[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan,

Thanks. It would be interesting (from my perspective at least) to compare Zakaria’s Post-Americanism with Fukuyama’s American Triumphalism (“End of History and the Last Man”). I mention this because we have a seen something of a radical swing in not only how America is perceived in the world, but how we perceive ourselves.

I watched Obama’s world tour with a great deal of interest. By and large, I thought he did very well, including in Israel, which I thought would be a much tougher sell.

Ideology aside, he is connecting with the wider international community and appears to be attacking (with vigor) the one area of weakness where McCain (at least initially) could claim a wider breadth of knowledge (the Iraq-Pakistan border comment notwithstanding) and experience.

However, voters in France and Germany don’t elect American Presidents. What happens when the McCain campaign actually starts running a campaign and goes after Obama? I had asked gandalf some rather pointed questions about where he thought Obama stood on certain issues.

To that, I would add: FISA and NAFTA and the DC gun ban. He appears to be tacking a little erratically, and IMHO, stumbled on the campaign finance issue.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan,

Thanks. It would be interesting (from my perspective at least) to compare Zakaria’s Post-Americanism with Fukuyama’s American Triumphalism (“End of History and the Last Man”). I mention this because we have a seen something of a radical swing in not only how America is perceived in the world, but how we perceive ourselves.

I watched Obama’s world tour with a great deal of interest. By and large, I thought he did very well, including in Israel, which I thought would be a much tougher sell.

Ideology aside, he is connecting with the wider international community and appears to be attacking (with vigor) the one area of weakness where McCain (at least initially) could claim a wider breadth of knowledge (the Iraq-Pakistan border comment notwithstanding) and experience.

However, voters in France and Germany don’t elect American Presidents. What happens when the McCain campaign actually starts running a campaign and goes after Obama? I had asked gandalf some rather pointed questions about where he thought Obama stood on certain issues.

To that, I would add: FISA and NAFTA and the DC gun ban. He appears to be tacking a little erratically, and IMHO, stumbled on the campaign finance issue.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan,

Thanks. It would be interesting (from my perspective at least) to compare Zakaria’s Post-Americanism with Fukuyama’s American Triumphalism (“End of History and the Last Man”). I mention this because we have a seen something of a radical swing in not only how America is perceived in the world, but how we perceive ourselves.

I watched Obama’s world tour with a great deal of interest. By and large, I thought he did very well, including in Israel, which I thought would be a much tougher sell.

Ideology aside, he is connecting with the wider international community and appears to be attacking (with vigor) the one area of weakness where McCain (at least initially) could claim a wider breadth of knowledge (the Iraq-Pakistan border comment notwithstanding) and experience.

However, voters in France and Germany don’t elect American Presidents. What happens when the McCain campaign actually starts running a campaign and goes after Obama? I had asked gandalf some rather pointed questions about where he thought Obama stood on certain issues.

To that, I would add: FISA and NAFTA and the DC gun ban. He appears to be tacking a little erratically, and IMHO, stumbled on the campaign finance issue.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan,

Thanks. It would be interesting (from my perspective at least) to compare Zakaria’s Post-Americanism with Fukuyama’s American Triumphalism (“End of History and the Last Man”). I mention this because we have a seen something of a radical swing in not only how America is perceived in the world, but how we perceive ourselves.

I watched Obama’s world tour with a great deal of interest. By and large, I thought he did very well, including in Israel, which I thought would be a much tougher sell.

Ideology aside, he is connecting with the wider international community and appears to be attacking (with vigor) the one area of weakness where McCain (at least initially) could claim a wider breadth of knowledge (the Iraq-Pakistan border comment notwithstanding) and experience.

However, voters in France and Germany don’t elect American Presidents. What happens when the McCain campaign actually starts running a campaign and goes after Obama? I had asked gandalf some rather pointed questions about where he thought Obama stood on certain issues.

To that, I would add: FISA and NAFTA and the DC gun ban. He appears to be tacking a little erratically, and IMHO, stumbled on the campaign finance issue.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I would go over to the “Obama is a conservative” post, but that’s gotten all Robert’s Rules of Order and I have completely lost the handle on where everything is there.

I think I am a bigoted anti-Muslim, pro-Neocon, post-colonialist racist (subtle, though). I’d have to recheck the thread to be sure.

I’m all for the name calling here, though. Why are we upset again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I would go over to the “Obama is a conservative” post, but that’s gotten all Robert’s Rules of Order and I have completely lost the handle on where everything is there.

I think I am a bigoted anti-Muslim, pro-Neocon, post-colonialist racist (subtle, though). I’d have to recheck the thread to be sure.

I’m all for the name calling here, though. Why are we upset again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I would go over to the “Obama is a conservative” post, but that’s gotten all Robert’s Rules of Order and I have completely lost the handle on where everything is there.

I think I am a bigoted anti-Muslim, pro-Neocon, post-colonialist racist (subtle, though). I’d have to recheck the thread to be sure.

I’m all for the name calling here, though. Why are we upset again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I would go over to the “Obama is a conservative” post, but that’s gotten all Robert’s Rules of Order and I have completely lost the handle on where everything is there.

I think I am a bigoted anti-Muslim, pro-Neocon, post-colonialist racist (subtle, though). I’d have to recheck the thread to be sure.

I’m all for the name calling here, though. Why are we upset again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: I would go over to the “Obama is a conservative” post, but that’s gotten all Robert’s Rules of Order and I have completely lost the handle on where everything is there.

I think I am a bigoted anti-Muslim, pro-Neocon, post-colonialist racist (subtle, though). I’d have to recheck the thread to be sure.

I’m all for the name calling here, though. Why are we upset again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: My apologies. S**t! Is this the ad hominem post?

Who am I supposed to be making fun of again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: My apologies. S**t! Is this the ad hominem post?

Who am I supposed to be making fun of again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: My apologies. S**t! Is this the ad hominem post?

Who am I supposed to be making fun of again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: My apologies. S**t! Is this the ad hominem post?

Who am I supposed to be making fun of again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: My apologies. S**t! Is this the ad hominem post?

Who am I supposed to be making fun of again?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan,

From my perspective, the argument was never that Obama was dumb. Rather, he is a foreign policy dilettante, as Joe Biden opined (and was later forced to retract in response to pressure from the DNC). While I don’t agree with Biden’s politics, he is one of the more capable operators on the Hill, and is something of an elder statesman when it comes to foreign relations.

I could care less about Obama’s gaffes; pols are forced to do dozens of speeches while on the stump and mistakes will happen.

I would also not question his academic record; to me it is somewhat irrelevant. Bill Clinton was admirably suited to the role of President, and I was extremely impressed with his status as a Rhodes Scholar. It did not, however, translate into a meaningful foreign policy capability and Clinton was widely admired as a policy wonk.

As to Obama’s record: It is curious to mention this, when there really isn’t anything to look at. He is a fairly junior member of the Senate, and his voting record (such as it is) is noticeably sparse; not because he doesn’t vote, but because he hasn’t been there long enough to really establish any sort of reputation. His record shows a politician who votes along party lines, and adheres to a left-leaning philosophy. This is not partisan, by the way, it is simply an observation.

He has shown less depth when it comes to history, and having an academic background in the law and international relations does not a historian make. I brought this up with gandalf following the Zakaria article: Zakaria was attempting to ascribe certain positions and policies to Obama in clear contradiction to the facts. The facts being that Obama did not have the voting record to support Zakaria’s assertions, nor did he have the foreign policy record to underpin Zakaria’s claims.

If Obama does embrace a policy of “American Realism” (which I am taking to mean a more pragmatic approach): I am all for it.

However, someone on this blog pointed out that, in all likelihood, the problems confronting him domestically will prove exceptionally daunting and, wrong-headed though it is, he will be blamed for continued lackluster economic performance. Much akin to the comment about LBJ’s Great Society dying in the fields of Vietnam.

[Author]

Posts