This is the first post I've ever made on a blog so bear with me. If you had asked me about Obama's VP choice a few weeks ago I would have put Joe Biden toward the bottom of my list. I had thought that picking Biden would emphasize one of Obama's weaknesses, namely his lack of foreign policy experience. Selecting Tim Kaine, on the contrary, would have reinforced his message of change. However, media coverage of the selection suggests to me that this was a safe choice. For example, it indicates that Obama has enough confidence to surround himself with individuals willing to challenge his opinions and offer another perspective. Biden's plan for a tripartite division of Iraq is indicative of his courage to challenge conventional wisdom, which has been lacking in the current administration. (However, I do have some misgivings about the "Biden Plan"). Finally, I do believe that the crisis in Georgia was a factor in choosing Biden over Bayh and Kaine (being a Roman Catholic with working class roots also helps!) Coverage in the NYT emphasizes these points as well.
What do you think?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
How often to you use Facebook to express a political view?
CMU Political Science Department Home Page
You can find more information about our MA program from our homepage.
2 comments:
Thoughtful comments David..........It seems that the Ds are trying to refocus the campaign so it is once more a referrendum on the last eight years of the Bush Administration as it relates to the economy and standard of living of average citizens (kitchen table talk) and low standing in the world rather than a what the Rs would like. That is, a decision on the basis of who has the most experience at the national level.
He who defines the issue can usually control the nature of the results.
Del Ringquist
Safe choice? I'm nauseous. I was hoping for (but not expecting) SO much more from the Democrats...
The Democrats seem to be out-neoconning the neocons. Last night, Bill Richardson said, "Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must fight the terrorists not where we imagine them to be, but where we know them to be like Afghanistan and Pakistan. We must lead a global effort to secure loose nuclear materials, not where we imagine them to be, but where we know them to be, in Russia, and the countries of the former Soviet Union." Sound vaguely familiar?
We are now expected to believe that Obama and Biden are right and Dubya was wrong? Wasn't it Dubya that once said something like, "Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice..."
Whatever happened the foresight of Washington, "The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to domestic nations, is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities." Or Jefferson, who in his inaugural address said, "...peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."
Seems the Dems have yet to embrace the lessons of Iraq, Vietnam, and Korea (or are choosing to ignore them).
If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck...
Now where's my Pepto-Bismol???
Post a Comment