TPM:Drudge Catches Hillary In Massive Flip-Flop! Not.

[SaveElmer]

Drudge Catches Hillary In Massive Flip-Flop! Not.
By Greg Sargent | bio
The story of the day in Democratic politics is the skirmishing that's going on between the Hillary and Obama campaigns right now over the meaning of Obama's claim last night that he'd meet with leaders of rogue nations like Iran or North Korea.

...


This wouldn't be a big deal if the big news orgs weren't already picking up on this meme.

Tim Russert, for instance, grilled Hillary spokesperson Howard Wolfson over this alleged contradiction on MSNBC this morning. (It's unclear whether Russert got this from Drudge or from the Obama campaign, which is also pushing the contradiction.)

But look, if you actually click through to the stories Drudge is directing people to, there's just no contradiction here.

Last night, Obama said that during his first year as President he'd be willing to meet, without precondition, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.

Hillary disagreed with Obama, saying that committing to such meetings could be used for propaganda purposes.

"Certainly, we're not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and you know, the president of North Korea, Iran and Syria, until we know better what the way forward would be," Hillary said last night.

This is supposed to be at odds with this story from April, in which Hillary said:

"I would begin diplomatic discussions with those countries with whom we have differences, to try to figure out what is the depth of those differences...I think it is a terrible mistake for our president to say he will not talk with bad people."

But look, again, these aren't contradictory. Hillary didn't say last night that her point of disagreement with Obama was over whether to negotiate with leaders of rogue nations at all. Rather, her point was that while she'd favor diplomatic negotiations with such leaders, she wouldn't commit beforehand to meeting with them in her first year, because such a commitment could be used for "propaganda purposes" by said leaders.

Look, whichever side you take here -- and whether you approve or disapprove of the Hillary campaign's use of this difference as a club to beat Obama with -- it's obvious that this alleged gotcha contradiction between what Hillary's July and April comments just isn't there.

Update: I just want to make this ultra clear -- this post isn't meant to be taking Hillary's side against Obama here. Stay tuned for more on this in a bit.