Obama advisor resigns for calling Hillary Clinton a "monster"

Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:02pm

Samantha Power, a foreign-policy advisor to Barack Obama and past FP contributor, has just resigned for saying that Hillary Clinton is a "monster" in what she thought was an off-the-record remark to The Scotsman.

But that wasn't Power's only boo-boo during her trip to the UK, where she is promoting her new book. As the Politico's Ben Smith notes, Power also deviated from the party line on Obama's withdrawal plan for Iraq:

Power downplayed Obama's commitment to quick withdrawal from Iraq on Hard Talk, a program that often exceeds any of the U.S. talk shows in the rigor of its grillings. She was challenged on Obama's Iraq plan, as it appears on his website, which says that Obama "will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months."

"What he’s actually said, after meting with the generals and meeting with intelligence professionals, is that you – at best case scenario – will be able to withdraw one to two combat brigades each month. That’s what they’re telling him. He will revisit it when he becomes president," Power says.

The host, Stephen Sackur, challenged her:"So what the American public thinks is a commitment to get combat forces out in 16 months isn't a commitment isn't it?"

"You can’t make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009," she said. "He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator. He will rely upon a plan – an operational plan – that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn’t have daily access now, as a result of not being the president. So to think – it would be the height of ideology to sort of say, 'Well, I said it, therefore I’m going to impose it on whatever reality greets me.'"

"It’s a best-case scenario," she said again.

What do Passport readers think. Should Power have resigned?

UPDATE: It probably wasn't the savviest political move by Power to compare Obama to a U.N. official, either.

Blake Hounshell | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register
( filed under: )


Advertisement

 

Christy

by Cquirk on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:12pm

Christy Quirk
www.quirkglobalstrategies.com

Obama is a rookie and so are the people around him. This -- and the NAFTA dustup -- are indicative that he and his people not ready to play with the big kids.

Hillary's people may be evil, but they're not naive.

Let him stew and mature as VP.

whoa there..

by dpadams on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:19pm

anyone who thinks that Obama and his staff are immature is clearly not looking at the depth of his staff or have read in-depth interviews on his policies. Both candidates are surrounded by experienced foreign policy heavy-weights.

It's true that Obama doesn't always tow the typical party line on every issue, but you shouldn't necessarily misconstrue original thinking with naive. I think that Barack has shown himself to be an eloquent, thoughtful person on foreign policy topics. Read this recent Washington Post interview for more insight on a number of his positions.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/02/AR2008030201982.html

As your last two sentences say, it's stunning to think you'd want the party to be run by "evil" or unorthodox.
www.democraticpiece.com

yes...of course

by dpadams on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:12pm

Yes, of course she should have. This was a smart, quick way to defuse a situation that the Clinton campaign could have talked about all weekend. It would have made it more difficult for the Obama campaign to drive the media debate in a direction they are seeking. Instead, the "monster comment" would have been the Clinton campaign's retort to any Obama messaging. "Does Barack Obama stand by the vicious, personal attacked levied against Senator Clinton made by his personal adviser?"

Besides, I am sure this will change little in terms of her input into Barack's foreign policy positions. She's a long-time adviser, he's not going to stop talking to her because of this. It's a smart move.

www.democraticpiece.com

I think the key point is that it was Obama's call

by Haggai on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:21pm

It's not clear whether she called him and offered to resign, or whether he made it clear to her that it would better if she did. But either way, he obviously had the final say on the matter, given how close an advisor she's been to him. If she had offered to resign and he said, "Just apologize, but there's no need to quit," then of course she wouldn't have resigned.

I'm sure that if he gets elected president, he'll bring her back in some capacity, and I'm equally sure that no one will care that this happened in the first place. He can also get advice from her whenever he wants; it's not like he's promising never to speak to her again or anything.

I guess the question is how much of a role she had to play in the campaign itself. Has she been so much of an asset that he couldn't afford to lose her just as the campaign is starting to get rough on the foreign policy front? Apparently his assessment is that her formal status with the campaign was not worth the possible headache of her Hillary comment, which would clearly suggest that as much as Obama values her ideas and her advice, he doesn't see her as being all that important an asset on the campaign trail.

Oh, and interesting point about her Iraq comments. When she says:

You can’t make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009...He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator.

It sounds more than a little bit like this to me:

Kenneth Pollack, a Persian Gulf specialist who worked for the Clinton White House, and who has become a proponent of the military surge in Iraq since leaving government, said yesterday: "I don't know what she would do as president. But all of my experience with her when she was first lady is that this is a woman who would put our nation's interests first and any campaign promises a distant second.

Of course, the latter quote has prompted anger in a few Democratic blogging circles, while Power's strikingly similar Iraq remarks apparently won't get any attention at all, despite her having been a lot more officially associated with Obama's campaign than Pollack is with Clinton's.

Power's Iraq comments

by Haggai on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:25pm

I see that Ben Smith's Politico post that Blake linked to had already made the same comparison to Pollack's comments about Clinton's Iraq policy.

She should....

by Lure D. Lou on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 2:35pm

never have been part of the official team in the first place. She is brilliant and self-willed -- unlikely to tow the party line and given to saying absolutley what she believes in. In other words, not a good bet for a politician.
Hilary Clinton in not a monster, she is a politician...Obama is not yet a real politician but he soon will be. Dear, Samantha....preserve your insight and integrity and your bully-pulpit and speak out on Darfur. That's where your power lies.

Message Discipline

by yuguri on Fri, 03/07/2008 - 4:02pm

She's a very smart and capable analyst who has been loose lipped in interviews. What she says is on Iraq and the Clinton campaign is not unreasonable in private, but she was terribly undisciplined to have said these things in public. The fact is, if you a official surrogate for a Presidential candidate, you must be capable of keeping your mouth shut and staying on message. Her resignation is entirely correct, hopefully other Obama surrogates get the hint and remember the importance message discipline.

-Yuguri, in Mendocino