In case you were momentarily hopeful that the “agreement” with China to pursue sanctions against Iran was real or that “pass sanctions in the Spring” meant sometime soon, think again. This report explains:
The United States is pressing the UN Security Council to impose a comprehensive arms embargo on Iran, allow foreign states to seize Iranian ships suspected of carrying materials linked to its nuclear program, and curtail Tehran’s ability to raise new investment in the country’s energy sector, according to U.N.-based diplomats familiar with the confidential text of the proposed resolution. . . .
China objected strenuously to the U.S. proposal for sanctions on energy investments during a big-power meeting on the text last week in New York, and insisted that it would not accept any provisions that challenged its commercial interests in Iran, according to council diplomats. But Beijing has begun to engage in direct negotiations, offering some suggestions this week on how the United States should modify its text.
The developments follow a high-level meeting in Washington on Monday between President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao. After the meeting, U.S. officials said that Obama received a commitment from Hu to continue negotiations on a new sanctions resolution. But the Chinese have yet to agree to endorse any specific measures against Tehran.
And the timing of this? “U.S. officials hope to adopt a sanctions resolution punishing Iran for its nuclear activities before the end of April, but some council officials said it was more likely it would pass in June.” These time frames have a way of slipping, we’ve learned.
Clearly, diplomats love to make deals and the focus is now on getting an international agreement, any agreement. But this is different from doing something calculated to thwart the mullahs’ nuclear ambitions. That’s not in the realm of consideration here. We know petroleum sanctions aren’t even on the Obami’s wish list and now we must tiptoe around China’s economic interests. The mismatch between means and ends is vast. The Iranians can see that even if Obama refuses to.
Smart post. Rubin identifies a tremendous potential benefit of the McCain campaign’s recent attacks: they will help marginalize the impact of EgoFestPallooza 2008, also known as Obama’s acceptance speech. When Obama preens and primps for 100,000 shrieking Kool-Aid drinkers in Denver later this month, people will remember the Celeb ad and The One ad, and hopefully that will hold down Obama’s bounce out of the convention.
McCain studied the contender. He tried a number of ideas and really landed one on “the One” This strategy is beautiful and you have to give a lot of credit to McCain’s campaign. The ad highlights the vapid celebrity status, lack of accomplishments, bad ideas for America, and Obama’s reaction shows how quick the race card comes out in a tight spot.
The energy issue and the cult of celebrity may be the undoing of Obama. It is the way that McCain communicated this to America that I am so impressed with.
I’m kind of amazed by the amount of bad advice for McCain that kind of boils down to “Settle down and lose with dignity, the way Republicans are supposed to!”
A big secondary factor in McCain’s strategy is that the Obama campaign seems to get rattled easily. Whenever they can’t fight on a battlefield of their own choosing, they seem to flail around wildly. Whatever McCain can do to seize and keep the initiative, he should.
By this logic the Republicans should hold an anti-Convention in which a handful of very old ladies in tennis shoes hold up McCain placards and listen quietly to him and his mother.
I am pleasantly surprised with the aggressiveness of the McCain campaign, particularly with the unwillingness to back down over the racism accusations. As long as McCain ties in his gimmicks with real and substantive issues(drilling, taxes and foreign policy experience), he can make this race competitive.
Yes, it was a master stroke. Turning an adversary’s advantage into a disadvantage goes back even further. David defeated Goliath because he maximized his skill and agility against the giant’s bad side vision. If all Obama has is his mystique, then McCain has shown that “the King has no clothes”.
“Who would have thought?”
Lots of us. We were very vocal about it, too but people chose not to listen.
Obama isn’t any different than he was when the campaign started. What’s different is the way formerly deluded people look at him. Without racial blinders, he looks like any other sleazy Democrat from Chicago. He sure as hell doesn’t look “brilliant” or “inspiring.”
The Republicans aren’t as bad off as people think. The Democrat Congress is the most reviled in America’s history. It suffers under single digit approval ratings. McCain isn’t the only Republican candidate likely to win by a landslide. Remember McGovern and the Democrat Congress under Clinton. Conditions are going to continue to deteriorate for the Dems along with Obama’s. The guy cuts himself with one gaffe after another, and tries to stanch his bleeding with more gaffes. He is just plain dumb. People realize he is a product of his party and the mindset that sustains it.
David C,
You say Obama’s campaign seems to be rattled easily. Could it be because there is no anchor of core Obama beliefs? His fans and advisors see him as the embodiment of their worldview and each tries to feed the message up the line. There is no coherence conviction because Obama lacks the conviction and experience to eliminate the noise.
The first “conviction” in my last sentence was an editing error. Sorry.
“There is no coherence because Obama lacks the conviction and experience to eliminate the noise.”
Yeah, I think that’s a good summation. Though it’s not *just* a lack of core beliefs – that’s been true of a lot of successful Democrats. What’s interesting and unusual about Obama is that his combination of arrogance and inexperience is really lethal. I always try to remind people that, before 2008, the toughest political task Obama ever faced was defeating Alan Keyes. So he makes dumb mistakes that most politicians probably got out of their systems in a tough House race or something.
For example, think of Bill Clinton in Obama’s place. He’d probably just laugh off the McCain ads, or change the subject, or something…. But above all, he wouldn’t let it *show* that it bothered him. Obama (and His worshippers) seem to have this attitude that ANY criticism of Him is out-of-bounds and the heretics must be immediately silenced. A more experienced politician would just say “Eh, it’s politics, comes with the territory.”
Or conversely, you might act like… Jimmy Carter in 1976 maybe? A bit before my time, but he was also inexperienced, and my impression is that he won by projecting a certain humility, not arrogance about his qualifications for the Presidency (that came later!) Obama, on the other hand, is the kind of guy who brags loudly about how humble he is….
David–
I do remember Carter running quite well. He was a cipher also. No one knew what he stood for. But he projected a kind of humble, man-of-the-people goodness that enough voters found appealing. We all know what a vindictive, nasty little man he turned out to be. Hopefully America will not make the same mistake twice.