McCain also agrees with Clinton

Posted: Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:03 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Republicans

From NBC's Andrew Merten
McCain today became the second GOP presidential hopeful (after Romney) to side with Clinton in her spat with Obama -- although he did not say so explicitly. During a town hall meeting in Derry, NH this afternoon, a member of the audience asked McCain what he thought about the dispute that began at Monday night’s debate. McCain used Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as an example, saying, “Are we going to come out of this meeting, and the president of Iran is going to say, ‘I'm stopping the IEDs, I'm going to stop developing nuclear weapons, I will agree that Israel is going to exist,’ then fine. Then lets set up the meeting.” But he warned of the danger posed to the prestige of the presidency and the country as a whole if such a dictator would use a high-level meeting for propaganda purposes, similar to Clinton’s warning on Monday.

Said McCain in conclusion: “There's a downside to just saying, I'll sit down and have face-to-face meetings with one of these dictatorial rulers, who violate every principle of upon which this nation was founded.”

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Ok, we all agree with Hillary. See why hillaryclinton.com ,the "best" women for the job !

Bill (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:14 PM)

I take this to mean that McCain wouldn't have face to face meetings with Musharif of Pakistan or Abdullah al Saud of Saudi Arabia seeing as both of thsoe leaders are dictators who violate every principle upon which this nation was founded.

to do otherwise would just be hypocritcal (read: Republican).

John Doe, The Peanut Gallery (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:17 PM)

When Clinton, McCain and Romney, formed an axis of old way of doing things in Washington, bind together to attack Obama, you know Obama is a candidate of change. It is Obama that will bring the true change this country needed

Stan (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:20 PM)

Interesting! She says she's not Bush-lite but she seems to have the same supporters. Now is the time for us to make a change and I don't see Hillary as the candidate to make that happen. Go Obama!

Jessica, WI (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:23 PM)

Huh? The US has been sitting down and having face to face meetings with Dictatorial Rulers from the start. (Who was Ben Franklin talking to in Paris?). The last fifty years, some of them have been on our payroll or on the recieving end of our weaponry, or both. Sorry Mac, you missed on that one.

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:24 PM)

I now understand why Clinton is Bush Lite, when she is been defended by the likes of MacCain and Romney...Obama is telling the truth and is the candidate of true change not just that he is scaring both parties elite as they know that his election will bring great change in Washington...Alas with Obama the old way of doing things will be history.

Jason (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:26 PM)

Stan, that's funny. The axis of old ways... or we could call it the Axis of Medieval.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:34 PM)

Yes more information is available,just go to hillaryclinton.com

Chelse (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:42 PM)

McRomney agree with Hillary... Now that's a winning positon...

Mark (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:44 PM)

This a debate that Clintons and her Repulican allies cannot win. This is a boast to Obama any democrat is in trouble when MacCain and Romney is defending you.....This is not looking good for the Clintons.

Emmy (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:44 PM)

Steve is IA is right.

So cynical and insulting-- the whole lot, except for Obama.

Hillary is getting nervous. This is the best she has?

Too bad McCain doesn't matter anymore.

Joe Justice (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:48 PM)

Seems as tho, the republican's Fear Obama more than we may know. They know at least with Hillary, they will have a continous punching bag, but with OBAMA, their work will be harder, since so many people want CHANGE."DELUSIONAL THINKING BY COMMON SENSE AMERICAN'S IS OVER"

rick,ky (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:51 PM)

Good,I hope all republicans agree with her.

Yiannis, Baltimore, MD (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:52 PM)

What does clinton have in common with McCain? Among other things, up until 2 years ago, they both opposed setting date certain for troops withdrawal! What has changed for clinton? She changed her possition to play well with the democratic voters because she believes thay have very short memory. After getting the nomination, it will be a different rhetoric.

CLINTON/MCCAIN 2008
or
CLINTON/ROMNEY 2008

In other words, more of the same for the next 8 years. Canada is still taking immigrants!

Donny (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:54 PM)

What is really wrong with Chuck Todd and Mark..they r really getting sloppy with their update of this blog. Why dont they post this on their blog?
RICHARDSON WILL MEEET WITH DICTATORS ANYTIME

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/07/26/richardson_ill_meet_dictators.html#more

chuck todd (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 5:58 PM)

Well said Stan and Jason. Americans are thirsty for change...it's time to throw the old bums out! Go Obama '08!

Ashe, SF, CA (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:02 PM)

Interesting that the top Republican candidates should agree with the Democratic front-runner and give their supporters reason to vote for a Democrat.

Republican candidates saying a Democrat is right! Perhaps Obama is bringing hope to our political system, but I don't think this was the what he meant by hope.

Guess Hillary may not be that divisive after all.

Carol LeHand (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:04 PM)

The world is not going to change how it does things if Obama is elected.

Carol LeHane (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:06 PM)

Hillary is Bush Lite. Go Obama!

Cat, St. Cloud, MN (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:08 PM)

Good one, Hillary, are your supporters happy that the Bushies are supporting you? This just proves Obama's poimt, she is Bush Lite. As for McCain and Romney, they're riding the coattails of the Dems because thats the only way they can get any press-and that's because nobody wants to hear what they have to say right now.

Cat, St. Cloud, MN (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:11 PM)

gee, she balks at being called for what she is, bush lite and then all the repukes are gathering around her side....proves Obama is right. again.

diane (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:21 PM)

So Bush sits down with the Saudi dictator, the Pakistani dictator, the Egyptian dictator, but that's different, those are OUR dictators.
Hillary is just Bush with moore brains and testosterone.

Patriot (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 6:43 PM)

Could someone explain to me why the prestige of the American President is tied up with the practice of only ever negotiating with folks who are our allies and agree with us? Is this a new definition of statesmanship and diplomacy? And why is bombing a superior way of communicating with our enemies? Has bombing yielded desired results for anyone except war profiteers?

UJ, Phoenix, AZ (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 7:29 PM)

B R I N G I T O N ! G O N Z O -- G A T E

KARL ROVE at the outhouse (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 8:00 PM)

I swear by the name of everything right and beautiful, if clinton, gravel or any of the rethugs win this 08 presidential election, I am immigrating to Canada or even Mexico.

rodney afilan (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 9:09 PM)

Boy, I'm sure Hillary was looking for an endorsement from McCain, who's campaign is almost over before we even get to fall of '07.

Bill, Herndon, VA (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 9:52 PM)

I'm sure Hillary is thrilled for that endorsement, Sen. McCain, who's campaign is coming to a grinding halt.

Bill, Herndon, VA (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 9:53 PM)

I could be wrong, but I thought that the whole idea of diplomatic negotiation was to enact change. Isn't it shortsighted to assume that countries we disagree with will enact that change BEFORE we negotiate with them? Go Obama.

Brian, Las Vegas (Sent Thursday, July 26, 2007 10:50 PM)

These two "Obama and clinton" Obstruct the reality of our present turmoil within America! They will serve any thing and every thing to gain a vote, in reality they have no power to back their promises. ""Vote for me and I will change"""! Change, these paper hangers have hidden agenda which is self serving! Washington is a shambles and the more self serving agenda has destroyed our moral content, moral conduct, opened two war's, Have not an exit to stop these war's, have forgotten the homeless, 12 million Illegals roam our streets, law and order over whelmed by the criminal acts of these Illegals and the list is endless.

It was Clinton who voted for war! and then flip flop agains't the war. Clintons agenda's are all self serving, she sings the same song over and over! She is buying the White house and slobering promises to the gender! Clinton is not a leader noer has she leadership traits ""which America ""Must have Now""

I hope America see's that this clinton is nothing but self serving and lavishes on the coat tail of her husband! America we have common sense and we don't want just another paper hanger as President!!!!

Rich ,AZ (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 12:25 AM)

I think that Obama´s approach could pay practical dividends. By agreeing to disagree with various states, even dangerous ones, we may be able to achieve compromises that will strengthen the security of the United States. These compromises would be lost if we continue under the status quo.

You know, a vote for Hillary is a vote for the Clintons, and the Clintons are like a big tent. In fact, their tent is so big, includes so many people, that in the end, all true leadership is lost and the only thing that remains is the tent itself.

This tent, by being so inclusive, creates some decent policy and some mistakes, but you´re going to get stability out of it. But if your country is heading towards environmental disasters, diplomatic disasters, etc. with total stability, what good is that? Nobody can steer a ship with a tent that big.

Obama is the best candidate, though I like Edwards. Obama is relying on inspiration, which is interesting because it´s going to take alot of it to do what this country needs to do. And folks can complain about policy, but you know what? Change, real change, is a policy nightmare that can only be overcome with inspiration. Folks, a vote for Obama is a vote for change.

Robert (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 1:00 AM)

When we are not living up to our own standards, i.e., historically we are really lame to be so proud of our ability to use slavery, global manipulation, wars all to bolster the pride of a few Americans while the rest of us , the Slaves must endure unfair laws and policies which seem to always add to the mess never resolving it, to say that Obama is the man is silly. All the choices offered are going top submit to the same old politics behind the scenes, regardless of who wins. They all are mainly concerned with how to get rich and their friends rich and to keep us at bay till they are relaced. The choice is BUSH, CLINTON, BUSH, CLINTON, BUSH, CLINTON, then we all here will be long gone and poor.

James Graham, SF, ca. (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 1:19 AM)

I am just stunned that there are people think 'change' constitutes entering into dialogue, without preconditions, with people who (for example) deny the Holocaust.

Honestly, what are you people thinking! Obama screwed up on this, he knows it and his people know which is why he is 'revising' his position after the fact.

You all need to stop being sheep, no one, not even Obama, wants 'peace in our time' redux.

Kristoph (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 2:22 AM)

"I take this to mean that McCain wouldn't have face to face meetings with Musharif of Pakistan or Abdullah al Saud of Saudi Arabia seeing as both of thsoe leaders are dictators who violate every principle upon which this nation was founded.

to do otherwise would just be hypocritcal (read: Republican).
John Doe, The Peanut Gallery
"
Musharif and Saud are shaky but necessary allies, The Iranian Ahmadinejad is a sworn enemy.

Disinterested Observer, Earth (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 3:06 AM)

Obama's idea is absurd and dangerous. Lest we forget John Kennedy had a high level meeting with Kruschev when first coming to office which he was not ready for giving the Russian leader the impression that he could bully us. Remember the Cuban missile crisis. That's when JFK had to prove his mettle.

glendale, ny (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 8:04 AM)

Clinton is a staunch democrat with many ideas and beliefs that don't even come close to Bush or right wing republicans. You all need to come to your senses. I like Obama too. Just vote democratic when the time comes or we will end up with someone that REALLY IS a Bush clone. How about Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama. The repubs want us to fight and then get mad and not vote at all. VERY foolish.

Susan, Miami (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 8:33 AM)

After 6 years of Bush, the US presidency has no prestige left to lose. It should be obvious that any meeting beween world leaders would require preparation. Clinton just was being petty.

Judy, Dover, Delaware (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 8:42 AM)

I don't know about the rest of you but I have had enough of Pres. Bush, Cheney and the lot of them including those Republicans that keep voting for this senseless war and administration. Our troops have become a political pawns in this power struggle at the top of todays Republican Party. The plan was always "once in Iraq we cannot leave". That is the American way. We have been dooped. Wake up America. Diplomacy works. Bullying pisses people off. Communication works if you listen and others know you are listening.

G, Valrico (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 9:13 AM)

Every world leader uses meetings with other world leaders for propaganda purposes. Bush's most recent trip to Europe was nothing but one big photo-op. So are Clinton, McCain, and the rest of these politicos saying, "it's all right for us, the good guys/gals, to do this but not for the bad guys/gals"? It's also interesting that they get to define the bad guys and the good guys.

Peter, Pittsburgh, PA (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 9:24 AM)

“There's a downside to just saying, I'll sit down and have face-to-face meetings with one of these dictatorial rulers, who violate every principle of upon which this nation was founded.”

And what downside is that Mr. McCain? Is it perhaps that this PARTICULAR dictatorial ruler won't eat out of our hand and do our bidding? Because we have supported more than our share of dictatorial rulers in our time...plenty of them and ruthlessly brutal ones too. So please spare me the holier than thou stance Mr. McCain. I'm an American and even I choke at your audacity in making such an ignorant comment.

Listen, this is not about Iran or any other nation. This is about the old guard in Washington fighting off anything contrary to the status quo. This entire argument is patently transparent and simply more Washington soundbyting. And for someone who has and still does support our illegal invasion of Iraq (which had zip to do with 9-11 BTW) Mr. McCain has zero credibility in discussing what our nation was and was not founded on. Because I'd be willing to bet my paycheck that invading another country illegally and then occupying it for years and not even counting it's civilian casualties is certainly NOT an example of what our nation was founded on.

James, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 1:33 PM)

Here's a cheat sheet for those that are confused about who the President should meet with, and its wallet size:

Okay - any democratically elected head of state
Not Okay - any dictator or head of state elected with 99.8% of the vote, and the other 0.2% are now dead.

LarryM (Sent Friday, July 27, 2007 5:19 PM)

Vote for Ron Paul!
Vote for whatshisname Gavel!
Vote for Rudy In The Red Dress!
Vote for McRomaney of Utah!
All coming to a theater near you!

HOT DAM (Sent Tuesday, July 31, 2007 1:16 PM)

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=293312