Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

I read your column.I am in general agreement, but I cannot stomach another act of the Clintons. I am especially offended by the soft sly racial innuendos and references to Ayres and Dohrn and Wright that hint that Obama is some sort of wild eyed radical. He has managed not to mention her past associations. I have a weakness for integrity.

I think this is the same argument that was used to make Kerry the nominee. I'd rather watch Obama stumble than Hillary slither....

Hence the reluctant tone.

Obama ends this thing ten weeks ago, this discussion is moot.

Now it's about stopping Bush III, sad to say.

My guess is Obama does win--ugly but he wins.

Then we're on to the next iteration. But I like to vote realistically, and that's what I did last Friday (absentee).

A saving grace that may allow leaders of the "Boomers" generation to exit the stage with some shroud of acomplishment can be found in Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069 by Neil Howe and William Strauss, where they observe that Idealist generation leaders, Boomers and Missionary, IE, (FDR), reach their full potential in their elder years.

Their observations hold some merit, as they predicted the Echo Boomers civic traits back in 1991..and also warned about the danger of "Boomers" getting power in their middle years..Clinton...Bush.

She sold FUD. You bought it.

If you guess she wins, then all you did was prolong the process. How is that realistic?

Here what you're saying about nervousness around Obama's economic rhetoric, of course, Clinton's isn't any better. They're both playing to the meme the feel they have to in order to win. So it's hard to say what they really think on the issue. Such are the short comings of modern day politics.

On Obama's foreign policy greeness, would a strong running mate help to assuage your fears? I've been a Biden fan since November, though was frced to recognize his lack of hope for the number one spot early on and have since envisioned him as a nice compliment to Obama as VP. Also, as has been mentioned on your blog a fair bit, Webb could hel to bridge this gap.

Or, do you think original fears about Obama were accurate all along; that we may be forcing a generational move in US political discourse too hastily and rashly? Did a lot of people get caught up in the thrill of the moment that Obama seemed to offer, but forget to keep one eye on the terrain (as the other shot straight to the sky and the possibilities)? Are we now paying for our understandably adolescent excitement with the bitter taste of reality setting in in a way that makes it all but impossible to ignore?

Excuse me, I mistyped. I meant "If you guess he wins, then all you did was prolong the process. How is that realistic?"

If fire is being held by the GOP it is on HRC.

My thinking on Obama is in regards to a question no one can answer. It seems to me a discussion on race would be great for America today, and Obama should thrive on such a discussion, after all, he is carrying the red states often described as where racism lives. Why then is he tripping on this subject when it is clear he should own it?

If he can't handle the subject he writes about in his books, how is he going to handle all the important topics relevant to being President of the United States he hasn't even discussed yet? For example, show me one military related thoughtful discussion the man has had regarding the military that didn't involve Iraq or Afghanistan. Your long search for "no comment" makes my point.

I agree with Tom almost entirely, which is why I dumped Obama a few weeks ago as a credible candidate.

We understand the risks the different candidates pose. My question is what benefits could we see, and which will have the greatest impact. With McCain I obviously see experience and an ability to deal forcefully with issues that need an iron hand. With Obama there’s the hope that almost overnight he could repair America’s image overseas. I think there is a lot to that. My question is would the benefits of a repaired image outweigh the risks to globalization and free trade (if those risks are really true, like the earlier poster said, who knows what they all think yet as their just jockeying for votes right now.)
My fear with the Clintons is the Jedi Mind trick they’ve pulled on everyone into thinking they support the military. There are some horror stories from people in the inner circle, that, if half true, make me cringe at what four years of that would be like.

This is easy for me to say (my state voted long ago), but it's too soon to tell. Obama stumbled on the Wright affair, but he did so during a primary--not during a general election, like Kerry did with Swiftboat. He has more time to make it up, let it settle from immediate consciousness (to the extent it ever will) and learn from the experience.

More broadly, both he and Clinton are stuck- as McCain was when he still had viable opponents- in the position of fighting for the same pool of party loyalists who tend to be immoderate in their opinions and interests. Once the general election starts, we'll probably see all three of them (or at least McCain and the Dem winner) moderate their tones.

I think much of this is moot. If you look at the polls, most people are so sick of Bush and the GOP that whomever the Dems nominate will be the next president. On Obama's experience: my four year old had been to far more countries than Bush had on his assumption of the presidency. He knew nothing. We see what that has accomplished. He appointed hacks and thieves to public office.

Obama has one quality that makes him far different than Bush. He is smart.

I will vote, along with the majority, for whomever the Democrats nominate.