Report: Hillary And Biden Want Obama To Talk Tougher On Iran
A fascinating detail from this morning’s New York Times piece on the debate about President Obama’s response to events in Iran:
Even while supporting the president’s approach, senior members of the administration, including Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, would like to strike a stronger tone in support of the protesters, administration officials said.
This one definitely merits some more reporting. But for now the tell seems to be that administration officials are leaking on such a sensitive matter. Republicans who’ve been hammering Obama’s handling of the Iran crisis and are persuaded it’s a political winner for them seem likely to grab on to this to give their criticism legs.
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Just like with Palin and McCain, nothing is quite as important as what the losers have to say.
That is just stupid… So we speak up on Iran and then what?? What are we supposed to do after that?
The best thing we can do for Amedenajad is get involved…Obama knows that and that’s why he is doing what he is doing now. And I agree with what he’s doing
Once again, anonymous sources………I just can’t trust the New York Times right now to fully believe this.
I want to, but with their recent track record, I really can’t.
And remember, this is Helene Cooper we are taking about who wrote this:
http://firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/helene-coopers-straw-man-straw-man/
and
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2009/05/by-publiusso-lets-say-im-helene-cooper-of-the-nyt-and-lets-say-i-have-a-great-idea-for-an-article—-the-premise-is-that-oba.html
Obama is doing what George W. Bush would do every chance he gets (bailing out Wall Street, defending DOMA, blowing it on health care, leaving room for preventive detention, keeping warrantless wiretapping alive, refusing to prosecute torture, protecting the CIA…). What would Bush do on Iran? Make a huge scene. Obama, for once, is doing the right thing.
I have to agree with sluggahjells, Helene Cooper is rather hacktastic.
Greg, I love your reporting and the way you dig into things, but I’ve never much cared for story lines that say the president’s people disagree with him and this will give his opponents ammo. It’s set piece journalism that doesn’t help much of anything. Plus there’s always the question of sourcing, which is on the dubious side with this one, given Helene Cooper.
This is a pretty disappointing piece of reporting and editing. It follows the model of so much that we see…use of anonymous sources which conveniently suggest conflict and even more conveniently function as stenography for a strategized narrative. “Pressure”? The neoconservative crowd certainly would like it taken as the truth of things that they have the capacity to bring “pressure” on the administration. Similarly, the minority party would wish it considered to be the case that their opposition to 95% of the president’s policies and statements wield influence on Obama. But both are projections of what is not real and simply done for marketing/propaganda reasons.
There is a plausible argument to be made that Obama ought not to have made the comment re lack of difference between the two candidates but that certainly isn’t obvious to me. In part, it seems a typical reflection of the tendency to assume that the rest of the world waits with bated breath for Americans to speak on any/all subjects.
Greg I am fan but this is totally lame. Have to say it. I know it is not as exciting to report on other stuff and making hay of the Obama is a wimp story line the republicans want to hear but come on! More anonymous sources telling stories so they can drive the narrative where they want it eh? And you trying to make a really important story out of it. even worse.
oh and the best part of it is that what Obama said is exactly right and what the neocons had been criticizing him for not realizing–that the real power is in Khamenei and not Mousavi or Ahmadi. His comments were spot on. Cooper is not a very good or responsible journalist.
Greg’s instincts are good here. He’s noted the element in the Times piece which has the potential to give heft to the rightwing narrative on the matter. They’ll certainly use this one. The serious pissoff is that the Times reporters and editor allow themselves to be pawns through such a shallow conception of their jobs and tasks.
the problem I have is that Greg is making it the story, this is how the Village gets its narrative set, a hint in the NYT the bloggers then report on the report and then they use that to get the ball rolling on the basis of nothing. this story is about people on the streets in Iran dying for gods sake not the self satisfaction of some neocons yelling for more from Obama and scoring political points. sorry, rant over. Love greg either way but this just feels like a story that serves to grease the skids not useful at all.
This nicely fits in with lsrael and The Lobby’s talking points.
JTA: “…U.S. Jewish organizational leaders were calling for more American support for the protesters and more international action to stop the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program…”
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/06/16/1005923/iranian-unrest-prompts-calls-for-more-us-pressure-on-regime
So, I wonder who on Obama’s staff is leaking this stuff? Also, wondering who is on the WH ’secret’ visitors list as well.
ifo – understood. It’s possible Greg and I might meet one day and I just don’t want him to hurt me.
I think it’s worth bring up especially since we had the lengthy discussion yesterday about this very item. It’s my understanding, however, that Biden and Hillary work for Obama and their wishes aren’t necessarily American policy. If the president wants to speak stronger he will. But taking foreign policy advice from Republicans, the people who presided over the last 8 years of miserably failed policy, isn’t something anyone is bound to do.
.
I also can’t help but think the Times would love for nothing more than to nudgingly mention disagreements in Obama’s cabinet whether substantive or not. That and the Times has been so graciously cautious at sounding war drums in the past (see Iraq and its coverage of Glorious War).
Sand – yes, lots of voices and media outlets for that set of notions. And one might be tempted to attend to them with more confidence if these folks hadn’t gotten almost everything dead wrong over the last couple of decades.
Obama may know of activities taking place in the upper echelons of the Iranian regime that he fears might be compromised if he were to take a definitive stance on the situation. If the Supreme leaders feel they are being pressured by our administration, they might do the complete opposite just because that is what they are used to doing when challenged by our country. He could be thinking, if we remain an outside observer, the discussion remains about the people protesting in the streets of Iran. We need to stay the hell out of this right now and let the discussion be about the people of Iran.
.
Besides, Bill Kristal came out and said Obama should take sides and call this election a fraud. Honestly, when was the last time he was right about anything?
LOL Bernie, totally get it.
and Mike–yep, exactly. but these types need satisfaction now, no matter the actual consequences in policy and national interest.
Is this the type of thing that one only does if it is in one’s political self-interest? Is there no right vs. wrong? Is it only “right” if it polls strongly?
?