Will Petraeus hearings favor Obama and Clinton?

April 4, 2008

WASHINGTON – Could Democrats orchestrate next week’s hotly anticipated Senate hearings on Iraq to give the limelight to party White House hopefuls Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?

“Of course not. The American people want a discussion of policy,” Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin of Michigan said.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden agreed: “The biggest mistake we can make is politicizing, looking at this in terms of political advantage and disadvantage. The American people are sick of this crap.”

The two committee chairmen were responding to questions from reporters who wondered if they might allow the Democratic candidates to speak earlier than they would ordinarily.

Army Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, the top two U.S. officials in Iraq, will appear before the Levin and Biden committees on Tuesday to deliver a progress report and recommend how quickly U.S. forces can be withdrawn in the waning months of the Bush administration.

One reporter wanted to know if Biden would allow Obama, the junior Illinois senator on his committee, to speak ahead of presidential rival John McCain, the panel’s senior Republican.

“McCain is the ranking guy. So he’s going to get to speak first,” Biden responded.

But while rejecting any notion of partisanship, Biden appeared to suggest the subject matter could have campaign implications for McCain, who supports a Republican war strategy that Democrats say has failed.

“I think it’s good to hear what McCain has to say. I love the idea of McCain having to explain what’s going on here and why this is working so well,” Biden said.

Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

Why in God’s name would Obama be allowed to speak before McCain and why should he speak before Hillary or speak at all. The media is still nuts and not doing any check on Barack Hussein Obama to see if he really qualifies to be commander in chief of the this country. msnbc has completely lost their minds focusing on how bad it would be for Hillary to be the next president.. If Obama is the nominee, I will vote for Ron Paul.

Posted by jan | Report as abusive

Or better yet, John McCain

Posted by barry | Report as abusive

Notice that neither Obama nor his campaign asked that he be preferred in the committee proceedings. “The two committee chairmen were responding to questions from reporters.”

Posted by Josh | Report as abusive

But Biden is head of SFRC, which Obama is on; McCain is Republican ranking member of SASC. SASC hearing is in the morning, SFRC in the afternoon. Article is misrepresenting Biden’s remarks.

Posted by j | Report as abusive

Because the media is so terribly blinded by the obvious hypnotic affect of Obama, it is indeed possible they will favor him during the Petraus hearing, but if that is what happens their is going to be many people totally and complete outraged with the media. Even as a Republican I can see how they have favored Obama over Hillary and I’m outraged by it, although I wouldn’t vote for her under any circumstances. The liberal MSM has much to be ashamed of themselves for, but it would take character for them to even realize that. Since they have none it is obvious we are going to get more of the same!

Posted by Gayle | Report as abusive

For Jan and Gayle

You both seems to be about say age 70 and 80 AND CLULESS

Posted by June | Report as abusive

Pretty hot issue here. I see no problem in Obama speaking on behalf of the Iraq’s issue. Obama has in the past, contributed some very detrimental information in decision makings. He is capable, his intellect and articulate manner surpasses a host of mindsets. An issue this critical needs in depth and factual reasoning because this war is abreast our priority concern. Bush’s decisions have proven to be extremely costly of lives and monies at the expense of the American people. The candidate’s output on the Iraq’s issue is detrimental and a much needed argument because it’s a big contributing factor to our slumping economy and inflation. Obama including Hillary and McCain’s decisions will be weighed as well. The most accommodating and appropriate end decision from either candidate will be thoroughly examined and exercised should it be the most reasonable and suitable decision concerning the welfare of this America concern. Why hate instead of respecting the fact that these candidates will be engaged in an issue that most Americans feel is such a major concern. With all the rhetoric manifesting on these sites, now it is time to put up or shut up, and these comments are still disillusioned. This is a time when we need unity, to stand together in love, to understand the intents of these candidates that we might pick the best elect for the presidential seat . Stop the bickering and finger pointing, come to together with like interests to share in the decision making that will help us instead of further destroy us. Life is too short to be taken for granted by unappreciated people. Be true to yourself and the future generations that they may be spared the ‘mess’ that we have inherited.

Posted by Nisey01 | Report as abusive

To Jan ,

You asked why in God’s name would Obama be allowed to speak? Good question. Reason so is because God can do all things, and apparently He has bless Obama with the required ability to accommodate the matter. Let me just reinterate the fact that Obama’s intellect and articulate demeanor surpasses a hosts of mindsets. It’s apparent that you don’t understand, time will reveal what you can’t seem to figure out. Hang in there and watch the country change for the best under Obama’s administration as the President of the United States of America.

Posted by Nisey01 | Report as abusive

Again people put down Obama who never asked for such a privilege in the first place. I do think McCain should speak first but really the issue was debated outside of all 3 candidates. We really need to focus here on the candidates and not get lost in conversations between other people and slop them on the plates of the candidates. It really is lame, regardless of who people vote for. The media wants us to get lost in it all and push us away from the issues. They obviously are doing a good job.

Posted by Zarthus | Report as abusive

April 19th, 2008
8:53 pm GMT

…all to protect life,liberty and pursuit of bitterness.
Life can be ended in Iraq
Liberty can be lost in Iraq.
Unless we specifically now know how we unconditionally disengage our current embedding . Our Soldiers embedded with our “loyals” will wind up
at gunpoint of one- another trying to make their way home.
So ” bring them home ” or better “bring them home alive”
is a lot quicker screamed than done !!
obama is out anyway – born in USA yes turning 18 or date of pick up KENYA Passport
voids the US Passport , not a US Cit = ineligible for presidency
But as Senator very good , he realized in Iraq to leave is about tactics
uncond.dissengagement must gain tactical safe distance from all non US Forces
else they cannot (physically ) leave , They would destroy their vehicles on the way out

etc etc
unthinkable the nightmare scenario that follow for 170000 outgunned/ounumbered in IRANQ

As far as Hillary ????lot’s a q-marks, SEN DEAN should come up with a third candidate , one that can fully explain everything. All sideline issues (incl. economy) are resolved if we can prevail in the middle East.
SEN Trent LOTT 3 years ago said “Mow them all down and
we get somewhere” Now it comes to my mind ,because
a separation into safe tactical distance for maneuvering is no longer existent. If Our GI’s want to move , they
wind up at gunpoint of one-another ,the pretectee
will realize , they let them down, and the logical
reaction then is , to take control of the protector and his military hardware.
I have studied Mil.History and interviewed many NaziGermans how they unsuccessfully attempted to
break away from vichy french troops , bulgarian
loyals etc etc. Also 1992 in Screbrenica (Serbia) about
133 Bosnian conscripted soldiers captured and murdered
in absolute cold blood.

Posted by hlg | Report as abusive