Thursday, July 26, 2007
Stop The RT Presses ...
Madscribe has a kind words for A Certain Ethnic Candidate
Having finally caught a few highlights of the latest "debate" among Democratic candidates, a response by Senators Obama and Clinton to a question about Bush' idea of diplomacy and talking to "our enemies" caught my attention:
(Obama)
"The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them, which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration, is ridiculous. Now Ronald Reagan, and democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to (the) Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire."
(Clinton reponse)
"Well, I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous, diplomatic effort because I think it is not that you promise a meeting at that high a level before you know what the intentions are. I don't want want to be used for propaganda purposes."
Although he did so partly for purposes of oratorical triangulation, Obama is nonetheless correct to raise the name of Reagan in this critical time, particularly when we have a pseudo-conservative impostor in the White House who has totally trashed and destroyed not only the legacy of Ronald Reagan, but also obfuscated the importance of Reagan's moral motivations in using diplomacy in dealing with "enemies."
There's a time to talk, a time to fight, and a time to just be still. Intelligence is knowing what time you are in, at any given moment. Had Reagan shared the immoral acceptance of "innevitable war" that the Neo-cons love so much, he would have missed his historic moment to deal with Gorbachev in the late 1980s, and there's no telling how much more messed up our planet would be in the current age. A careful reading of the recently published diaries of the late president shows that he was no fan of the Neo-cons and their world view. The wisdom of Reagan and the failures of the current administration, as useful idiots for nihilistic ideologues, speaks for itself. As Obama rightly points out in citing Reagan, what is the use of a stupid international "macho" approach in dealing with trouble spots, when your approach simply doesn't and hasn't worked; indeed, has strengthened your enemies? Why NOT talk? We have nothing to lose because ... frankly, we're ALREADY losing!
Senator Clinton displayed a realpolitik understanding of current regimes and not offering too much, too soon (as her husband was wont to do) in trying to use non-gunboat diplomacy to instigate change.
Even though the previous statements occurred in the heat of two candidates trying to score points with a audience that was generally too moronic to understand the nuances of the statements, maybe a few Democrats and Independents will have the brains to see the truth underpinning both viewpoints and that the two positions are not mutually exclusive.
If Obama really understands the importance of his Reagan statement, rather than just name dropping to appeal to the "center," I might have to give the brutha some dap and order a bumper sticker or something ...
|
Having finally caught a few highlights of the latest "debate" among Democratic candidates, a response by Senators Obama and Clinton to a question about Bush' idea of diplomacy and talking to "our enemies" caught my attention:
(Obama)
"The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them, which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration, is ridiculous. Now Ronald Reagan, and democratic presidents like JFK constantly spoke to (the) Soviet Union at a time when Ronald Reagan called them an evil empire."
(Clinton reponse)
"Well, I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous, diplomatic effort because I think it is not that you promise a meeting at that high a level before you know what the intentions are. I don't want want to be used for propaganda purposes."
Although he did so partly for purposes of oratorical triangulation, Obama is nonetheless correct to raise the name of Reagan in this critical time, particularly when we have a pseudo-conservative impostor in the White House who has totally trashed and destroyed not only the legacy of Ronald Reagan, but also obfuscated the importance of Reagan's moral motivations in using diplomacy in dealing with "enemies."
There's a time to talk, a time to fight, and a time to just be still. Intelligence is knowing what time you are in, at any given moment. Had Reagan shared the immoral acceptance of "innevitable war" that the Neo-cons love so much, he would have missed his historic moment to deal with Gorbachev in the late 1980s, and there's no telling how much more messed up our planet would be in the current age. A careful reading of the recently published diaries of the late president shows that he was no fan of the Neo-cons and their world view. The wisdom of Reagan and the failures of the current administration, as useful idiots for nihilistic ideologues, speaks for itself. As Obama rightly points out in citing Reagan, what is the use of a stupid international "macho" approach in dealing with trouble spots, when your approach simply doesn't and hasn't worked; indeed, has strengthened your enemies? Why NOT talk? We have nothing to lose because ... frankly, we're ALREADY losing!
Senator Clinton displayed a realpolitik understanding of current regimes and not offering too much, too soon (as her husband was wont to do) in trying to use non-gunboat diplomacy to instigate change.
Even though the previous statements occurred in the heat of two candidates trying to score points with a audience that was generally too moronic to understand the nuances of the statements, maybe a few Democrats and Independents will have the brains to see the truth underpinning both viewpoints and that the two positions are not mutually exclusive.
If Obama really understands the importance of his Reagan statement, rather than just name dropping to appeal to the "center," I might have to give the brutha some dap and order a bumper sticker or something ...
Labels: Barack Obama, Democratic 2008 Presidential, Hillary Clinton
