Obama foreign policy claim stirs controversy

For the record Obama said he had more knowledge of foreign policy, not experience, and such knowledge is not confined to Congress. Twisting his words around contrives his point, which he should be given a chance to elaborate on, and the media shouldn't presume it laughable because he is a junior senator. The role of the media should be to ask the right questions (like they should have before we went to Iraq) and draw out detailed arguments for policy positions from politicians, not to mock them.

The important thing to note is that Obama is not saying he has more foreign policy experience, he's saying that he "know(s) more and understand(s) the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain", which is another matter entirely. President Bush has all sorts of foreign policy experience after his years in the White House, but that doesn't mean he has the knowledge and understanding to accomplish his goals. What matters is wisdom and judgement, which comes from a broader understanding of the world than just foreign policy committees and hearings.

Now after 5 years the United States is bogged down in the Iraq war. A war that is breaking the economy of this country. A war that is making us less safe. A war that we cannot win.

Clinton & McCain's experience:

They both voted FOR the Iraq war.

Obama's experience: He was AGAINST the Iraq war.

.
That's exactly the experience that I'm looking at.
That's exactly why I'm voting for OBAMA

end of story

The foreign policy experience that Sen. Obama has is his wise judgment linked to his principle how he has stood for. Well all I can say in contrast according to what she has been articulating to American people regarding her foreign policy experience against her rival is that Sen. Clinton has an inflated phony one--sniped attack with a big smile and welcome ceremony at the airport. Wasn't that foreign policy experience the presidential candidate can claim for showing to American people, being Ready on Dayone as a Commander in Chief?

OBAMA has NO Foreign Policy Expereience, If you do not know this than you are brainwashed by a campaign based on lies and falsehoods.

Obama is such a fraud with no qualifications for Commander in Chief.

It is so funny to hear this wack job speak

I was going to write what I thought about Obama and his comments, but clearly he would not understand what I was stating. I am writing this for Obama so he will understand.

U rote: "I would like somebody who knows about a bunch of stuff that I'm not as expert on," he replied. "I think a lot of people assume that might be some kind of military thing to make me look more commander-in-chief-like. Ironically, this is an area -- foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain."

U r write Obama, u r sumbody that thinks he kows lotts about foriengn polici and wher u is most comfortable, me hopes that u can ax sombodies to help u. I justs hopes that u can find a persons tht actully has an education and is good experenced. Thes countri needs U. I will vote for U.

Don’t think so……

Of course the Messiah is omnipotent!
Just ask his true believers!

There's a circular psychology going on,
he convinces his wide-eyed followers,
they convince him. He is not ready.

"Blair Latoff, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said in an earlier statement, “Perhaps in an effort to one-up his own ridiculous assertions about John McCain’s record, Barack Obama laughably claimed to have more foreign policy experience than Senator McCain. Even by Obama’s standards, this is a horrifyingly false claim without a shred of supporting evidence."

Actually Obama never claimed to have more "Experience", what he said (if you read the statement carefully) was that "I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain" which is quite obvious. As McSame is clearly clueless not only about the economy, but he has shown that he also has absolutely no understanding of the Middle East (evident in his recent statements where he could not tell the difference between Shia and Sunni extremist, as well as his assertion that we could ever occupy an Arab country without US soldiers being shot at), then there is Billary, who has been too busy dodging imaginary sniper fire to take the time to read any NIE reports before making the most important vote of her career.

Personally I would rather have a president who has good judgement and intelligence than an "experienced" clueless old nitwit, or a vain "too important for the details" fibber any day.

I doubt that any President, starting from George Washington to Date, is an "Expert"
on everything thats envolved with being POTUS.
Thats the purpose of carefully selecting a VP, a Cabinet, and Advisors.

"...I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain."

Nowhere does Obamaclaim to have more foreign policy "experience." He's simply claiming to have more foreign policy know-how.

Who would you rather have manage your baseball team, a coach who led his team to 8 straight last place finishes, or a new coach with fresh ideas and an ability to inspire his players?

I'd go with the fresh ideas and inspiration even though the coach with 8 straight losing seasons has more experience.

I have a question: what does this commentary have to do with Political INTELLIGENCE. I don't see any of the former in this piece.

So, he said he "knows more" and "understands the world better". That doesn't say he sat on more committees and voted more.

Knowledge and understanding come from life experiences and judgment. Obama's life experiences come from living both within and outside the U.S. and having relatives of every color, among other things. Judgment comes from family and ones innate character.

He's never claimed to have more Washington experience. That's what we're trying to throw out.

Ron Paul takes his marching orders from the constitution.

"You do not go to war without a declaration. This is an invasion. An aggressive invasion. Its an undelcared war. Its lasting way too long. We ought to just come home."

Then again, the "frontrunners" do offer pandering and intelligence greater than Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers.

Obama and foreign policy. What policy?
He never voted for the war because he could not vote. he spoke against it. Kind of what we all do when we have absolutley no responsibility for our words in the event we were wrong. Then two years later he is clearly on record saying "had he had access to security clearance (Clinton and McCain did) he "would have voted for the war". After he could vote, he voted the same as Clinton. He also stated in 2006 that "he did not have enough experience to run as President." And exactly what countries has he been to? What war zones has he visited? What world leaders has he even met? This guy is now starting to sound like a nut. He has been listening to his own sales pitch B S for so long, he is starting to believe it.
Obama will lose the General Election if he wins the Democratic nomination. I hope the Democrats, Super deleges and voters are smarter than this and vote for Clinton. Obama should have waited to run. He chose not too. And it was the wrong choice. Clinton is the chance we have to actually win in November. And winning in November is all that counts.

I doubt that any POTUS, from George Washington on down, was an expert in
everything needed to be POTUS. That is why it is important that you select
competent people as VP, Cabinet Members, Advisors to help make well informed
decisons in all areas.

It's incredible how the blinded sheep will follow their herder to whatever mirage he can concoct.

Obama is unelectable. Period.

Let the voters in Penn confirm this in two weeks.

Obama: "So when I speak about having lived in Indonesia for four years, having family that is impoverished in small villages in Africa--knowing the leaders is not important--what I know is the people. . . ."

Wiki: "Born to a Kenyan father and an American mother, he spent most of his early life in Honolulu, Hawaii. From ages six to ten, he lived in Jakarta, Indonesia with his mother and Indonesian stepfather."

His foreign policy experience is largely based on living in Indonesia from age 6 to age 10. He knew the people there. All 245,452,739 of them. And while his parents flew back to the states, Obama walked back.

Does anybody else want to mention experience vs knowledge? It's not like the point has been beat to death already!

Ok, So Obama believes he has more knowledge of the world than Clinton or McCain. How So? I mean what is he comparing to this statement. Answer that you Obama fever heads.

More incredible than anything else is that all of you people have taken the time to vent your spleens and (apparently) in the process, read all of the other drivel posted here (I have not . . . .). Lighten up, folks. It's just this kind of hysteria and foaming at the mouth that creates the matrix for the self-anointed know-it-alls (the Matthewses, O'Reillys, and Russerts we've all come to know [far too well] and loathe) to continue to waste air-time and advance their undeserved claims of expertise and as an inevitable by-product, blow all of this Clinton-Obama-McCain stuff way, way out of proportion. Just sit back and let the system work. At least our juvenile "Commander in Chief" will soon be gone, and maybe this place can begin to straighten itself out. Just maybe . . .

Where is the intelligent life?????Seems like all of us understood what Obama said ...so what is the problem with other candidate's understanding. I berlieve that the Rev. Wright thing is more of the same twisted stuff from MS Parser of Words and shortness of memory- Hilary Clinton and MCNumb who lives in another world - the world where everything is better in Iraq....
and let those homeowners get themselves to homeless shelters for their stupidity....

God help us of McNumb or "MS" Hill are anywhere near the white house or the senate comes January 20, 2009.
SPread the word..A vote for Obama is a Vote for an intelligent human being !

whos the stupid writer who wrote the piece?? isnt it rather obvious that obama has not claimed more experience than his two stupid rivals???

Where is the substance of Obama's knowledge of foreign policy (a valid point is made that he did not say he had more experience)? Please tell me that.

Do you people read and comprehend?

He was chair on the Nato and European subcommittee and held NOT ONE hearing. No questions, nothing, a complete no show.

SO, where then does all this experience come from. Just going to countries and spending a little time there does not make you an expert on the politcal leanings or problems of a country.
That statement is nothing more than PURE ARROGANCE.

As for knowledge, knowing where to shop and hangout is not going to cut it. All those POLITICAL JUNKETS do not experts make.

Most of you really need to learn how to read and comprehend what you are reading. Although he did not directly say he was more experienced he IMPLIED he was.

Being a POW and dropping napalm on children does not equal foreign policy experience.
Being a first lady and going to cocktail parties with world leaders does not equal foreign policy experience.

Real experience only comes with spending lengthy time in a country and interacting with different layers of society. Duh! Anyone who's been an international tourist can tell you that much, now we have to explain it to our "experienced" politicians.

Experience vs. Principles

A great deal is being made about experience. While I do think experience is important, of GREATER importance are the principles that guide the president.

Also, the quality of experience should be considered. Lots of experience in doing things poorly only ensures that they will continue to do things poorly, but solid principles provide proper guidance even in entirely new situations where experience is of no use.

In my opinion the candidate with the best mix of principles, experience and vision is Obama. He has my vote and my prayers.

Given McCain's latest round of "errors" regarding Iraq and Iran, as well as demonstrating... well, let's call it "forgetfulness"... since he seems to change his foreign policy positions to match the latest hard-core Right-wing Republican polls... we're not even talking average Republicans, but a small minority of people who don't have any idea what's really happening in the world.....
AND given Hillary's latest rounds of, oh what does she call it?... "mis-speak"... and her own free trade errors and omissions--not to mention that whole Columbia thing.....
AND, yes, OBAMA NEVER SAID "EXPERIENCE"...
(www.cafepress.com/wetnoodle)
AND

Obama certainly lacks foreign policy knowledge AND experience; he relies on the uneducated lower socioeconomic class to buy this bull-crap and vote for him. Unfortunate.

The best way to demonstrate that Obama has more common sense and judgment in foreign policy than either Clinton or McCain is that Obama has consistently opposed this disastrous war from the beginning.

What more evidence to you need?

OBAMA is a JOKE!

to quote erica (post 1): "The Bush Administrations has so damaged the image of a very peaceful religion by making all Muslims and Arabs look like gun toting maniacs and bombers that we've developed a warped sense of what the reality is."

Peaceful religon! Ha! 9/11 and spain and london bombings? They were trained in pakistan! Pakistan exported nuclear technology. If it is so peaceful why jihad against Salman Rushdie. Why not discuss the merits of your "peaceful" religon? When 9/11 happened the Palestinians jumped with joy! they claimed it was gods will against USA. Now what happens to Indonesia? largest muslim pop. erica go marry a muslim. Be one of 4. Have equal rights. Get a life

It's disappointing that a paper like the Globe would reference a piece of tripe such as the article in the Huffington Post. If anyone bothers to read the original article as well as some of the other articles by that particular "reporter", you'll realize that she's very biased against Obama. In one article she actually said,

"The light catches the fabric of his suit. You know he is vain, because only fit thin guys can get away with shiny fabric."

Now her biased and misleading article has made its way onto the national spotlight. This is the kind of reckless journalism that lead us into this war. Journalist not digging deeper, simply repeating what some other journalist said until the story mushrooms and the lie becomes the truth in the eye of a trusting public.

Obama's experience...
random votes on very little stuff ...
not working on anything he is responsible for.
Looking at he resume, he shouldn't even get an interview for this job.
He is one of those big loud mouth in your company that says he does everything
but nothing get done.

When you go to look for a job, what do employers ask? Any job requires experience. Without experience, none of you and I can get a job except to work in a grocery store. So, experience is NECESSARY to KNOW the stuff. And the type of job that we are looking at will not provide any training. So, person has to be capable to take charge..

Looking at Mr. Junior and so called judgement, I do not want to put the country at risk..

So, it appears that everyone is in agreement Obama does not have more experience than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain.

However, his statement does raise a question of how could claim “to be most confident that he knows more and understands the world better than” those with more experience?

Were does he obtain his knowledge and understanding if not from experience …where does it come from…reading newspaper or polls, what? Maybe its like Lucky Charms and just magically appears?

Additionally, I would present this point for your consideration yes he was against the war, but why? He certainly did have any better information that the rest of the Senate/Congress. Further, is this his only claim to fame does he have anything else to point too?

Sounds as if he is going to like change like English grammar, to make him more commander- in-chief-like, and a bunch of stuff like that.

This thread is obviously dominated by Obama supporters. He doesnt have to say "experience" as long as in context you understand that he implies that he is better than them in that area. Obama supporters have to realize just because he says it, doesnt make it true. What evidence does he have that he is other than just saying it? If he was so much better how come he hasnt held ONE meeting in the NATO and afghanistan sub-comittee? Again, you see why he is just talk and no actual substance or facts to back it up. If he wins the nomination...HE WILL LOSE!!!

REVERAND.WRIGHT.TRYING.TO.SAVE.YOU.
GOP Folks do not read the Ancient Hebrew Prophets; The GOP steals funds from the Social Security Trust, replaces these with special notes but not bonds as it issues to other borrowers, and spends social Security Moneys on the Very Rich and their interests. Example, the US Treasury gives Bear Sterns to the big Rockefeller fortune Bank, gives it 31 Billion dollars of Social Security guarantees, which Social Security may have to pay,and will never get paid back, to the Rockefeller Fortune, controlled by David Rockefeller. Similarly, Social Security borrowing by Congress and the President for the benefit of the very rich and well connected, will never get repaid. Conservatives will start yelling that these are "Entitlements," implying that these are obligations to Social Security created out of thin air; but these Obligations are to repay real borrowings from the Social Security Trust, the same kind of Obligation that Private Investors receive Bonds for. These Bonds represents the very same kind of Entitlements that US Treasury Bonds represents; only since the U.S. Treasury Bonds represent Obligations to Rich and Very Rich Investors, and these are never termed "Entitlements," with an implied threat of Non-Repayment, as Obligations to Social Security are. The Rich and Very Rich oversaw the spending of the U.S. Governments borrowings from Social Security; it is thus the Obligation Rich and Very Rich to repay Social Security. The Ancient Hebrew Prophet Amos, Preached to the Rich and the Very Rich, of the Ancient Kingdom of Northern Israel (Samaria) that if they did not quit stealing the Tithes (owed to the Government of Israel for the first Social Security System of History) then God would Damn the Northern Kingdom of Israel, and thus proceed to Destroy the Northern Kingdom of Israel. They did would not and did not stop stealing from the poor, disabled, etc, and so God sent the World's First Great Empire to destroy the Northern Kingdom, and took the Rich and the Very Rich into Exile, and scattered them all over the Ancient Assyrian Empire, while replacing them with Loyal Assyrians, just like Stalin did in Soviet Russia, and just like All Empires do, following the Assyrian started Tradition. Assyrian Aramaic thus replaced Hebrew as the language of Israel and all the Mid-East, was spoken by Jesus, remained so, until it merged with simple Camel Driver's Arabic, to become Modern Arabic. So Reverend Wright was just repeating the Ancient Prophet Amos, and his successor Prophets; only Reverend Wright left out the "If you do not Change, God WILL Damn America, and America will be destroyed, like Ancient Hebrew Samaria was in 726 BC/BCE. But Reverend Wright and his fellow Black Preachers have repeated the Ancient Hebrew Prophets OVER AND OVER, so many times that they yield to the Temptation to shorten their messages, for listeners who have heard it over and over for so many times, that they can ADD BY HEART, what Reverend Wright left out. Reverend Wright was PREACHING IN VERBAL SHORTHAND, a message very familiar to followers. If Reverend Wright's Critics were really Jews or Christians, not secret Atheists and/or Agnostics and/or secret Communists or secret Fascists, they too would have recognized Reverend Wrights VERBAL SHORTHAND for what it was, and the prof that they are Ignorant of True Judaism and True Christianity, is that they are so Ignorant. and do not recognize the Ancient Prophets being brought back to SPEAK TO US TODAY, as they spoke to Ancient Israel; and their PREACHERS/PRIESTS, are Preachers/Priests of Baal; they are spiritual disciples of BAALAM OF PEOR, hired by the Rich and the Very Rich, to curse the People of God, an Unforgivable Sin, for which Baalam, the King who hired him, and the Kings people, Paid For with their Lives. You Republicans and Cooperating Democrats better Listen Up; Reverend Wright was not only trying to buck up the distressed amongst his own congregation, but Preaching to save YOU HELL BOUND OUTSIDERS, as well. Just like the Black African Angelica Bishop agreed to supervise the Virgina Episcopal Diocese, to save them from the EVIL AMERICAN EPISCOPAL CORRUPTION, a corruption endemic and overwhelming many other American Churches.

Barack Obama says that he feels he has better knowledge and understanding. He did not say anything about "more experience".

Members of the press and representatives of the RNC then turn around and ask Hillary and the McCain campaign, "so how do you respond to Obama's claim that he has more foreign policy experience?" - even though he never said that.

So not only is the (supposedly "liberal") media guilty of bad reporting, they're actually twisting candidates' words and feeding them to Clinton and McCain as 'talking points' that never existed in reality - and are doing the RNC's job for them in the exact same way RNC surrogates are. And Hillary's perfectly happy going on Fox (again) with her "Hillary cackle".

The media is doing a great disservice to the citizenry, and is failing to act in the public interest. The media needs to stick to reporting the news, not influencing it or creating it.

Clinton laughed....what is she laughing about...She should have listened or read the statement properly., before casting unnecessary remarks. Now she has "misheard", or "misread"...Just like she misspoke...Why is this a "CONTROVERSY"...Really "RIDICULOUS"

Sorry to burst everyone's bubble who is defending Obama's position, but he was talking about foreign policy...ironically left out of all the quotes. Here's the full quote for you to read...again...

"...FOREIGN POLICY is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain (emphasis added for the willingly blind)."

Don't be ignorant. He was talking about foreign policy...not foreign people and cultures. Also, foreign policy doesn't begin and end with issues...it's about the leaders themselves...the current ones. I find it hard to argue I know more about someone I've never met than people that have met the person. Which is not exactly but quite similar to what Obama has insinuated here.

I also find the argument that he lived in a foreign country of any validity when it comes to dealing with the nation from a foreign policy point of view. Why do I doubt it? Because I have lived in Japan for three years, not as a soldier on an American base, but as a worker living and working in Japanese society. While this does give me insight into the culture and interactions with Japanese people it does not give me any true understanding of the details of Japanese foreign policy other than their stances on most issues.

Also, the longest period I've heard mention of Obama living in a foreign country was from ages 6-10. I'm sure he was deeply involved in the culture and politics of Indonesia during his time there...oh, and he did visit Pakistan for a short time. (I'm sure you don't want to hear about how many countries Clinton has been in and for how long...much less McCain). The only other knowledge or understanding he might have could come from his B.A. in Political Science with a specialization in International Relations from Columbia University in 1983.

By this standard I can officially claim that I have equal (if not more) knowledge and understanding of the world than Obama (seeing as how we share the same 4 year degree, except I have a minor in Japanese and recieved special honors for work with international history, particularly dealing with the political history of East Asia). Furthermore, I have lived with internationals for the past 6 years. As a matter of fact, only one of my co-workers is a native English speaker...which means my daily life is essentially Japanese.

I'm sure none of you are impressed by all the things I've done/experienced...and that is my point. Why is it that Obama's claim doesn't sound as rediculous as mine? I have stated much (not all in fact) of my knowledge and understanding of international policy, and it does measure up to Obama's in the area of foreign policy (I make no claims to have an equal quality or amount of education overall as Obama...just one area)

By the way...here's the actual dictionary definition of experience in the context of which the writer (as well as Hillary and McCain use the term).

Experience - knowledge or practical wisdom gained from what one has observed, encountered, or undergone: a man of experience.
—Synonyms: encounter, know, endure, suffer.

Hmmm...interesting how it puts knowledge in there, isn't it? From this definition and taking the whole context of what he was asked (what kind of expertise would he want in a VP) it can easily and accurately be inferred that Obama was either calling Hillary and McCain stupid or was trying to show he is experienced in foreign policy. The first is degrading and goes against his pledge of being a clean political contender and the other would simply make the writer of the article correct.

Fire away.

I understand "experience" and "knowledge" , the definitions of both words and meanings....why can't others who probably did not hear Sen. Obama's speech, discriminate between experience and knowledge? I want someone in the office of the president of the United States who has knowledge of the world and its' history and can bridge the great divide that has occured between our fine country and the rest of the world.

Spokesperson for the RNC: "Barack Obama laughably claimed to have more foreign policy experience than Senator McCain."

What?

This is the worst case of "spin" and "word twisting" I've seen yet in this campaign. Review Obama's words again carefully. Where did he use the words, "I have more experience than John McCain"?

He did not. I quote, "...confident that I know more and understand the world better..."

There is a huge difference between those statements. "Knowledge and Understanding" vs "Experience". It is apparent to me, in the way he expresses his views of the world, that he is right to be confident.

And then Hillary, on FOX NEWS no less, parrots the RNC spin: "I'm speechless!"

My god, Hillary. Appearing on the "Right-wing Propaganda Channel", fueling the fire of the RNC's spin machine. Whose side are you on??? Call Carville, he's got a new Judas to criticize.....

This disgusts me. I can't consider voting for HIllary anymore. Obama, you've got a lock on my vote. Period. God speed.

Clinton also has plenty of experience giving information to Chinese Spies. Of course she can moan about the Olympics after already handing them Nuclear Trade Secrets. I wonder if Ted Sioeng raised any money for Hill-Dogs campaign?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Cox_Report_controversy

Hillary logic in the argument is flawed. She has one criticism, the Senate subcomittee, and conflates that with all of Obama's experience. That's politics.

Obama does have considerable experience in foreign policy. Go here for a long list:

http://obamarecord.blogspot.com/2008/03/foreign-policy-experience.html

Most important, Obama has been right on important issues: he was right on Iraq, they were wrong. He was right on Iran, they weren't. He is right on talking to foreign leaders, the advised policy, she was not. Obama was right about targeting Al Queda. And so on.... Obama has demonstrated that he has the right judgement to navigate difficult decisions.

Experience is completely irrelevant, if it isn't grounded on sound judgement. Decisions can be dangerous if they are not grounded on sound judgement.

Why do so many people apparently believe it's acceptable practice to post a comment without reading a fair percentage of the comments that have already been posted? No one needs to see the same thing repeated ad nauseum. It's supposed to be about intelligent commentary, folks, not a popularity contest.

Holding to the tail coat of a president doesn't make Hillary an expert in foreign policy no matter how much Boston Globe tries. As for Mccain he is still working on it to find the difference between shia & sunni's in the Mid East. Judgment is what counts and Obama has a solid track record.

I think hillary needs to shut her frekin trap Obama isn't a bad guy. He respects the people. Hillary only cares 4 her self. wat a selfish bitch. she needs to stop beat him down. SHE IS A STUCK UP BITHC THAT CARES 4 ONLY HERSELF. OBAMA 4 PRESIDENT.............

Holding to the tail coat of a president doesn't make Hillary an expert in foreign policy no matter how much Boston Globe tries. As for Mccain he is still working on it to find the difference between shia & sunni's in the Mid East. Judgment is what counts and Obama has a solid track record.

becareful what you vote for

Mr. Obama is one of a few Senators who opposed the war after 9/11.
Why did he made such a decision?

After watching Mr. Wright's Video, I think, He was influenced by the teaching of
of his mentor.

Wow... you Obama supporters protest far too much! So he didn't use the word "experience!" Now, let me see, who's the last politician I remember explaining that he understood how the world works? Oh, yeah, GW Bush! Same guy who claimed to be a uniter (hmmm... where have I heard that before?)

Oh, yeah, and I vaguely remember someone campaigning on the theme of Hope back in the 90's...

Obama is all talk, no subtance. You people who support him have been mesmerized by hot air. It is laughable for a man of his age and relatively limited experience to believe he understands more and knows better than Ms. Clinton and Mr. McCain; to say it outloud is arrogance of the first water!

Amazing that Clinton and McCain can scoff at anyone, let alone Obama, given their collective approval of the Iraqi war from the beginning. Given the fact that this war represents perhaps the greatest strategic disaster of the American Experience, Clinton and McCain (McHillary) have impeached themselves as incompetent in foreign policy. The both of them have absolutely no credibility in questing the judgment of others.

Obama says he's better equipped intellectually to understand foreign policy... Clearly his arrogance is overwhelming!

BUT on the other hand, he may be right... he certainly understands how Africa feels, owing to Rev. Wright's mentoring all these years. And he has enough intelligence to push forward this Political Will and Moral Compass.

The only question remains... "whose political will and moral compass"? Michelle's? Rev. Wright's?

Hillary logic in the argument is flawed. She has one criticism, the Senate subcomittee, and conflates that with all of Obama's experience. That's politics.

Obama does have considerable experience in foreign policy. Go here for a long list:

http://obamarecord.blogspot.com/2008/03/foreign-policy-experience.html

Anot
Another way to compare candidates is to see what they have accomplished.

While Hillary visited 80 countries, she didn't influence policy. In fact, her claims have been debunked: Bosnia, Macedonia, Kosovo, Ireland.

Obama has produced important legislation with his trips. After visiting the Soviet block to investigate nuclear proliferation as part of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, he returned to write the Lugar-Obama Act, which worked toward nuclear and conventional weapons disarmament around the world.

Nuclear proliferation is a primary concern for Obama. He is already working to keep us safe.

Living and spending long stretches of time in another country and amongst other cultures a achild brings a unique understanding to their situations and value systems, what attending a church 20 years in his aldult life brings?

"belies the facts and the record." Who is she kidding? How can she say this with a straight face when she blatantly lied about her trip to Bosnia. Obama didn't say "experience". He is exactly what we need to repair our tarnished image and bring back the America that used to be looked up to and what other nations aspired to.

By the way, why is the press letting her get away with the "I misspoke" claim about the Bosnia trip. Call it what it was...an outright lie.

Obama continues to show that their is "no meat on the bone". He may be a good orator, but his resume stinks. You would have to be a fool to ever really consider voting for this man as president.

Go here to hear Obama speak on his views of foreign poicy at a foreign policy forum in Des Moines, IA.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid900881681/bclid900480414/bctid1349157811

Liar, Liar Lipstick liar..............
Oh, don't laugh at sniper fire........she has more experience and four years of it did not help Mr.Bush do a good job .

It is crazy to imply that the Bush Administation has painted all Muslims as gun toting maniacs and bombers, quite the opposite. It seems every chance he gets he talks about how Islam is the religion of peace and how extremists are hijacking a religion, even though anyone with half a brain who has taken the time to study the religion would disagree with this crazy assertion. I wish more people would take the time to study this so call religion of peace and find out for themselves why this liberal brainwashing will ultimately lead to the destruction of Western Civilization.

Interesting to read the unfettered defense of OB. Wonder when was the last time any of the world leaders called any of these posters to have discussion on foreign policy. I can't remember any world leader calling me, my neighbors or anyone I know.

It is clear OB has some very fanatic uninformed followers. Most of them probably could not name more than 3 world leaders and all of them will from Western Europe.

The extend of OB's foreign policy experience.

Folks are blinded by something other than reality.

For those who trying to differentiate knowledge from experience. Knowledge comes from experience that is why, when applied for job (assuming you did apply), you got the response you didn't have enough experience.

Level of thinking and exhibition of ignorance is mind boggling. No wonder we can never get to serious policy discussions. Blogosphere is overrun nimwits.

Here is where Obama has experience:

1. Obama holds a degree in foreign policy from Columbia,

2. He is on the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, that plays a vital role in shaping US policy around the world.

3. He is on the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee that addresses, among other things, issues of immigration and our borders.

4. Committee on Veterans' Affairs: focused on providing our brave veterans with the care and services they deserve.

5. He has lived in places that have exposed him to many different cultures. As a child in Indonesia, Hawaii as a teenager, he visits his family in Africa, his family has people from the world. This should not qualify him. But, it has given Obama an insight unique among the current candidates to understand, deeply, that our genetics do not divide us, that as people, we all want the same things: a home, jobs, security. That experience, that world view, will be very important in addressing the now globally integrated world.

Barack Obama even tries to sound like MLK. Laughable if it wasn't so scary. Believe me; he can't be Martin Luther King. MLK wasn't so full of himself. MLK's compassion and insight was so sincere and honest and eloquent. He was so clear about the dream and the change that he wanted to see come true for All people. He was mature and made his way up to the mountain that he stood on; He wasn't carried as Barack Obama has been in this campaign. BO's been made to be what he is by the media presenting things the way they want them to appear. BO seems like a nice person with nice intentions; but, he DOES NOT possess the strong leadership qualities that MLK had nor the qualities of a leader who can get us out of the messes that we are in. I think people are so desperate these days; they just see and hear what they want to see and hear.....

Obama voted against the war because he was used to NOT VOTING for anything. To claim he has more knowledge than McCain and/or Clinton, experience aside, is ludicrous and a glaring light on his arrogance.

Or wait maybe he learned what he needed to know on his trip to Pakistan.

mlehnerer wrote

> he seems to understand the conflicts in the world better either of his >competitors. That's why he voted AGAINST the Iraq war while Clinton and >John "100 Years" McCain voted for the war.

Hate the cloud this marvelous discussion with facts, but Mr. Obama never cast a vote regarding the Iraq war. At that time, he was busy voting "present" in the Illinois State House.

Al Gore is now running, this will certainly mix things up a bit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can stare at my navel and have more understanding of the world than John McCain or Hillary Clinton. McCain is a hotheaded old man with more ambition than brains, and Hillary is delusional if she thinks being married to a politician and acting as his political advisor is the same as being the politician himself.

The fact of the matter is Obama is running against a couple of hard hitting lightweights who are in no way qualified for the oval office, not by their temperament, not by their records, not by their powers of judgment.

As long as he doesn't do something tragically stupid, like pick Joe Lieberman as a running mate, Obama should win hands down in November.

WORDS MEAN SOMETHING....BUT NOT ALWAYS WHAT WE THINK,,,,MR OBAMA, SLIPSAND SLIDS WITH WORDS....THAT WHY HE WORDED HIS STATEMENT THE WAY HE DID....'" more confidence that the other canidates running for president......ONE TRUTH IS THIS...MR OBAMA USED THESE WORDS BECAUSE YOU CANNOT DRAW ANY CONCLUSION AS TO WHAT HE THINKS CONCERNING THE QUESTION. HE IS LEAVING WIGGLE ROOM AS TO WHAT HE REALLY THINKS. THIS IS SLICK ON MR OBAMAS PART BUT IS AN INTENTION TO DECIVE....AND THAT MY FRIEND IS A LIE....OBAMA IS DOING THIS FOR POLTICIAL GAIN...NOW YOU MIGHT SAY, ALL POLTICIANS DO THIS...BUT, REMBER, MR OBAMA PROMSIED NOT TOP BE THE TIPICAL POLITICAN...MY FRIENDS.. MR OBAMA IS ACTING LIKE SOME SLICK LAWYER NOT LOOKING FOR TRUTH BUT TO ONLY WIN....THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO VET THIS YOUNG MAN WHO WANTS SO BADLY TO BE PRESIDENT. MR OBAMA TELLS US HIS SPRITIUAL LEADER HAS MADE STATEMENT HE DOES NOT AGREES WITH BUT WILL NOT DISASSOCATE FROM....I DO NOT WANT MR WRIGHT BEING OUR PRESIDENTS SPRITIUAL LEADER.. JUST TO MUCH SLIP AND A SLIDDING. SINCERLY, JIM BECK

Was this article changed since first posted?

A lot of the comments (including mine) complained that the article misrepresented his claim as being about "experience." I'm fairly certain that the article used that inaccurate word — "experience" — in its own description of Obama's remarks, not just in quoting Clinton and McCain.

The article no longer makes this error. Apparently it was fixed? If so, thank you for fixing it.

It is customary in the blogging world (if not in the reporting world as well) to explicitly note the time and nature of substantive changes to an entry, especially corrections made in response to posted comments. That helps subsequent readers understand what earlier commenters were talking about.

For example, you might add at the end of the entry:

"Update 2008-4-8 2:15 PM: Corrected summary of Obama's remarks as being about 'knowledge and understanding' instead of 'experience.'"

Such footwork helps maintain the strong and constant downward pull on the quality of online dialogue.

I've lived in 8 different countries and was married to a Middle-eastern Muslim - can I run for president, too?

A person with experiences is a person who can make a quick and right decision. He doesn't argue, he knows what to do, to deliver in short time. In physics, this is called power or works over time.
Obama is an orator, he experiments, argues. He makes trials and errors before any conclusion. He knows how to make his cases and keep talking and talking.
No, Obama is not suitable at this time of emergency, recession. We need someone who is more stable.

Blogger: Would you please screen these things for childish mis-spellings, poor grammar and syntax, and malapropisms? Give all the guilty ones a single bite at the apple, then strike any successive posts that continue the error(s).

If one is going to read stuff like this, at least one shouldn't be doubly burdened by wholesale ineptitude with the use (misuse?) of the language in addition to the he-said, she-said back and forth rants, thinly-veiled racism and sexism, and factual ignorance.

Thanks ever so much.

Of course many of you Clinton fanatics (those that can read) can actually see what Obama said, and it moots your silly posts. Then again, I guess you all believe saying one thing actually means something else.

"foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain" EQUALS "I have more foreign policy experience".

Just like -- "we landed amidst snipper fire and had to run to our vehicles with our heads down" EQUALS "I was greeted by an 8 year old girl who read me a lovely poem when I arrived in Bosnia".

Changing the wording in the article is insufficient. The reporter used an erroneous quote to illicit an erroneous response from Clinton and McCain. The story should be retracted and the reporter reprimanded.

Imagine if someone said "I kissed my wife tonight" but a reporter quoted me as saying "I killed my wife tonight". Only 2 letters different, but the response to my quote many people would be very different.

It's like trying to "unring" a bell. Once it's rung, it can never be unrung.

"We" see that some people will grasp at wet straw to try and stay afloat. Is this all you got. This "story" have been going on all day long. And a "story" it is. Why do you take a mans words and spin them the way you want them to play. Heck if anyone is responding to these comments,that means that person can read. And if that person can read than they no Mr.Obama did not say he had mor experience than Mr.McCain and Mrs.Clinton. But like a drowning man a drowning woman will grasp at straws. If that is the worse thing he has done all day he will be just fine. I leave it to you.

Lingam #150:

Most Americans are profoundly ignorant about international affairs (and, unfortunately, American politics as well) -- irrespective of their candidate choice.

Having said that, one should generally refrain from launching into diatribes attacking the intellect of others when one has difficulty formulating proper English sentences on an English language blog.

Your assertion that experience is both a necessary and sufficient condition for knowledge is specious at best. There is too much empirical evidence to refute this blind assertion to uncritically accept it. If you are suggesting that there are many different types of experience and that you more heavily value the types of experience that Billary and McCain have, then your claim is defensible. It is interesting to note though that despite all of HRC's experience, apparently none of it taught her to read the intelligence report that was central to her vote on Iraq before actually casting that vote. Apparently, the only experience she drew on for that vote was that nobody who opposed a popular war, trumped up or not, could even hope to vie for the Presidency.

Dear Foon Rhee,

If you undertake a content analysis of the comments received here, you'd realize that your attempt to contrive Obama's words, for what I suspect to be a political reason, is clear for all to see. Claiming to have more "understanding" of the world is not the same as "experience."

Understanding of the world requires extended periods of stay in various parts of the world, not from short visit where one is flown around in an aircraft or whisked through VIPs without having in-depth interactions with the natives.

I will even dare say that Peace Corps volunteers probably have a better "understanding" of the world than Clinton and/or McCain. There are nuances of a culture that one can only understand not from longevity in Washington but from actually living amongst the people. Usually the lifestyles of the world leaders that usher McCain or Hillary with VIP treatment are a far cry from the experiences of the natives.

And oh, for the ignorant commentator that suggested that Obama's support comes from ignorant uneducated folks, please go review the exit polls. Get your facts right before publicly exposing your ignorance for if you were bright, you'd probably concur with Obama words. You don't have to be an Obama supporter to reason. Understand that you are not always right and your opponents may sometimes have a better logic.

Sham, sham, sham.
Wake up everyone! We're not talking about buying a car!
P.S. Where is Reverend Wright hiding?

Dear Dom:

Your religion is only as violent as you are.

Islam is just as violent as Christianity, which is to say: Islam and Christianity are only as violent as each individual who believes the myths.

In other words, in the right mind, Christianity is a benevolent religion that does much good for many people. The same thing can be said about Islam: There are many Muslims who are non-violent who work to create a better world.

So pick your myth, whatever it may be, just don't use it as an insane rationalization for murder and bigotry, because it bears repeating:

Your religion is only as violent as you are.

John McCain can't even seem to keep the difference between Sunnis and Shiites straight, and thinks that Iran is supporting Sunni terrorist who blow up Shiite mosques.

Yeah yeah yeah, war hero blah blah blah. I don't think the old man has a whole lot on the ball.

I have a few questions for Obama supporters:

1. How is it that one can "know" without experiencing? Life is an experience.
2. Just knowing and understanding multiplication means one can become a mathematician? I guess exposure to different cultures is proof of foreign policy knowledge.
3. Where is the proof that exposure to different cultures is equivalent to foreign policy knowledge? If you say it's difficult to list or rationalize this, then
4. How can one claim to be better at something when there are no solid grounds for comparison?
5. To be clear, he wants to hire a someone who has more foreign policy experience (to complete him, so to speak) when he claims to have the knowledge and understanding in this area?
6. And finally, who would you want as president - the person with no foreign policy experience OR the person with no foreign policy experience?

I would have let this article go, but read so many comments parsing knowledge and experience I couldn't help myself.

Thanks.

"I find it an asset that he has spent time in nations with Muslim populations then he understands the difference between an extremist and a peaceful Islamic person." - from post 2.

That's the problem with Obama; he thinks those people existed. If they did, they would speak out in great numbers against the Islamofacists; they would have defended the women of Afghanistan; they would have defended the cartoonists, authors, etc., of countries in which free speech is allowed instead of whined about how insulting it all was ... to them.

The existence of peaceful Muslims is a lie; if you don't believe me, then read the Koran. If you don't believe me, then look at the records of war the world over for the last fifty years alone. If you don't believe me, look into their own histories of their own countries, tribes, and warlords. Then try to find one peaceful Muslim who speaks out against beheadings and the false history Syria created for "Palestine."

Obama may be the only candidate fooled by the Muslim propaganda pouring out all over the world. If not, let's hear him say now, before we all vote for him, that he will march to war against those who would control enslave and control all women the world over to defend us ... all of us ... Black women, Jewish women, White women and yes, Muslim women; let's hear him say now who his running mate will be as well.

it is true that obama understands world better than hillary and mccain. they may have served longer in foreign relation or arm services committees, but this simply does not give them an understanding of foreign countries, especially their culture, values, religion, their needs, their way of thinking of problem and solution process. see--what kind of price we are paying because of bush, who has no understanding of lot of things and the supporters and followers of his ill conceived foreign policy. we do not want to go to the same path. to change the current course of action we just need a president who has better and wider perspective and understanting of the world communities. viva obama

Blog after blog...and all I see is that the Obama supporters harbor such hatred toward Hillary. Why? I always figured that I would support the Democratic nominee against McCain. Why the venom from Obama supporters? He is my Senator in Illinois, and I supported him with time and finances. I have become less sure of him because of all the haters. I have always voted. I am in my 50s and to the left of any of the reactionaries at moveon.org. My politics are certainly to the left of the Democratic Party and moveon. At this point, Democratic bloggers have exposed the Democratic Party for what it is...f'ing haters. The Clinton and Obamab supporters are equally guilty. So haters, you win. All of my energies are now going to be focused on trashing both Democratic candidates and encouraging people not to vote. Reject Obama's and Clinton's campaign of hate--DON'T VOTE!

I am from Ethiopia and we know that most US presidents so called foreign experience have done nothing but worsened the relationship b/n us and the USA. If you understand what other cultures are all about then you will understand what Senator Barack Obama is referring to.

I think the veneer is starting to come off of Mr. Obama.

He is far from the honest new leader of our times that he has tried to project -with the media's assistance of course

Time for the media to follow up on Mr. Obama's relationships, experiences, etc
as is done for all political candidates - who are we dealing with?

I read somewhere that Mr. Barack Obama feels he has better judgement and understanding of the world. We had a similar politician here in UK about sixty years ago. His name was Neville Chamberlain. He also *understood" Herr Hitler by looking at his eyes and bought peace for our time. We all know where it ended.

To me Obama is just another Washington DC hochstapler, as my German friends would say. Only fools can believe he can achieve changes with the same people sitting in the congress and all kind of lobbyist groups supporting his race.

Obama is a troubling neophyte who would be considered nothing more than a flyweight like Dan Quayle if he didn't have the right melanin content of character.

First you have the facts, do more research if necessary, then you have to analyze them in an logical, open minded and objective manner to make the right decisions. Not listen at what the media or others are saying. Too many times the facts are not analyzed. Knowing a culture also helps. This is why I believe Senator Obama has better foreign policy judgment because he analyzes first. I live in NYC and I followed the trial of those who bombed the WTC in 1993. They said they planned for it to come down. I had the facts, did research on the bombers and I analyzed them and made a decision. I told friends the WTC will be hit again, no one believed me.

I agree with poster #8 whole heartedly!!! Read, don't take the US media's word. I get my news from the BBC, CBC and international newspapers online. Eg El Haretz had an article, the NY Times had the same article but with a few sentences missing to change the meaning of the article.

Oblama is grasping at straws. all he has is rhetoric.

Obama didn't claim to have more general knowledge of foreign countries - he claimed to know more about FOREIGN POLICY.

Based on spending several WEEKS abroad. That is ridiculous.

If I lived abroad for several years, does that mean I have any special 'knowledge' of foreign POLICY? At least Clinton and McCain have interacted and discussed POLICY with the leaders and POLICY-MAKERS of those foreign countries. In Clinton's case, more than 80 countries.

Even assuming that Obama does have some special knowledge of foreign policy, the criticism that he didn't do much with it is spot-on. Why didn't he convene more committee hearings to discuss FOREIGN POLICY as it relates to NATO/Afghanistan? What good is all that 'knowledge' if he's not williing to do more than talk about it?

Wow…. I used to have respect for the Boston Globe but seeing now how the author of this article changed his/her first assertions that Obama claimed to have more experience to Obama claimed to have a better understanding is sad. It took countless replies to your article to point out the flaw in your analysis and logic and what you do is simply change your article without offering a retraction. Now, everybody who reads this article and then the posts will wonder why the posts keep stating that Obama never stated that he had more experience, as your first version of the article stated, and think that these posts are ridiculous. Sad indeed.

Obama is sounding like Chamberlain in 1938 at the Munich conference. Appeasement of the enemy is not the answer. Chamberlain tried that with Hitler to avoid a 2nd World War, you see how well that worked. Obama and Clinton are both ignorant of what history has tought us and if either of them win the Presidency then the world is destined for World War 3." If WW3 is fought with nuclear wepons then WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones" by Mark Twain. The rich are Commonly ignorant of the problems of the real world. Simply look at Louis 16th of france. Due to what history has taught us we can be certain that we are doing the right thing by being in Iraq and should also suggest we launch a preempted strike on Iran as well. We must realize the conduct in the middle East goes back hundreds of years to the fighting over the successor of Muhammad and over time they have had radicals turn that hatred toward us because we are free, do not have their conflict, and most of all we do not take their side in their fight for succession. In short, if we pull out of Iraq they will strike back with a force the likes of which we have never befor seen.

Barack Obama said that "foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain."

Look at his qualifications his undergraduate degree is in Political Science with a specialization in international relations. He has traveled and lived overseas which is a plus. He taught Constitutional Law-which means interpreting-thus analyzing. Where has Clinton discussed policy outside of the US? When Clinton said that she helped in Ireland according to the BBC this was a lie.

This is why I go to other news sources other than what is in the US.

How could Obama claim to know more about foreign policy when he's never had to negotiate any foreign policy matters with other countries? He wasted the opportunity when he failed to have committee hearings for NATO/Afghanistan, for a whole year. Perhaps if he did he would have known that Al Aqueda is making a comeback in Afghanistan, and America needs more help from NATO to combat these insurgents. Of course he would really have a different perspective about life in Africa or Indonesia, just as an individual raised in a rural area would have a different perspective compared to one raised in an Urban area.
John McCain has been on Foreign Affairs Committee in Congress for years and after Mrs. Clinton arrived in Congress she has done the same. Mrs. Clinton has traveled to China, Bosnia, Ireland on behalf of the United States. Further, she has been to Iraq and visited with the troops. I too have spent 17 years growing up in a foreign country and have been to Europe, spent time in Puerto Rico, Bermuda, St. Maarten, Martinique and Barbados, but I wouldn't say that having these experiences gave me any advantage when it comes to Foreign Policy. Perhaps if I was a diplomat, then I could claim that I had foreign policy esperience.

But are we not at war with Islam, primarily Radical Islam?

Interesting. Jonathan Cifre has a piece on this at savagepolitics.com today. He has added a few more comments.

Not that I'm impressed a lot, but this is a lot more than I expected when I found a link on Delicious telling that the info is awesome. Thanks.