Having it both ways?

Posted: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:06 PM by Mark Murray
Filed Under: Democratic debates

From NBC/NJ's Matthew E. Berger
Obama's answer on an Iranian attack on Israel tried to seem to have it both ways: highlight his support for Israel but not lock him into treating an attack on Israel like an attack on the U.S.

But it may have looked more like a no because it wasn't a firm yes. Clinton's answer seemed more direct.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Clinton's answer was direct, alright -- bomb the hell out of another country. Terrific. If I wanted that, I'd be voting for McCain.

Jayne, Midlothian,VA (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:10 PM)

and was terrifying.

doug; fargo, nd (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:11 PM)

This is a function of style (at least typical style)...Obama tends to be more nuanced, Clinton more direct (some would say black and white while he is more shades of gray). I think you can find ample examples of this over the months of campaigning. Of course, both approaches can have their advantages and disadvantages.

Lisa in working class New Britain, CT YES WE CAN! (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:13 PM)

BS...

I did not hear that....

MAP,Sr (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:14 PM)

nonsense..only parsing each consonant and comma would lead to that conclusion

Jerry (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:14 PM)

US is NOT Israel.

We are tire of sending Israel our money.

Enough is enough!!!

Ed, Asheville, NC (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:14 PM)

Why didn't ABC bill this as a 90 minute Clinton infomercial?

This is one-sided-sick!

Only die-hard Clinto supporters would think otherwise.

Michael Roland, North Hills, CA (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:14 PM)

When did the Clinton's buy ABC and MSNBC? Sure looks that way tonight!

Although, I'm sure it's not going to be posted here!

Lyn - KCMO (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:15 PM)

Obama's guy Jimmy Carter is in the middle-east meeting with the terrorist group Hamas. Any word from Barack on if this is a good idea, and if not, will he decline Carter's superdelegate vote?

Super One (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:16 PM)

Obama keeps refering himself as "Commander-in-Chief - does anyone else have a problem with that?

ArkansasVet; ElDorado, AR (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:16 PM)

It is stupid to get short answers on complex questions such as these imaginary scenarios. Why not a hour-long discussion on the important topics of the day? Oh, I forgot, this is ABC, and attention span is limited.

David Kolva, MD Oswego/Syracuse, NY (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:17 PM)

It's true though, isn't it? An attack on Israel is, in fact, not an attack on the US, just like an attack on any other country is not an attack on the US. It is, however, an attack on a US ally, and the US would be appropriate in responding as such!
E.g., when in the playground, someone charges you, you defend yourself, including fighting back if necessary. When someone charges your friend, though, do you join your friend in beating them up in return, or do you merely stop the attacker and help stop the fight?

Shaun, Mesa, AZ (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:18 PM)

Obama is in way over his head. It's really time to rethink your candidacy when Hillary is running circles around you. Might be best for Barack to go do something he's good at, like teach something at a community college.

Bert Nance, Woodrow KS (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:20 PM)

I agree it is obvious she paid someone for this time. I am turning and will never watch ABC again. I'd rather watch murder on Law & Order

Rochella Alozie, Herndon, VA (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:22 PM)

Matthew: Clinton made a massive retaliation pledge. That echoes our Cold War promise to Europe after WWII. It implies (and you seem to like)the idea that Iran is the new Soviet Union. It's not. It's an economic basket case. The idea that Iran is an "existential threat" to Israel is laughable, but has become conventional wisdom because of the Bush Administration's weird combination of bellicosity and incompetence. You're a journalist. Do your job. Your criticism of Obama for preserving flexibility is uninformed and way off base.

Ty Kelly, Houston, TX (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:24 PM)

I for one am tired of DIRECT answers on war. I'd rather a guy in charge who actually thinks about the issues before he commits to anything. Come on. Direct does not mean Intelligent.

Bonnie S (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:24 PM)

This is just ridiculous and one-sided...I can't say that the blog coverage is much better either. While Obama seems to be a bit off his game tonight, he is addressing questions in the most careful manner...shouldn't we want someone running the country who actually thinks about ramifications?

John B., Charlotte, NC (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:24 PM)

Good, I don't want Isreal to have cart blanc when it comes to the ear of America. She does wrong too, and we should stand against all wrongs in the Middle East.

donna (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:32 PM)

http://twocanpete.blogspot.com/
He'll have to talk to Farakahn about that and get back to you/

twocanpete (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:32 PM)

I'm actually glad that I am watching the debate instead of having someone"spin" and define the debate for me.

No one sitting in this room saw it that way.

nino ac,nj (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:46 PM)

this debate was absolute nonsense and to see chuck todd analyze it as if it even had crumb of credibility is just plain too bad. The real question was to what extent was ABC being unfair and unbalanced

Pedro, Costa Mesa, CA (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:04 PM)

Obama said Israel is our chief ally in the middle east and that everyone should remember that. That's a strong response. There was no equivocation. Better than Hillary sounding like John McCain singing "bomb, bomb, bomb"

Sue, Bloomington, IN (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:04 PM)

twocanpete: Perfect propaganda. No on the issue discussion, just put-downs and setting up some guilt by association argument. If you don't cite any relevant evidence on the issue, it means you don't have any. Crawl back under your rock, OK?

Ty Kelly (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:07 PM)

I can see why Obama is not going to get the Jewish vote.

It would seem that Obama is not willing to give to Israel the same loyalty and support that we give to our friends in NATO. I'm sure he has goood reason but it is going to cost the party votes.

Campdog (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:15 PM)

There were 2 people at that debate that displayed hideous behavior, and that is George and Charles. They spent the first full 50 minutes asking questions about tabloid fodder of both candidates... Not one question about the issues that this country needs to address. I do not give a damn about Wright, Ayers, Bosnia, Bitterness... I want to know how they are going to end the war in Iraq, how they are going to deal with Global Warming, how they are going to shore up social security.... the losers are ABC News, they should be ashamed of themselves!

Jody, Philadelphia (Sent Wednesday, April 16, 2008 10:17 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=904795