McCain Adviser: Obama’s ‘Words Matter, Except When They Pose an Inconvenient Truth’

“„

Randy Scheunemann: It’s important to highlight what [Obama] said a year ago and what he said just about an hour ago at a press conference in Israel. He was asked July 23, 2007, at the presidential debate in South Carolina: “Would you be willing to meet separately, without pre-condition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?”

“„

Sen. Obama’s answer was: “I would.”

“„

Today, Sen. Obama was asked: “A year ago you said you would meet in your first year as president…Is there anything you’ve heard today in your discussions with Israeli leaders to make you rethink that pledge, or are you standing by that?”

“„

Today, Sen. Obama said: “I think you have to look at what the question was…”

“„

I just read the question for everybody.

“„

“…and how I responded…”

“„

I just read his response. Sen. Obama said today: “But I think what I said in response was that I would, at my time and choosing, be willing to meet with any leader if I thought it would promote the national security interests of the United States. That continues to be my position.”

“„

There you have it. What he said a year ago and what he said today. This is revealing about Sen. Obama in several respects. First, it shows his inexperience in making such an uncategorical statement a year ago in the presidential debate. Second, it shows his stubbornness in adhering to such a position for so long. And third, and what we’ve seen more recently, it shows his malleability in trying to rewrite history and refusal to admit a mistake in what he originally said…I guess for Sen. Obama, words matter — except when they pose an inconvenient truth.

“„

OBAMA: I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them — which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration — is ridiculous. (APPLAUSE) Now, Ronald Reaganand Democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire. And the reason is because they understood that we may not trust them and they may pose an extraordinary danger to this country, but we had the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward.

“„

And I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them. We’ve been talking about Iraq — one of the first things that I would do in terms of moving a diplomatic effort in the region forward is to send a signal that we need to talk to Iran and Syria because they’re going to have responsibilities if Iraq collapses.

“„

They have been acting irresponsibly up until this point. But if we tell them that we are not going to be a permanent occupying force, we are in a position to say that they are going to have to carry some weight, in terms of stabilizing the region.