Obama and Edwards: the "anti-Hillary"?
Justin Gero
Issue date: 10/31/07 Section: Ed Op
Drexel's Democratic Primary Debate got off to a start on Tuesday, and the focus quickly turned to New York Sen. Hillary Clinton. The media gave a lot of coverage to the impending Obama-Clinton match up, but it was John Edwards who took the lead in confronting Senator Clinton.
Edwards accused her of "double-talk" and Clinton's debate performance proved him right. Obama also stood up to Hillary, but he downplayed the rivalry between the two, and it took him awhile to draw a distinction between himself and Senator Clinton.
Hillary took a lot of hits from the other candidates, and she didn't help herself either. She dodged questions and it was impossible to get a straight answer from her all night, something that other candidates did not let her get away with. Even debate moderator Tim Russert wasn't letting her off easy as he tried to squeeze a straight answer out of her.
While Obama and Edwards were attempting to define themselves as the "anti-Hillary," Senator Clinton attempted to show herself as at odds with President Bush. Although she attempted to define herself as the candidate for change, her record stands at odds with her statements at the debate.
On the war in Iraq, she claimed that she is against the war and will withdraw troops as soon as possible, but she has refused to commit to troop withdraw even by 2012. Edwards hit her hard on her stance on Iraq by saying: "If you believe that combat missions should be continued in Iraq over the long term, if you believe that combat troops should remain stationed in Iraq, and if you believe there should be no actual timetable for withdrawal, then Senator Clinton is your candidate."
Her rebuttal confirmed she would continue combat operations, and gave no other specifics, stating that she "intend[s] to do it in a responsible manner." Although she stated she would commit fewer troops to Iraq than President Bush, her open-ended answer left a lot of questions unanswered.
Senator Clinton was also attacked for her stance on Iraq's neighbor, Iran. She recently voted for a resolution, supported by President Bush, to call Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Although she defended her vote as opening the door to diplomacy, many of her critics have argued that the vote could allow Bush to go to war with the nation. She has argued that the Iranian vote doesn't specifically allow the president to go to war; however, the senator should not forget that congress has given Bush the authority to fight terrorist organizations, and this vote gives an uncomfortable amount of wiggling room to a president who has shown he will bend the rules. In the words of John Edwards, "You give this president an inch and he will take a mile."
Edwards accused her of "double-talk" and Clinton's debate performance proved him right. Obama also stood up to Hillary, but he downplayed the rivalry between the two, and it took him awhile to draw a distinction between himself and Senator Clinton.
Hillary took a lot of hits from the other candidates, and she didn't help herself either. She dodged questions and it was impossible to get a straight answer from her all night, something that other candidates did not let her get away with. Even debate moderator Tim Russert wasn't letting her off easy as he tried to squeeze a straight answer out of her.
While Obama and Edwards were attempting to define themselves as the "anti-Hillary," Senator Clinton attempted to show herself as at odds with President Bush. Although she attempted to define herself as the candidate for change, her record stands at odds with her statements at the debate.
On the war in Iraq, she claimed that she is against the war and will withdraw troops as soon as possible, but she has refused to commit to troop withdraw even by 2012. Edwards hit her hard on her stance on Iraq by saying: "If you believe that combat missions should be continued in Iraq over the long term, if you believe that combat troops should remain stationed in Iraq, and if you believe there should be no actual timetable for withdrawal, then Senator Clinton is your candidate."
Her rebuttal confirmed she would continue combat operations, and gave no other specifics, stating that she "intend[s] to do it in a responsible manner." Although she stated she would commit fewer troops to Iraq than President Bush, her open-ended answer left a lot of questions unanswered.
Senator Clinton was also attacked for her stance on Iraq's neighbor, Iran. She recently voted for a resolution, supported by President Bush, to call Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. Although she defended her vote as opening the door to diplomacy, many of her critics have argued that the vote could allow Bush to go to war with the nation. She has argued that the Iranian vote doesn't specifically allow the president to go to war; however, the senator should not forget that congress has given Bush the authority to fight terrorist organizations, and this vote gives an uncomfortable amount of wiggling room to a president who has shown he will bend the rules. In the words of John Edwards, "You give this president an inch and he will take a mile."
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Barack Obama 2008
posted 11/02/07 @ 12:24 AM EST
Edwards I think has realized that his only chance at being a major part of this election is if he is able to knock down one of the frontrunners in the democrat party. (Continued…)
Barack Obama 2008
posted 11/02/07 @ 1:46 AM EST
Edwards I think has realized that his only chance at being a major part of this election is if he is able to knock down one of the frontrunners in the democrat party. (Continued…)
Post a Comment