RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Hillary in 2008

 Wilson questions Obama's anti-war credentials in Clinton endorsement
Nick Juliano
Published: Wednesday February 13, 2008

In a aggressive essay targeting Barack Obama's qualifications for the presidency, Joseph Wilson, the former-ambassador-turned-war-critic married to outed CIA agent Valerie Plame, endorsed Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House.

Wilson's endorsement comes as Clinton finds herself 0-and-8 in February primary contests, and Obama's campaign gaining momentum headed into Wisconsin and Hawaii next week. The retired diplomat, who spoke out against Bush's characterization of Iraq's WMD program, said Obama's record opposing the war is too flimsy because he was just a state senator at the time "representing the most liberal district in Illinois."

"Senator Obama claims superior judgment on the war in Iraq ... and in so doing impugns the integrity of those who were part of the debate on the national scene," Wilson writes in the Baltimore Sun and at Huffington Post. "In mischaracterizing the debate on the Authorization for the Use of Military Force as a declaration of war, he implicitly blames Democrats for George Bush's war of choice. Obama's negative attack line does not conform to the facts. Nothing could be farther from the truth."

The essay appeared in the Sun Tuesday, as Maryland voters were headed to the polls. Obama bested Clinton with 60 percent of the vote there, to her 37 percent.

Wilson also argues that Clinton would fare better against presumptive Republican nominee John McCain. He resurrects a previous comment from an unnamed McCain aide who charged that "Obama wouldn't know the difference between an RPG and a bong," and says that Obama backed down in a prior letter exchange with McCain.

"The wrathful Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of being 'disingenuous,' to which Mr. Obama meekly replied, 'The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you.'

"Mr. McCain was insultingly dismissive but successful in intimidating his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one face-to-face encounter with Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama failed to stand his ground," Wilson writes.

"What gives us confidence Mr. Obama will be stronger the next time he faces Mr. McCain, a seasoned political fighter with extensive national security credentials? Even more important, what special disadvantages does Mr. Obama carry into this contest on questions of national security?"

In Wilson's view, The McCain Obama spat over war funding, which led to the bong/RPG comment, represents precisely the kind of GOP attack-machine politics that will be an intractable part of the coming general election campaign. Judging from McCain's comments at the time, combined with his distance from the most extreme conservatives in the GOP and reputation as a straight-talking Maverick, an Obama-McCain general election match-up might head down a different path.

"We're not gonna do that," McCain told Time when asked about plans for negative campaigning after the spat. "It's not helpful to me to get my message and my vision out. Now, you can't let an attack go unanswered, but at the same time you don't have to get into some kind of catfight."

Asked specifically about his staffer's retort to Obama, he said, "I thought that that was inappropriate and whoever said that should not have said that." He added: "If it happens again, I'll fire the person who said it." When reminded that he laughed at the line when it was read back to him during a conference call with reporters, he said, "I think it was funny, but I still think it was inappropriate."

An Obama spokesman also seemed to try to squelch the dust-up when it happened.

"America doesn’t need juvenile name-calling from Washington," spokesman Bill Burton told Politico's Jonathan Martin, "we need a commitment to end this war and bring our brave troops home."

Wilson goes on to argue against the Illinois Senator's main theme: "Change." But he seems to be trying to re-frame the issue.

"Contrary to the myth of his campaign, 2008 is not the year for transcendental transformation," Wilson writes. "The task for the next administration will be to repair the damage done by eight years of radical rule."

Where change appears, it is Wilson taking another dig at Obama in justifying support for Clinton.

"In order to effect practical change against a determined adversary, we do not need a would-be philosopher-king," he writes, "but a seasoned gladiator who understands the fight Democrats will face in the fall campaign and in governing."