Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Redbaiting by Hillary?

That's the impression that I got watching this answer, especially as she talks about Castro and Chavez. See for yourself.


Anonymous Tom McC said...

I don't support Hillary (although if she's the candidate I will certainly vote for her, holding my nose, but there you go), but if this is redbaiting, then redbaiting has reached such an innocuous level as to be meaningless. It certainly wasn't such an anti-communist rant as to bring the rabid right to her side.
OK, why not meet with any of those guys? I suppose it's probably a fair question, and she does make a reasonable point in her rather tortured answer by saying that we've abandoned diplomacy unwisely. I do think it's also fair to say that the terms of a meeting with any of those leaders (of Cuba, Venezuela, NK or Syria) would need to be negotiated pretty heavily beforehand. I suppose that's the way any summit is set up any, so maybe that's not even really an obstacle.
I find Chavez a pretty interesting figure, and I've tried in vain to get a balanced picture of him. Up here, most papers' treatment of him assume that he's either crazy or extremely dangerous or both. I also read a biography of him by somebody who claimed to be cautiously sympathetic to Chavez's cause, but it was actually way too pro-Chavez and neither terribly well written nor well reasoned. So it's extremely hard to find the truth about him. I have fewer doubts about Assad, and even fewer about Kim. I don't suppose Fidel is particularly relevent anymore; not many punches left on that ticket, as my Da said.

July 26, 2007 8:27 PM  
Blogger Jack McCullough said...

A survey just issued today indicates that, although not a majority, a plurality of voters support Obama's position to meet with these other leaders without conditions.

July 28, 2007 4:47 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home