talks.

 

Later:

MCCAIN: Look, Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve of face-to- face meetings between the president of the United States and the president -- and Ahmadinejad. He did not say that.

OBAMA: Of course not.

Hey look, Obama just fully acknowledged Kissinger never said anything about direct meetings with the president without preconditions! Later:

MCCAIN: And I guarantee you he would not -- he would not say that presidential top level.

OBAMA: Nobody's talking about that.

"Nobody's talking about that!" The transcript says, right there -- Nobody is talking about talks with no preconditions on a presidential level. We're talking about preconditions on ANOTHER level.

What has Kissinger said in the past?

KISSINGER: I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations.

KISSINGER: I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level

One statement about NO preconditions. One statement about HIGH-LEVEL talks.

What did Kissinger say tonight?

"I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level."

Obama was 100% correct. Kissinger favors high level talks without preconditions -- just not with the president. Obama never asserted otherwise.

re: WRONG - Obama was correct new

Submitted by proud2b4family on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 08:58.

Do you mean before or after Obama began parsing words and denying what he was saying all through his campaign?

FROM OBAMA'S OWN CAMPAIGN WEB SITE (Don't you people READ?!)

Diplomacy: Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama and Biden would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress.

Would you PLEASE do your homework on your own candidate before you start trolling?!

Honestly.

My friend, i'm afraid you misunderstand liberal trolls

Submitted by Big Ben 4 liberty on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 10:25.

Facts do not matter to them.  Only meaningless little points of contention that they think makes the case for their guy (no matter how flimsy).  They don't have the luxury of actual facts because their polices have been tried and failed before throughout history. 

It's actually funny

Submitted by gabriel on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 10:33.

that at a time that even the republican head of the SEC recognizes we need more regulation you would claim that liberal policies have failed throughout history.

Wrong again leftist troll!

Submitted by Big Ben 4 liberty on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 13:19.

He pointed out that the current regulations are bad and unenforcible.  This mess actually began under the Carter administration and finally reached its peak with the clinton administration.  This is afilure of big government of the highest order, and more government will actually make the problem worse.

Under Carter?

Submitted by gabriel on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 15:25.

Just curious, do you know anything about this topic?

Yes, dumbass!

Submitted by Big Ben 4 liberty on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 17:25.

The Community Reinvestment act of 1977 was Carter's baby.  And the genesis of so-called deregulation of which you erroneously blame Republicans for. 

It seems you don't

Submitted by gabriel on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 18:39.

Here's a simple question. What's a CDO and what role did CDOs have in the current crisis?

 

 

Obama Definitely Accurate On Kissinger

Submitted by MoBama on Sun, 09/28/2008 - 04:00.

Factcheck.org has the scoop, and what Obama said during the debate is accurate.  Huston's post takes issue with Obama suggesting "presidential level talks", but Obama never mentioned "presidential level talks" during the debate.  McCain did.

The argument can only be over the phrase "without preconditions", and on 9/20 Kissinger definitely mentioned holding talks at the Secretary of State level without preconditions.

Kissinger Sept. 20: Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we -- we know we're dealing with authentic...

CNN's Frank Sesno: Put at a very high level right out of the box?

Kissinger: Initially, yes.But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_debate_no_1.html

Community Reinvestment Act

Submitted by ShrikeDeCil on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 11:26.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o Quick history lesson. (The second half is more of a campaign ad, but the first half has plenty of leads for further research.)

Update on Phillip Berg, Esq. Lawsuit Against Obama and DNC

Submitted by AdrianS on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 15:27.

UPDATE TO MR. PHILLIP BERG’S LAWSUIT AGAINST BARACK OBAMA BASED ON OBAMA’S INELIGIBILITY ON HIS CANDIDACY AS REGARDS THE REQUIREMENTS OF NATURAL BORN CITIZENSHIP ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Partial excerpt from an email I sent Mr. Berg:

“I trust the judge did not originally dismiss your lawsuit because it does indeed have merit. We, as Americans, in order to fulfill the intent and directive of our Constitution are bound by patriotic duty to determine the legal status of any citizen running for the Presidency of the United States; such determination of status having to do with a requirement that said citizen must be a natural born citizen. Mr. Obama should be required to present pertinent evidence that would allow a judge or qualified public official to determine if he is, or is not, a natural born citizen. It is a legal requirement.”

Mr. Berg sent this copy of Mr. Obama’s and the DNC’s response.

Update: http://www.nextgenerationcorp.com/NextGenBlog/?p=66

It appears that Mr. Obama is trying to stall the matter. The outstanding issue is Mr. Obama’s birth certificate (Certificate of Live Birth). It appears that so far he has obfuscated this issue as well by providing, or having his agents provide, a false certificate of birth for publication.

But to Mr. Obama’s determent, the people of the United States of America demand that he (Mr. Obama) remove himself from eligibility to run for any political office for which he is not qualified and/or for which he (Mr. Obama) will not publicly present authoritative qualification for his candidacy as required by the Constitution of the United States of America.

God bless.

Definitely a stall tactic

Submitted by proud2b4family on Sat, 09/27/2008 - 15:39.

"You don't have standing" and "The burden of proof and demonstration of harm is on every single American" is nothing more than saying "You and what army?"

11 pages of useless legalese just to say "I'm not confident enough in my own standing as a natural born citizen to produce an official-enough looking document to attest to it."

None of our business?

Elitist to the core.