In scouring the coverage tonight, I was especially surprised to see this, from the conservative Financial Times:
The US is tired and discouraged these days. The country is right to seek a little inspiration, a lifting of the spirits, a sense of renewal. Mrs Clinton is the perfect antithesis of those things. She is commanding in debate; she knows her facts. But she is dreary and angry at the same time, which is no easy feat. She personifies partisan division. And, through her husband and her nostalgia for the 1990s, she is tied to the past. She is indeed the paradigm of business as usual, with the taint of dynastic succession thrown in. The Democrats would be wrong to make her their nominee, in my view, even in a field of unexceptional candidates – but this is not a field of unexceptional candidates.
Make no mistake, Mr Obama is a once-in-a-generation possibility. Admittedly, in many ways he is too good to be true. Hopes of what he might achieve are running out of control. His followers say he is uniquely able to restore US standing in the world, partly by adopting a more conciliatory approach and partly (it seems) by being black. The sad truth is that on many issues US interests diverge from those of other nations. Any new president could improve relations with other governments; the current administration has set that bar into the floor.
…What makes Mr Obama remarkable is that his message of hope, resonating so powerfully with black America, is cast to every American, regardless of colour, to Democrats and Republicans alike. This is surpassingly important: a man of outstanding intellect and magnetic personality, he is running on a one-nation platform, as though he merely happened to be black. And the best part is, the whole country is paying attention: polls say that he is more electable in November than Mrs Clinton. In a close election, he could make the difference.
Republicans, of course, are bound to dislike his liberalism – but what is there for Democrats to think about? Why are they even having this conversation? They have been waiting an awfully long time for a politician like Mr Obama. If, having come so close, they still manage to nominate Mrs Clinton, I think it is a choice they will regret for years and maybe decades.
Wow.
.
Don’t need to expand with more words in a broader sense, just the esential of the dynamics that makes people move. Will the U.S. finally realize we are living in a new century, a new beginning. The world has new challenges beyond making war: poverty, food, healthcare and the environment. We need to leave behind the eighties and nineties, and the ‘leaders‘ who failed We the People so miserably.
For me personally, I won’t vote for Hillary because her lack of insight and courage on American foreign policy. Too damn close to the Bush policy over the past 7 frustrating years. She will bring no vibrance and renewal, but more of the same lackluster view: “keep the status quo” and don’t rock the boat. America should kick butt of some of our “friends”: dictator Musharaf, King Abdullah and loser Olmert. American foreign policy is designed by commerce, military goods and fueled by oil.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
They think trhat they can beat himn in the election, and failing that they think that they can Jimmy Carter him should he actually win the Presidency.
Beware false prophets with ulterior motives.
Nothing else to say on the subject.
AG
.
Nevertheless, nice diary AG …
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Because it’s just so damned easy to do, read this:
* Bush vs. Obama: Perhaps lost in the news of Obama’s weekend victories and Solis Doyle stepping aside was President Bush’s broadside against Obama. “I certainly don’t know what he believes in,” Bush told FOX’s Chris Wallace. “The only foreign policy thing I remember he said was he’s going to attack Pakistan and embrace Ahmadinejad. I think I commented that in a press conference when I was asked about that.” Whoa, Nelly. Obama spokesman Bill Burton fired back with this statement: “Of course President Bush would attack the one candidate in this race who opposed his disastrous war in Iraq from the start. But Barack Obama doesn’t need any foreign policy advice from the architect of the worst foreign policy decision in a generation.” Talking to folks who know Bush well say he just doesn’t believe Obama’s earned it; that he’s worthy. He has a lot more respect for Clinton and apparently would be more comfortable seeing her or McCain as his heir than Obama.
What on earth has Georgie ever earned in his entire life?? He’s 60 and STILL coddled by his parents. God, this fool cannot even speak in English, and that’s his only alleged language.
Well, I take that back–he is fluent in stupid.
Bush commenting on foreign policy hmmmmm. His foreign policy is akin to having a chimpanzee bang on a typewriter and waiting for War and Peace to be written. Life is to short and I can’t comprehend eternity. I’m not interested in anything he has to say on any subject. God I hate that a##hole. Thanks for f##king up our country you piece of sh#t.
that observation is repeated over and over.
From Hillary’s camp: Yesterday’s losses were products of the system and the shakeup wasn’t a shakeup.
Hillary Pollster Mark Penn: Obama More Likely To Suffer Fate Of John Kerry Or Al Gore
Penn can keep on spinning but Something is happening here.
Dispatch from a caucus “organizer” in Washington
The WA state caucuses: it was’t about the ground game
Great story from Atlantic.com. This guy is the real deal. He exudes Competence, Confidence and Charisma. Accent on COMPETENCE he has the instincts to make the right decisions. He is not a panacea for this nation’s ills but he is as close as we’ve got. The Financial Times is right we better seize the moment.