Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2009 > January > 13 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USIsakson to Clinton: What about preconditions for talking with bad eggs?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Today’s examination of Hillary Clinton, President-elect Barack Obama’s nominee for secretary of state, by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was a largely friendly affair — in keeping with the chamber’s clubby reputation.
Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) posed one of the few questions reminding the world that Clinton and Obama were bitter enemies only a few months ago. And that one of their chief disagreements was over the terms under which the U.S. should speak to its enemies.
Here’s the meat from a transcript:
Isakson: In the presidential debate, I watched both sides — ours and yours. There was a significant debate over foreign policy and over the issue of precondition. I really appreciated your responses throughout, and I think you added a great deal of strength to that debate.
And now that we’re looking at suggestions of talking to Hamas or maybe Hezbollah or maybe Iran, preconditions are absolutely essential, I think, to good, strong diplomacy. I hope you still feel that way.
Clinton: Well, I certainly do, as does the president-elect. I think that his commitment to vigorous and effective diplomacy is in context of his understanding that there are different ways for us to engage.
When it comes to non-state actors like Hamas, as I said at the very end of the morning session, there are conditions. Hamas must renounce violence. They must recognize Israel, and they must agree to abide by all previous agreements.
There are conditions that are usually part of the preliminary discussion that would lead to any kind of negotiation. The president- elect believes that he has the right to claim the opportunity to speak with anybody at any time if it’s in furtherance of our country’s national interests and security. But he fully appreciates the preliminary work that has to be done in order to tee up any such discussions.
So I think we’re in vigorous agreement, Senator, that we want to be smart about how we engage in diplomacy. We want to make sure that when the president of the United States or the secretary of state is engaged in any diplomatic effort that all of the necessary preliminary work, including conditions, if appropriate, have been met before doing so.
Comments
By RaceCop
January 13, 2009 6:41 PM | Link to this
It is racist to question “Her Thighness” because she is a democrat. And as everyone knows blacks vote democrat so the Clinton’s are covered by that. How dare Isakson question the smartest woman in the world. He is racist and sexist for his silly questions.
By gafarmer
January 13, 2009 6:52 PM | Link to this
“It will get worse before this is over and people will die”. Fred Thompson as the Navy Admiral in the Hunt for Red October. Just seems appropriate to me in the context of this discussion on national security and the middle east.
By For States rights
January 14, 2009 7:58 AM | Link to this
Now she is speaking for the next President????? Just one more example of her saying exactly what she thinks her audience wants to hear. Like I have said before this is no change whatsoever it is simply a coronation instead of an inauguration and a warmed over Clinton administration.
By wishing
January 14, 2009 8:21 AM | Link to this
We are at the start of a historic time for this country and our relations with the rest of the world. Those Americans who hate will continue to hate, complain and criticize; the rest of us will support this President and this change in spirit, policy and process. May the God of Peace bless this Man of Peace: President Obama, and those willing to implement this approach to our world.
By Road Scholar
January 14, 2009 8:37 AM | Link to this
What was interesting about her testimony was that she answered primarily with “I” instead of “we” or “this administration”,which makes one wonder how she is going to represent the government views in lieu of her own! Time will tell.
RaceCop: get over it
By Road Scholar
January 14, 2009 8:37 AM | Link to this
What was interesting about her testimony was that she answered primarily with “I” instead of “we” or “this administration”,which makes one wonder how she is going to represent the government views in lieu of her own! Time will tell.
RaceCop: get over it
By John Birch
January 14, 2009 8:40 AM | Link to this
wishing, you make made me laugh! You said: “Those Americans who hate will continue to hate, complain and criticize” Surely you must be talking about the Hate-Bush crowd…
This is what phychologists refer to as “projection” a defense mechanism in which one attributes one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts and/or emotions to others.
Hillary will be confirmed. It is a foregone conclusion. I am glad she has the balls to say out loud that groups like Hamas “must recognize Israel” as a pre-condition. Obama is too weak and scared to draw such a line in the sand.
side note: I also find it humorous that the same people who viciously attacked the Bush administration for the last 8 years are now the ones calling for support and cooperation for the Obama administration. Payback is a b***.
By Denise
January 14, 2009 8:46 AM | Link to this
Isakson = pure tool. I can’t think of one positive thing he has done for this state. He needs to go.
By John Birch
January 14, 2009 8:47 AM | Link to this
wishing, you make made me laugh! You said: “Those Americans who hate will continue to hate, complain and criticize” Surely you must be talking about the Hate-Bush crowd…
This is what phychologists refer to as “projection” a defense mechanism in which one attributes one’s own unacceptable or unwanted thoughts and/or emotions to others.
Hillary will be confirmed. It is a foregone conclusion. I am glad she has the balls to say out loud that groups like Hamas “must recognize Israel” as a pre-condition. Obama is too weak and scared to draw such a line in the sand.
side note: I also find it humorous that the same people who viciously attacked the Bush administration for the last 8 years are now the ones calling for support and cooperation for the Obama administration. Payback is a b***.
By DirtyDawg
January 14, 2009 8:54 AM | Link to this
Face it boys, ‘Johnny’s side’ on the Israel/Palestinian, or indeed anything having to do with Israel, has been content to stand by and allow them to have their way with whomever they choose…I suppose in the belief, and/or hope, that Hamas or Hepsbolah (sp?) will be wiped out or something. It ain’t happened and ain’t likely to. Be an honest broker dammit. Be determined to establish some sort of ‘fairness’ to all the people’s of the middle-east and we might just find that progress can be made. Jimmy and Sadat and Begin showed that it could be done thirty years back, and I’ll bet they didn’t have any ‘pre-conditions’ other than showing up at Camp David with a willingness to compromise.
I mean do you really think that Hamas will denounce violence as a precondition unless Israel does the same? Would you?
By sd
January 14, 2009 9:01 AM | Link to this
There is nothing wrong with talking. If you aren’t willing to talk to those you disagree with, you have not chance of working out your disagreement. While painting the world in black and white, good and evil, may make it easier for man to relate to others, it is not efficient or reality.
By funshaker
January 14, 2009 9:05 AM | Link to this
RaceCop, You are obviously Black and a Raceist as well. Its funny how when all of your efforts fail you cry “Raceist”. Besides, Clinton is not much of a man and Hussein Obama is only half Black.
By Howard
January 14, 2009 9:37 AM | Link to this
Sir…the USA is screwed…period…by the election of this man and the evil, spineless, and left-wing cabal of idiots that he appointed to help him “rule” us. You think 9-11 was bad?? You haven’t seen a thing yet. A three ring circus is about to start, compliments of the 50% of the morons in this country who voted for Obama…and just like Fred Thompson’s character said…things will get a lot worse and more people die before it gets anybetter. Oh, and just wait…Israel is not done yet. They’re going after Iran after they clean up the Hezbos and Hamas…then we’ll see just how the Messiah and “Her Thighness” handle things then. Diplomacy? Yea,,,sure! Oh, go back and look in history what party was in power when we had a major war…not just the things like Iraq…but wars when over 50,000 are killed…it was always Democrats!!! WW I-Wilson, WW II-Roosevelt, Korea-Truman and liberals’ favorite organization…the UN!! Just wait…the crap is gonna hit the fan and it won’t take four years of this neophyte and far-left leader…Barack Hussein Obama!!
By sd
January 14, 2009 9:41 AM | Link to this
Howard, what would you have us do? Blow up everyone? Achieve peace through war?
By David S
January 14, 2009 10:14 AM | Link to this
First we claim that we are “exporting democracy” to the middle east. Then groups like Hamas and Hezbollah get elected in free and open elections. Now war criminals like Hillary and Isakson want to make sure we don’t talk with them about the problems in the middle east. Same goes for Iran.
Anyone with any clue about history that can actually study it with an open mind - that leaves most of you folks out - will see that the US has a long history of two-faced “support” of democracy. We talk a great talk, but in the face of elected officials that we don’t like, we resort to assasination, coup, mass murder, war crimes, and everything that used to be considered Un-american.
Ho Chi Min in Vietnam, 1953 in Iran, Venezuela just a few years ago, and the list goes on and on.
Democracy is mob rule. We are not a democracy and there is no reason to say that we are. We are supposed to be a constitutional republic. When others vote for what they want, we may not always agree. What gives us the right to question their decisions? The enire world hated Bush, but we would not have tollerated any of them coming over here with guns and bombs to change the outcome. Why are we so surprised that there are repercussions when we show up with guns and bombs.
Now we claim that Israel is our “democratic” ally while they prevent arab political parties from running and ruthlessly slaughter everyone that isn’t jewish in their territories.
Obama speaks of change and then appoints this war mongering clown as secretary of state. Yeah, things are really going to be different from the last 8 years. I can only wonder how long the rest of the world will put up with our arrogance.
By DeeMack
January 14, 2009 10:20 AM | Link to this
Now, DirtyDawg, this time I have to agree with you. Compromise on BOTH SIDES will have to be done. I know the Hamas have been shooting rockets at Israel, but now Israel start killing everybody in sight. T** for tat never worked! It’s like never ending murder from the both of them. What is the problem with Israel and Palestine co-existing together! Why can’t we all just get along? By the way, Barack Hussein Obama is not a neophyte far-left leader. We have had 8 yrs of raping the American people by the Bushes. Republicans have taken a hands of approach to everything, except for the Iran war b/c Bush felt his daddy was disrespected. George W. Bush is leaving the White House. Here, here, here! Don’t let the door hit you where the good Lord split ya’.
By The Blogger Formerly Known as "Anyone But Hillary"
January 14, 2009 10:25 AM | Link to this
I wish that Isakson and the other senators were questioning someone else to be Secretary Of State and that Hillary was getting ready to be inaugurated next week instead of Obama. Even though the thought of another President Clinton used to scare the crap out of me, it would have been so much better for the country to have her, a known entity with tons of experience, as president than that winner of an American-Idol-Style popularity contest who stole the election. God help us all for up to the next four years.
By mike
January 14, 2009 11:15 AM | Link to this
So much hate here. There is no question that Obama will be president this time next week. How about supporting him and your country instead of so much negatism. Are you folks just plain jealous of Bill and Hillary? One thing about it. It was not Bill and Hillary that got this country in the predicament it is in. We need more of those who look like Isakson then this country will really be in the poor house.
By The Blogger Formerly Known as "Anyone But Hillary"
January 14, 2009 11:57 AM | Link to this
Hey, Mike - I’ll support him with all the enthusiasm that you supported George W. Bush during the past 8 years. How could you ask me to do more?
By Aaron Burr V. Mexico
January 14, 2009 1:39 PM | Link to this
You should STFU Blogger Formerly Known.
Obama isn’t prosecuting Bush and his cronies for war crimes. You’d think that would be enough for your lord and master, but of course it isn’t.
By Ron Mexico (Aaron Burr V's brother)
January 14, 2009 2:12 PM | Link to this
Such language! I think TBFKAABH made an excellent point and I agree wholeheartedly with him or her.
By The Blogger Formerly Known as "Anyone But Hillary"
January 14, 2009 2:28 PM | Link to this
Aaron - Presidents don’t “prosecute” anyone or anything you ignoramus.
By Aaron Burr V. MExico
January 14, 2009 2:39 PM | Link to this
Yes and no. Technically, the Justice Department is supposed to be independent.
Bush changed that. But the AG serves at the will of the President, and thus listens to the President on many matters about what to go after and not go after.
If Obama doesn’t want his AG to go after Bush, then they won’t.
By Copyleft
January 15, 2009 8:48 AM | Link to this
How could you ask me to do more?
Well, for starters, Obama was legitimately elected.
By The Blogger Formerly Known as "Anyone But Hillary"
January 15, 2009 9:30 AM | Link to this
Copyleft - get over it, a-hole. Is that the best you got? I almost didn’t even bother responding to such crap.
By Copyleft
January 15, 2009 9:46 AM | Link to this
Fair enough, Former. I’ll give you a more detailed response, since you asked so nicely.
Obama has not wiped his butt with the Constitution. Bush did.
Obama has not trashed our economy, started an illegal and unnecessary and disastrous war, ignored our infrastructure, violated our civil liberties, and let a terrorist attack occur on our soil while failing to bring the perpetrator to justice.
Bush did all those things.
As soon as Obama racks up some blunders of THAT magnitude, you can start b*** about him. How’s that?