Patterico's Pontifications

4/9/2008

Obama on the Issues: The Olympic Games

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 1:23 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Campaigning in Pennsylvania, Barack Obama was asked about Hillary Clinton’s call to boycott the opening of the Olympic Games in China and ABC reports he ducked the question:

“ABC News’ Sunlen Miller Reports: Barack Obama doesn’t seem to want to talk about the Olympics or Senator Clinton’s call for a boycott of the opening ceremonies on August 8, 2008.

At a town hall in Malvern, Pennsylvania, Obama, D-Ill., was asked about U.S. policy toward Tibet and Darfur, especially in light of the forthcoming Olympics in Beijing this summer.

Obama has not followed Clinton’s lead in calling for an opening ceremony boycott to protest China’s human rights abuses in Tibet and Darfur.

“It’s very hard to tell your banker that he’s wrong,” Obama said, after talking about the need to restore America’s stance in the world, “And if we are running huge deficits and big national debts and we’re borrowing money constantly from China, that gives us less leverage. It give us less leverage to talk about human rights, it also is giving us less leverage to talk about the uneven trading relationship that we have with China.”

Obama never once mentioned the Olympic Games in his response.

He did say the United States has not been “consistent enough and tough enough” toward “pushing (China) to deal with Tibet properly.”

ABC states that Obama has a “particularly tricky balancing act” because Chicago is bidding for the 2016 Olympic Games and Obama’s campaign advisor and friend, Valerie Jarrett, is vice chair of the bid committee.

It’s hard to believe that a President Obama would get tough with China given his view that China is the world’s banker and “it’s very hard to tell your banker when he’s wrong.” Apparently Obama won’t even risk offending the Olympic selection committee for the 2016 games. Is there anyone he’ll get tough with?

— DRJ

26 Responses to “Obama on the Issues: The Olympic Games”

  1. I am no friend of Communist China but pre-1951 Tibet was far more horrific than it is under Communist rule today. The “human rights” the Dalai Lama’s monks are demanding are the rights of the monasteries to own most of the land with most of the population as their serfs. The nomads likewise miss the “human right” to play polo with their enemies’ heads. If Afghanistan was in the 7th century A.D., Tibet was in the 3rd century B.C. before the Communists stepped in.

    nk (6b7d4f)

  2. They should have asked that question of Michelle, since it is obvious that she wears the pants in that family.

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  3. “It’s very hard to tell your banker that he’s wrong,” Obama said, after talking about the need to restore America’s stance in the world, “And if we are running huge deficits and big national debts and we’re borrowing money constantly from China, that gives us less leverage. It give us less leverage to talk about human rights, it also is giving us less leverage to talk about the uneven trading relationship that we have with China.”

    Hey, B.O., listen up: This is a problem that you want to have come next January. You’ve been talking big about talking to America’s enemies like Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, etc. and your so-called “diplomacy surge” — now, you don’t have a clear answer when it comes to talking to a trade partner?

    Maybe we should draw upon your own record regarding reticence in a situation when you are duty-bound to “tell your banker that he’s wrong.” Does the name Tony Rezko ring a bell, Barack? You haven’t talked about him lately, have you?

    L.N. Smithee (e1f2bf)

  4. maybe that’s why he never told Rezco he was wrong.

    davod (5bdbd3)

  5. Oh, good one, Davod.

    DRJ (a431ca)

  6. Obama is one thing consistently: weak. Can’t tell his wife that that crazy preacher is going to screw up his kids, can’t tell China that’s wrong to destroy Tibet, can’t tell Iran that they will die if they kill our troops.

    He can’t even control his own campaign. He’s like my property manager, a 20 year old boy. he tells me I can’t have a grill on my balcony, and I tell him to shut up and roll my eyes (a year ago). Not very manly of me, and not very impressive, but it shows that you can’t get anywhere if no one respects you… and that I love my grilled ribeye.

    Jem (4cdfb7)

  7. “Is there anyone he’ll get tough with?”

    Yes. The Obama delegate who told her neighbors’ kids, who were in the tree next to her house, to stop acting like monkeys and get down before they killed themselves. The kids were black. This sort of behavior is apparently completely beyond the pale and the campaign forced her to “step aside”.

    brobin (c07c20)

  8. What’s Obama’s favorite dish?

    Why duck, of course.

    MarkJ (42fe5b)

  9. In this case would it be Peking Duck, MarkJ?

    Oh God, and I was trying so hard to cut back on awful puns.

    JVW (835f28)

  10. DRJ asked:

    Is there anyone he’ll get tough with?

    Israel. Gun owners. Small businessmen. The taxpayers.

    Dana (c36902)

  11. What president has ever gotten tough with China? Certainly not Nixon.

    Plus businesses are loving the cheap labor there. So come on and admit it. We’re in bed with them.

    Psyberian (d18acc)

  12. I think you’ll (Psyberian) find that Ike didn’t kowtow to the ChiComs at all. In fact (as I remember it) he communicated with them through back channels that if they didn’t get serious about negotiating at Panmunjon (is that how it’s spelled?) there would be no more Manchurian sanctuary, and there might not be any Manchuria.

    Also, when things got dicey down in the Formosa Strait at Quemoy and Matsu, he re-inforced the 7th-Fleet, and had them steaming 24/7 in the Strait to visibly display his concern.

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  13. Uhhh? IKE? So you are saying that China owned 30% of our debt during the 50’s and Ike got tough with them anyway?

    EdWood (e7631f)

  14. Psbyterian, Yah we’re in bed with them, the question is who’s on top right now?

    If Obama had called for a boycott of the opening ceremony the headline here would be “Only a liberal like Obama would value Chinese cops being nice to rioters over our economic interests in the Asian Rim”… or something like that.

    Maybe he and GW (who isn’t calling for boycotts either) know that the American people are raising enough hell to show the Chinese govt. how they feel about Tibet… not that the Chinese people will see it but the govt. will. Since the people are doing it, they don’t have to. They can be the good cop.

    Now if all that outrage somehow translated into people actually boycotting PRODUCTS (no more WalMart!) then the Chi-gov might really get the message.

    EdWood (e7631f)

  15. Uhhh, Ed. China doesn’t own anything. You and your friend Obama have made a fundamental error in likening international trade to that of something like the mortgage business. China can’t call in this supposed debt. It doesn’t work that way.

    China isn’t some guy, or even a big bank. Nations don’t foreclose on other nations. The most any one nation can hope for is for the other nation to elect some idiot with an incredible lack of understanding for international markets who will accede to a reduction in sovereignty out of some infantile desire to be “liked”.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  16. Apogee,
    Thanks for making me look this up. Now I know more…maybe… So apparently they could stop buying our bonds (ie. lending us money) but they probably won’t coz that would cost their businesses money in some round about inflation here means we buy less Chinese stuff way? (plus they arent making interest on more US bonds)?

    EdWood (e7631f)

  17. Thanks for making me look this up. Now I know more

    Which is why, Ed, that between you and BO for POTUS, I’d vote for you.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  18. we’re gonna stiff our banker by repaying the trillion we owe it in inflated dollars which won’t even buy a quart of gasoline. we can make as many new dollars as we have to. inflation is the debtor’s friend.

    assistant devil's advocate (aff0d6)

  19. I don’t believe Psyberian mentioned anything about China’s Dollar holdings while he was dissing Nixon, and other Presidents.
    IIRC, China’s Dollar holdings didn’t really take off until the administration of the 42nd President, while he was selling sleep-overs in the Lincoln Bedroom, BTW.

    China sells goods to American companies for Dollars. Where else but America would they find a stable, lawful economy to invest those Dollars?
    They invest in the same place that the Japanese before them did, and the Arabs before them, etc, etc.

    I remember when Americans were being encouraged to put Dollar deposits into Mexican banks for outrageously high interest rates. But, you had difficulty getting the money out, and then the Mex Govt made a rule change where you could only get your money in Peso’s. That was really cool!

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  20. I think Obama is right. The bible says in Proverbs 22 verse 7 that “The rich rule over the poor and the borrower is servant to the lender.” If indeed America is so indebted to China, its tough to see how any leader can afford to antagonise them by boycotting the opening ceremonies. Its easy for Clinton or any candidate to step up and say the president should, (maybe to score some political points and to distract from the issues), but would she be willing to do just that if she were the president, considering the issues I just raised? There is an adage that says only the person wearing the shoe knows how it hurts. Its easy to sit in the sidelines and tell someone how to govern, but its not the same when you are that someone. This is a very sensitive matter that demands alot of insight, foresight and hindsight and yes, judgement. A leader should not be swayed by public opinion. Question is, can America afford to fall out with China?

    love2008 (6e616b)

  21. It’s hard to believe that a President Obama would get tough with China given his view that China is the world’s banker and “it’s very hard to tell your banker when he’s wrong.”

    This is either really dumb or dishonest. If you read it in context, the point he was making is that our debt to China makes it difficult for us to do anything concrete about their misdeeds. and that’s a reason we need to reduce or eliminate that debt.

    He’s also issued a new statement calling for a boycott unless China cleans up its act.

    Vergil (444e9b)

  22. Hey, B.O., listen up: This is a problem that you want to have come next January. You’ve been talking big about talking to America’s enemies like Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, etc. and your so-called “diplomacy surge” — now, you don’t have a clear answer when it comes to talking to a trade partner?

    What do you mean he doesn’t have a clear answer? That sounds like a more sober assessment of our relationship with China than anything else I’ve heard other candidates say. What’s the point of not going to the Olympics? We’re borrowing billions of dollars from the Chinese to finance an unprovoked war where we have abuses human rights ourselves. Obama’s right, we don’t have any leverage on this issue and on similar human rights issues, because George Bush has squandered all of our credibility and moral authority in Iraq.

    This is an example of Obama saying something, letting us know what he’s about and what his positions are, and people on the right ignore it outright so they can continue with the ‘we don’t know anything about him’ narrative. There’s nothing unclear about what he’s saying. So he sidestepped the wholly insignificant question about whether or not Bush should boycott the games, at least he chose instead to identify the real issues that we have with China, and that’s what is important.

    Levi (76ef55)

  23. It is an election cycle. Otherwise Mr. Obama would have nothing to say on such a matter. Demonstrating he lacks substance.

    Thank you for your time.

    The Outlander (e46c56)

  24. Levi…
    Please try to learn how international financial systems work.
    We are not borrowing money from the Chinese.
    They are investing their Dollar proceeds from International Trade into the only truly safe market that can accomodate large amounts of funds.

    Where do you think they’re going to put that money, under a mattress in a Tibetan Monastery?

    The United States has always had large portions of the economy owned by foreigners. It was British money that financed the construction of the Erie Canal, and later the railroads.
    Where do you think all of that Arab Oil Money goes? Proceeds from the sale of Japanese cars?

    I’m through with your delusions.

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  25. Sadly, Another Drew, he can’t be educated. We are doomed to hear more of this fatuous nonsense until Obama is finally sent off as he deserves.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  26. Please try to learn how international financial systems work.
    We are not borrowing money from the Chinese.
    They are investing their Dollar proceeds from International Trade into the only truly safe market that can accomodate large amounts of funds.

    Yeah, okay. Call it whatever you want buddy. The point at the end of the day is that ever-increasing portions of our economy are dependent on China. So it’s stupid to pretend like not attending the Olympics is some big gesture.

    Levi (76ef55)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0880 secs.