About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Right-wing media mockery ignores Obama's nuclear policy experience

April 09, 2010 11:33 pm ET — 29 Comments

After President Obama reacted to Sarah Palin's criticism of his nuclear policy by stating that she is "not much of an expert on nuclear issues," right-wing media figures responded by denigrating Obama's own nuclear expertise prior to assuming the presidency. In fact, as a U.S. senator, Obama co-authored nonproliferation legislation and traveled to the former Soviet Union to examine weapons stockpiles.

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Right-wing media mock Obama's "vast nuclear experience" before becoming president

Palin mocks the "vast nuclear experience" Obama gained "as a community organizer and as a part-time senator." During her April 9 speech at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, Palin said: "Now, the president, with all the vast nuclear experience that he acquired as a community organizer and as a part-time senator, and as a full-time candidate, all that experience, still no accomplishment to date with North Korea and Iran."

Ingraham: Obama "had no nuclear experience, and became president of the United States." Discussing Obama's exchange with Palin on the April 9 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, Ingraham stated, "He says, 'I'm not going to comment on that,' and then he says, 'well, she has no nuclear experience.' And of course, he had no nuclear experience and became president of the United States."

Hannity: Obama's nuclear experience comes from "his days as a community organizer." On the April 9 edition of his Fox News program, Sean Hannity said, "I guess the president got a lot of nuclear policy experience during his days as a community organizer in Chicago, alongside his pal, the unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers."

In Senate, Obama worked on non-proliferation policy, co-authored "next critical step" on issue

Obama took fact-finding trip to former USSR to examine WMD stockpiles. In 2005, in his first foreign trip as a U.S. senator, Obama traveled to Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), then-chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. The purpose of the trip was to examine facilities for the storage and destruction of conventional, biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. Obama and Lugar subsequently co-wrote a December 2005 Washington Post op-ed on the issue and appeared together in a discussion at the Council on Foreign Relations on "Challenges Ahead For Cooperative Threat Reduction," in which Obama detailed ways to improve the U.S. program to control, secure, and dismantle weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union.

With Lugar, Obama co-authored non-proliferation initiative signed into law by President Bush. Obama and Lugar co-authored the "Lugar-Obama non-proliferation initiative," which "enhances U.S. efforts to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles and to detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction throughout the world." The legislation was signed into law by President Bush in January 2007. According to a June 28, 2007, press release from Lugar, he and Obama subsequently secured "$36 million for programs to destroy heavy conventional weapons, $10 million for efforts to intercept weapons and materials of mass destruction, and $2 million for rapid response to proliferation detection and interdiction emergencies."

Lugar praised Obama's "productive" work on nonproliferation that took "next critical step" on the issue. In an August 2008 Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette op-ed (retrieved from the Nexis database), Lugar wrote that "Sen. Obama has worked with me, productively, on non-proliferation issues. We jointly introduced a bill that strengthened U.S. defenses against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction." He further wrote:

Sen. Obama joined me in developing legislation in 2005 -- long before he was a presidential candidate -- to address emerging proliferation risks. After significant study and site visits, it became clear to us that additional safeguards were required to strengthen the lines of defense between unsecured weapons of mass destruction and U.S. borders and to deal with vulnerable stockpiles of conventional weapons and hand-held anti-aircraft missiles. Lightweight anti-aircraft missiles were especially at risk. There may be as many as 750,000 such missiles, known formally as man portable air defense systems, or MANPADS, in arsenals worldwide. The State Department estimates that more than 40 civilian aircraft have been hit by such weapons since the 1970s.

Loose stocks of small arms and other weapons also help fuel civil wars in Africa and elsewhere and, as we have seen repeatedly, provide the ammunition for those who attack peacekeepers and aid workers trying to stabilize and rebuild war-torn societies. The Lugar-Obama initiative disposes of artillery shells like those used in the improvised roadside bombs that have proved so deadly to American forces in Iraq. Lugar-Obama also strengthens our ability to work with allies to detect and intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction or material that could be used in a nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. This enhances an important second line of defense between weapons of mass destruction and the American people.

The Nunn-Lugar program has provided a solid foundation, valuable experience and measurable results. With the Lugar-Obama legislation, we took the next critical step forward to refocus and reinvigorate our country's non-proliferation mission.

In 2005, I traveled with Sen. Obama to Russia, Ukraine and Azerbaijan to oversee a number of proliferation projects. In Russia, we visited Nunn-Lugar sites where nuclear weapons were being dismantled and stored. In Ukraine, we inspected the Donetsk State Chemical Production Plant, a conventional weapons destruction facility where the U.S. has taken the lead in a three-year NATO program to destroy the weapons. At that facility, more than 117,000 tons of ammunition and 1.1 million small arms and light weapons are slated for destruction within 12 years. During the visit we encouraged Ukrainian officials to expedite destruction efforts and expand cooperative threat reduction of conventional weapons. In Azerbaijan, we observed sea interdiction exercises in the Caspian Sea and encouraged leaders there to continue their cooperation with the United States.

These programs are ongoing. For a relatively small investment they are making a huge difference to U.S. and global security.

Obama introduced Nuclear Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 2007. Obama introduced the Nuclear Weapons Threat Reduction Act of 2007 (S.1977), with then-Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) as an original co-sponsor, which would "provide for sustained United States leadership in a cooperative global effort to prevent nuclear terrorism, reduce global nuclear arsenals, stop the spread of nuclear weapons and related material and technology, and support the responsible and peaceful use of nuclear technology."

Obama interest in nuclear policy predates his Senate career. Obama reportedly authored his college thesis on "Soviet nuclear disarmament." Moreover, Washington Monthly reported in September 2006: "On the campaign trail in 2004, Obama spoke passionately about the dangers of loose nukes and the legacy of the Nunn-Lugar nonproliferation program, a framework created by a 1991 law to provide the former Soviet republics assistance in securing and deactivating nuclear weapons. Lugar took note, as 'nonproliferation' is about as common a campaign sound-bite for aspiring senators as 'exchange-rate policy' or 'export-import bank oversight.'"

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by phredicles (April 10, 2010 12:18 am ET)
      15  
      Thank you - I see this is also a talking point among the trolls on this board.

      Y'know, when the announcement about the president's Nobel Peace Prize came out, Mrs. Phredicles remarked that nuclear non-proliferation has long been a central concern of the prize committee - it puts the lie to the notion that he got the prize simply for not being his disreputable predecessor as well.

      The new treaty is one of his greatest accomplishments to date, and I am quite certain we would not see any such document if his opponent had won the election.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (April 10, 2010 12:30 am ET)
        12  
        If you look at comments that the Nobel Prize committee made BEFORE the decision was made to select Obama (and sorry, I don't have the links handy, but I did post several of them here last fall if someone is really interested in seeing them), you'd see that Obama was the perfect candidate, based upon the criteria they stated they were going to use.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by angels4light (April 10, 2010 1:31 am ET)
        3  
        We would, however, be able to see all kinds of documents in windowless underground rooms, because we would be glowing in the dark by now.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (April 10, 2010 12:50 am ET)
      12  
      The thing is, these kooks on here talking about how this is going to leave use defenseless (it's not), should probably watch the Daily Show take down of this ridiculous talking point (again showing WHY people watching TDS tend to be better informed than your average FoxNews viewer). Thing is, if a country is not part of the non-proliferation treaty/agreement, then, we reserve the right to use nuclear weapons against said countries. Such as, North Korea, Iran, etc. etc.. The only countries IN the NPT, are the ones that we're friends with, or have decent relations with, and don't see us souring out attachments too soon to say, Russia, China, France, Israel, UK, and so on.

      Hence, all of this blather from republicans/conservatives about leaving us defenseless is just that, blather. We'll still have OVER 1500 nukes hanging around, which is more than enough to destroy our world a few times over anyway, so what are you scardy cats afraid of?

      Also, the crown prince of modern day conservatism, Ronnie Reagan, also wanted a world completely devoid of nuclear weapons, and he signed SALT I, which reduced our nukes, by, yes, 1/3rd as well.

      So if Obama is wrong, then so was Reagan. When conservatives complain about Obama, they are also condemning their hero, Reagan at the same time.

      If Reagan were alive, he'd be on board with Obama's decision here. Guaranteed.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Porkeater (April 10, 2010 1:01 am ET)
        9  
        Not only that; the new treaty really just formalizes the policy that was already in place. If there was any serious consideration of using nukes willy-nilly, wouldn't we have already bombed Iran, North Korea, Kuwait/Iraq... or Panama???
        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (April 10, 2010 1:31 am ET)
          10  
          We haven't had a need to use nukes for a long time now, as there have been no incidents where a proportional response wasn't good enough. Plus, if we had an act against our country that claimed lots of lives (god forbid), it is probably going to happen through an act of terrorism. Who do you lob a nuke at then? Saudi Arabia (because their people tend to support terrorism more than anyone else in the Middle East)? Iran? Pakistan? Jordan? Lebanon? Who? Terrorists are not State actors. Some terrorists might get funding and or weapons from certain states (Iran does come to mind), but Iran, or any other country who doesn't like us, would not be stupid enough to give terrorists biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons. Why?

          Because they know what the consequences would be if that were to happen. Their country (whoever it may be) would be bombed, invaded, destroyed, and taken over, and seriously, they are certainly not that dumb. Nobody is.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (April 12, 2010 12:30 pm ET)
          2  
          Anyone who doesn't know that the USA's de facto policy was already that we wouldn't use nukes against any country that was a member of the treaty is lying to themselves!
          Report Abuse
      • Author by mrhebert74 (April 11, 2010 6:26 pm ET)
        4  
        So if Obama is wrong, then so was Reagan. When conservatives complain about Obama, they are also condemning their hero, Reagan at the same time.
        Wrong, magnolialover -- consider that Reagan was neither a Muslim nor a Socialist when he took this stance...
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Arishia (April 10, 2010 12:51 am ET)
         
      Gawd Sarah is a nasty sarcastic twit. On CNN they went from the Palin screed to the high school bullying story with absolutely no sense of awareness at all. Her up there acting like a queen bee bully whipping up the mob against a sitting president, to the younger ones that are charged in the death of the teen. Gee, I wonder where kids today get the idea that being a total lying stupid mean jerk is cool?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by ProgLib (April 10, 2010 7:07 am ET)
      16  
      "...and as a part-time senator..."

      This coming from a woman who quit her job as Governor right in the middle of her term? Seriously?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by jcgrim (April 10, 2010 7:18 am ET)
        12  
        One of the more frightening characteristics of Palin is that she is unaware of her own stunning ignorance. Most people have some awareness of their personal limitations and make efforts to overcome them. Her grand pronouncements are so short on logic and depth, it's clear she was never, and never will be, a student of geopolitics, economics, history, or governing policy.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by worrierking (April 10, 2010 11:05 am ET)
          12  
          What's more frightening is the belief among her followers that she would make a great president even though she's never once, since being chosen as McCain's running mate, held a press conference or faced a group of non-believers in a Q&A session.

          Report Abuse
        • Author by rob2007 (April 11, 2010 10:10 pm ET)
             
          While the unexamined life is not worth living, her unexamined life--dominated by a stubborn aversion toward intellectual curiosity--also reveals a pattern of behavior indicating a profound inability to be self-deprecating. This condition--a chronic neurotic affliction--can be identified in one or more of the behavioral personality disorders listed in the DSM-IV, those whose characteristics include a sensitivity to perceived criticism. An underlying persecution complex would not be surprising as well, given how everything that has ever negatively swirled around her is always, always somebody else's fault.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (April 12, 2010 9:55 am ET)
        4  
        Hypocrisy or stupidity? I'm not sure.

        Her lack of SELF awareness, is rivalled only by her lack of awareness of EVERYTHING ELSE.

        ------------------------------
        IMHO
        Report Abuse
    • Author by wookie (April 10, 2010 5:38 pm ET)
      12  
      In fact, as a U.S. senator, Obama co-authored nonproliferation legislation and traveled to the former Soviet Union to examine weapons stockpiles.


      Yeah, but Palin can see Russia from her house. So take that MMFA!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by TheAncients (April 10, 2010 6:39 pm ET)
        6  
        That enough places palin as a foreign policy expert.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by rtejon (April 11, 2010 2:30 pm ET)
        7  
        Yes, she could have seen Russia from Little Diomede Island if she'd made any effort to go there, but the mostly-Native Alaskan population there has never seen her.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by fantagor (April 10, 2010 5:52 pm ET)
      9  
      Palin mocking Obama for a lack of expertise in nuclear policy is like a penguin mocking a humming bird for its lack of expertise in flying.

      Randy
      Report Abuse
    • Author by grmce (April 11, 2010 1:05 am ET)
      6  
      Amazing that the obamaphobes make fun of the Community Organiser stage of Obama's life to attack him on foreign affairs and defence matters whilst ignoring that prior to becoming a Community Organiser he obtained a B.A. majoring in international relations from Cornell.

      That, plus a very good Harvard law degree and professorship at Chicago - all of which points to a thorough understanding of, and respect for the rule of law in both intranational and international affairs.

      Add all of that to the slew of top advisors available and put that against the C.V. and circle of advisors of his critics.

      Q.E.D.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Reinhard (April 11, 2010 11:05 am ET)
        5  
        Yes, they seem to overlook the fact that President Obama has been in office for a while now. Seems to me the POTUS would have a large cadre of people who are in fact "experts" on nuclear arms and policies advising him? Who does Palin have, the "first dude"?

        BTW, I don't recall Bush II having much success with Iran or N.Korea concerning nuclear affairs but I also can't recall the uproar from the right over Bush's lack of "newclure" experiance. Seems a little duplicitious, no?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Reinhard (April 11, 2010 11:19 am ET)
          5  
          And didn't Bush II have 8 years to solve the N.Korea/Iran problem?

          What did he accomplish?
          ZERO!

          Maybe it's time to use a different playbook, you know, like the one Reagan used?

          Report Abuse
        • Author by borealis (April 11, 2010 3:44 pm ET)
          5  
          Funny you should mention the "newclure" pronunciation since that's the way Palin says it, too. I guess those of us who say "new-klee-ur" are elitists who should shut up and drink our lattes.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by rumpleteasermom (April 12, 2010 5:31 pm ET)
               
            Okay, I'm nit-picking, but I just can't help myself

            Bush II and Sarah pronounce it New-cu-ler (3 syllables) not new-clure (2 syllables)

            And yes, they both sound just that much less intelligent every time the mispronounce it.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by SMTDL (April 11, 2010 1:06 pm ET)
      6  
      Do these dummies ever check before they criticize?Shows as always its about attacking anything Mr.Obama says!!Sarah Palin as usual picks up what ever line of criticism from Hannity,Limbaugh or one of the Cheneys..same words and all.She didn't explain how the vast nuclear knowledge she based her criticism on came from being Mayor of Wasila and watching Russia from her house!!!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by grmce (April 11, 2010 10:01 pm ET)
        2  
        They're all a bunch of Marxists - c.f. Groucho's song in "Horsefeathers".
        Report Abuse
    • Author by chickenfried (April 11, 2010 1:13 pm ET)
         
      Obama doesn't know jack about nukes. He just knows how to get rid of them. Not exactly rocket science, now is it?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by shaggles (April 12, 2010 12:06 pm ET)
      1  
      Seriously? Palin is going to call Obama a "part time Senator, full time candidate?" Talk about a lack of self awareness.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.