by John McCormick
DES MOINES – In a national television interview today where he was forced to address some of the less savory moments of his political history, Sen. Barack Obama said it would be more difficult for his top Democratic nomination challenger to win a general election.
Appearing for a 45-minute interview on NBC’s Meet the Press, Obama was asked about his past relationship with an indicted Chicago developer, access to records from his time as a state lawmaker and statements his wife has made about just how important a win is for him in Iowa.
Moderator Tim Russert also asked him whether he believes Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York could win a general election against a Republican opponent.
“I’m not somebody who believes she can’t win,” the Illinois Democrat said. “I believe that it’s going to be harder for her to win because I think a lot of voters go in with some preconceptions about her that are going to be very difficult to overcome.”
Obama suggested Clinton is dodging tough questions on the campaign trail, specifically mentioning her position on reforming Social Security.
“I think that what Senator Clinton has been doing is running a textbook, Washington campaign,” he said. “What that says is that you don’t answer directly tough questions, you don’t present tough choices directly to the American people, for fear that your answers might not be popular, you might make yourself a target for the Republicans in the general election.”
More Top Picks Sales Tax Calculator
Obama said pointing out policy differences is not a case of abandoning his so-called politics of hope.
“The politics of hope doesn’t mean hoping that people aren’t going to point out differences between you and other candidates,” he said. “We are running for the presidency of the United States of America, not student council president. That means the American people have a right to know what exactly we intend to do as president. And if I believe that one of my opponents is potentially going to take the party or the country in a direction that does not meet our challenges… I’m going to point it out.”
Obama denied that he had not always been such a strong opponent on the war in Iraq, when asked about a statement he made in July 2004 before his party’s national convention that seemed to leave some wiggle room for how he would have voted on the Iraq resolution had he been in the Senate at the time.
“It probably was the wrong time for me to be making a strong case against our party’s nominees decisions when it came to Iraq,” Obama said.
Obama said he would have all combat troops out of Iraq within 16 months of when the process starts.
“The only troops I would have in Iraq would have a very limited mission,” he said, adding that they would be charged with protecting the U.S. embassy and to ” engage in counter terrorism activity.”
He declined to give specifics for how many troops he would leave on the ground.
“I’m going to leave that up to the commanders,” he said. “We will have the vast majority of the troops who are there gone. This war will be over, there will be no permanent bases.”
He also challenged Clinton on that point.
“She hasn’t given a firm timetable in terms of executing a withdrawal and I think that’s a problem,” he said. “I think we have to provide certainty to the Iraqi leadership so that they know we are serious about changing course. “
Obama said Clinton has also “suggested that the mission on the ground would be more expansive than the one I’ve envisioned.”
Although he said earlier this year that it would be a “profound mistake” for the United States to use nuclear weapons to fight terrorism in Afghanistan or Pakistan, he toughened that stance when talking about Iran.
“I think it would be a mistake for me to talk about clear red lines,” he said. “I will do whatever is required to keep the American public safe…Military tools are part of the tool kit the president deploys. We have not been using the other tools available.”
Obama denied any hypocrisy between his rhetoric and his past acceptance of large amounts of money from federal lobbyists and his current acceptance of money from state lobbyists and other powerful interests.
“I have said repeatedly that money is the original sin in politics and I am not sinless,” he said. “But what I have been consistent about is fighting to reduce the influence of money on politics.”
Russert also pressed Obama on what happened to records and scheduling information from his time in Springfield.
“In the state Senate, every single piece of information, every document related to state government was kept by the state of Illinois and has been disclosed and is available and has been gone through by a fine-tooth comb by news outlets in Illinois,” Obama said. “The stuff that I did not keep has to do with, for example, my schedule. I didn’t have a scheduler. I was a state senator. I wasn’t intending to have the Barack Obama state Senate library. I didn’t have 50 or 500 people to help me archive these issues.”
That’s similar, but slightly different to an answer Obama gave late last week in a Tribune interview.
“Whatever remaining documents that I have are inevitably incomplete and then the question is going to be where’s this, where’s that,” he said then. “Once I start heading down that road, then it puts me in a position that could end up being misleading.”
There is no requirement that correspondence, schedule information or policy memos be made public now that Obama is no longer in the state senate. The Tribune asked him for such documents from his time in Springfield earlier this year, but never received anything.
Russert pressed further on the records matter, asking if there was really no record of his meetings with lobbyists.
“Tim, I kept my own scheduling. I didn’t have a scheduler,” Obama responded. “These days, I have a public, presidential schedule that I think everybody has access to.”
That is true, although Obama still does not provide any detail about the bulk of the fundraising events he has, instead listing the city where he will be raising money and “no public events.”
Russert next asked about the most controversial name of Obama’s political career: “Tony Rezko, who is he?”
“He is a developer in Illinois. He was a friend of mine for over 10 years. He was a supporter of Democrats and Republicans back in Illinois. He was indicted recently for issues completely unrelated to me. But, obviously, it’s a source of concern because not only a friend, but also a supporter of my campaign.”
Noting that Rezko had helped raise or contribute about $168,000 — an estimate Obama did not reject — during the course of his political career, Russert asked about a controversial land transaction between Obama and Rezko involving property to expand the yard
More Top Picks Pet
for his Kenwood neighborhood home.“I have already acknowledged this was a mistake. Not only should I have not been involved with any business decision with him in particular, but with contributors generally,” Obama said. “There was no evidence of wrong-doing. This was an above the board, market-based transaction.”
Obama said he has not talked to Rezko “since he got in trouble with the law.”
He suggested his wife, Michelle, might exaggerate a bit on the campaign trail when asked about a September statement she made on the importance of winning Iowa.
“Iowa will make the difference,” Michelle Obama said when speaking to an Iowa audience. “If Barack doesn’t win Iowa, it is just a dream. If we win Iowa then we can move to the world as it should be. And we need your help in making that happen.”
Obama said his wife may have over-sold that a bit.
“We have to do well in Iowa,” he said. “Now keep in mind, when Michelle goes to New Hampshire or South Carolina, I think she says, you know, she probably says the same thing there.”
At one point, Obama called himself a “law professor” at the University of Chicago. Technically, he was a senior lecturer.
Clinton’s campaign quickly responded with a fact-check Web site specifically for Obama’s appearance on the show.