is it a mistake for obama to say he will meet with our "enemies" without preconditions? this raging debate seems to signal a new message, and perhaps a new approach, for barack obama.
hillary represents the past (old thinking) while barack represents change (new thinking). for the life of me, i can't see why hillary's supporters would be so excited about this frame.
hillary has a standard line in her speech about 2008 being a "change election." our research shows that even democrats find this a bit hypocritical on her part. now these aren't the democrats that some of hillary's supporters imagine, but real voters. hillary's references to the past, even a glorious past, by her account, does not seem to invoke the thought of change in voter's minds.
barack obama seems to be picking up on this. and this is a good thing. democrats need to understand that if hillary is the democratic nominee, republicans can successfully make the argument that the gop is the party of change. why do you think that republicans (like areyouready) are chomping at the bit for hillary to be the democratic nominee?
partisans, probably on both sides, are offended at the comparison of hillary clinton to george bush and dick cheney. but here's a less offensive way of saying the same thing: hillary clinton represents -- and campaigns on being -- continuity with the past. as president, at least in foreign policy, it's difficult to think of how she'd be any different than george bush. yeah, she says she'll withdraw from iraq, but i don't believe that. it's not a guiding principle for her, and certainly not as important to her as not being characterized as weak.
how will she treat north korea any different than george bush? once again, her imperative to not be seen as weak demands that she continues the multi-lateral negotiations, which really haven't gotten us anywhere.
do you really think hillary clinton is less likely to invade iran than george bush? i'd argue that she's more likely, just because bush's popularity is so low and he has active constraints on what he can do. bush can continue his old policies at most, he can't really start new ones. hillary, otoh, will face mounting pressure to "do something" about iranian nuclear ambitions, from both our formal and our informal allies.
and hillary has the clinton legacy to think about. bill clinton was the first president to allow the nuclear club to expand unchallenged. this is unquestionably his greatest failure, reversing 50 years of american nuclear policy -- apparently because he wasn't really interested. he had other things on his mind.
can hillary clinton allow iraq to go nuclear? i'd bet she'd think not. one clinton failure doesn't deserve another, she's probably thinking. attacking iran is probably her only option in this dilemma.
hillary clinton's foreign policy won't be different from george bush's at all. and let's be clear: this is not because george bush offered america leadership and built consensus behind his foreign policy. it's just that hillary clinton, because of her own personal story, doesn't have the ability nor the strength to move this country beyond it.
barack obama represents real change. just as he was willing to meet with gang kids on the southside of chicago, he's willing to meet with the people THAT GEORGE BUSH HAS DEFINED as our enemies. hugo chavez isn't an enemy of the united states, he's an enemy of george bush's arrogance and his interventionist foreign policy. and why shouldn't we met with the president of iran? we've had a fscked up policy and relations with iran since the second world war. it's time for a change.
barack obama hit this one out of the park. it is time for a change, and this is what change looks like. yes, cowards like hillary clinton are going to cling to past conventions (like preconditions) because they don't have the intellectual heft nor the personal strength to move forward. barack obama does not share those weaknesses. we are not weaker when we talk to those who oppose american hegemony in the world. in fact, we already do that. these are just people that offend george bush.
while hillary isn't brave enough to step away from george bush's foreign policy, thankfully barack is. and we have a real choice in 2008, a choice between continuing the policies of the last two decades or real change, real leadership, and a better america. the reality is that most people don't want real change, and while they may not prefer george bush, they aren't so offended by his policies. which is why hillary is running as bush-cheney lite...
|
|
|
Permalink :: 110 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
