An Appeasing Candidate

As Barack Obama continues his slog to victory as the ostensible Democratic presidential nominee, we begin to see the shape of the main event emerge from the murk of the protracted Democratic primary. Many have looked at the tally of delegates and the possible outcomes of the remaining few primaries and have concluded. logically, that absent an improbable landslide move on the part of the remaining uncommitted super delegates, Obama can’t lose. With a giant caveat in deference to the parallel reality that reigns in a place called Planet Clinton, The View is ready to subscribe to this outcome with a never-say-never admonition to Obama to watch his six. This is based upon the opinion that the one issue that keeps Hillary from exiting stage left is that of money. After all, isn’t it always about money when we the focus is on the Clintons. After a combined lifetime of “public service”, the Clintons have realized that the free housing and plane rides all comes to an end and there is after all a need for personal wealth. Having achieved a measure of that goal, they are both deathly afraid that the spigot may finally be turned to the off position. To put it another way, Hillary ain’t going no where until she can recapture the $11.5 million that the campaign owes her and Bill. The good news is that this problem can presumably be solved without them moving back into the Whitehouse.

With this background, Barack fired on of the first round in the presidential election this week. As it turns out, however, the volley had the indirect trajectory of a three-cushion pool shot. When President Bush , in a speech to the Israeli Knesset, warned against the strategy of appeasement in dealing with radical and terrorist regimes, Obama quickly framed the remarks as criticism of his nebulous foreign policy, arguing that his strategy of direct talks with despots can achieve effective results, in spite of the extreme positions such despots might espouse. Then, in an attempt to square the circle, he puts forth the weak argument that John McCain’s first term would be, in essence, Bush’s third. But before we take the bait and descend into a referendum on the Bush presidency, let’s look at the underlying issue: the characterization of each candidate’s foreign policy.

It is impossible to focus on a discussion of foreign policy without acknowledging the divisiveness of the ongoing Iraq war. We, as a country, have paid an enormous price for this operation which, only recently, seems to have achieved military success. But the political issues surrounding the war, are numerous and do not lend themselves to simple analysis. The core issue here is the manner in which the USA should deal with rogue and radical regimes that have the publicly-stated goal of causing fatal harm to America and its allies, not to mention mankind in general. And these are not idle threats. The terror of the events of 9/11 is but one of the dubious achievements of these purveyors of hate. We as a country have to decide the optimum mix of collegial and big-stick toughness. Democrats are famously known for their preference for diplomatic negotiations, even to the extent of establishing parallel diplomatic contacts, sometimes in direct conflict with the State Department’s policies. Exhibit one is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who apparently dreams of reincarnation as Condoleza Rice. But in dealing with a those states advocating near criminal programs of oppression and violence, it is often our strength, and our willingness to employ it in a just cause, that produces the desired results.

John McCain is his own man and before the election is over, we will know much more about his views on government. But be prepared. Democrats will do their best to tie him to the policies of the Bush administration, especially those which have proven unpopular. It is always easy to pick apart the efforts of those actively dealing with real world challenges, especially for those gadflies who have never had to function in an executive capacity. If the Democrats have, in fact, got their act together, let the games begin and let’s hear from each of the candidates about their vision of the future rather than tired criticisms of the past records of those not even in the race.