Skip to main content

Hillary over Obama

I support Hillary over Obama. Why?
  • Both have a level of idealism, but Clinton mixes in a healthy dose of pragmatism. I watched Obama speak a couple times and was inspired. I saw him speak a couple more times and thought "enough with the pretty-talk." Although he follows Frank Luntz' rules of communication really well, the debates expose Hillary's dominance when it comes down to brass tacks in policy. I am longing for a president that educates the American people on the complexity of issues, rather than sticking to simplistic populist themes.
  • Hillary proved, in Congress, that she could reach across party lines and work professionally even with people who had worked to demonize her. That's really what we're looking for. Obama is not the first campaigner to say "I'm a uniter, not a divider." It's easy to say, but very hard to do.
  • Obama is putting himself farther to the left on Iraq than reality will allow if he becomes president. He's doing that for political gain, and I respect Hillary more for telling the truth even though it has a cost in delegates. Don't think for a minute that Obama or anyone else will continue pulling out troops when Iran cranks up their operations in Iraq, there is a humanitarian crisis, and oil suppies are threatened. We are not the only ones capable of a surge, given the right strategic opportunity. Obama's brand of idealism is nice--to a point--and that point is reached when he's the one making decisions. Over a long presidential campaign against a tough Republican candidate, people will start to realize that "let's get outta there" is not an overall security or foreign policy strategy. George W. Bush is another guy who believed he was "right on day one", and look where it got us.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 2020 Vote: Bending toward justice

The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.  --  Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. My hero, Dr. King, was wrong about justice. I love Dr. King. His writings and speeches are collected in a book called “A Testament of Hope”. That book was a revelation for me. Dr. King had a moral clarity that is rare in this world. Many of his observations were accurate, wise, and timeless. But the ‘arc of the moral universe’ statement is misleading. We are promised no such experience in this world. In Dr. King’s time, the quote may have been both accurate and wise. King saw the expanding reach of national newspapers and television networks. When the nation, through that new media, was exposed to the reality and brutality of overt Southern racism--then the nation, which believed it shared a common and decent morality, imposed that morality on the South. While Dr. King’s understanding may have been both accurate and wise, it was not timeless. This is where my moral hero comes u...
Post a Comment
Read more

Federal incompetence is an equilibrium strategy

I’ve heard a number of commentators--right, left, and center--characterize Trump as the pivotal problem with Republican leadership. But why was Trump overwhelming to the Republican party? Why was he gradually embraced by nearly all Republican leadership? And would the Republican party be much different today without him? Each party is made up of different interest groups. Two large factions of the Republican Party are fiscal conservatives and the Christian Right. The fiscal conservatives are dominated by Free Market Fundamentalists. Anti-tax pledges and opposition to virtually any government regulations are Free Market Fundamentalist positions, and those positions are prominent in the current Republican party. The Christian Right wants white Christian conservative values to dominate American culture. They once did dominate American culture, and they want to turn back the clock. These two influential factions of the Republican party do not make natural teammates. Free Market Fundamental...
Post a Comment
Read more

Recommended podcasts (update)

Two years ago I listed my recommended podcasts. Here’s an updated list. Guide: Asterisks are meant to show how timeless the episodes are. One asterisk (*) means the last year or so is likely still relevant.  Three (***) means you could (or should) start from the first  episode and it would still be relevant. The number two (2) means they were also on my list two years ago. I don't necessarily listen to every episode, especially for podcasts that do different topics or different guests (like Vox, Spycast, Hidden Brain). You can’t really skip episodes for serials (podcasts that tell a story, like In the Dark). Tiers are based on a combination of quality and personal preference. Tier 1 In the Dark *** [Crime podcast. Start with season 1. This show is amazing.] Revisionist History *** (2) [Malcolm Gladwell's podcast. First couple seasons were outstanding. The most recent episodes are just ads for Gladwell's other projects.] I Spy by Foreign Policy *** [Fun stuff....
Post a Comment
Read more