SMRs and AMRs

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

What's this? David Brooks likes Obama

The Obama-Clinton Issue
By DAVID BROOKS

Hillary Clinton has been a much better senator than Barack Obama. She has been a serious, substantive lawmaker who has worked effectively across party lines. Obama has some accomplishments under his belt, but many of his colleagues believe that he has not bothered to master the intricacies of legislation or the maze of Senate rules. He talks about independence, but he has never quite bucked liberal orthodoxy or party discipline.

If Clinton were running against Obama for Senate, it would be easy to choose between them.

But they are running for president, and the presidency requires a different set of qualities. Presidents are buffeted by sycophancy, criticism and betrayal. They must improvise amid a thousand fluid crises. They’re isolated and also exposed, puffed up on the outside and hollowed out within. With the presidency, character and self-knowledge matter more than even experience. There are reasons to think that, among Democrats, Obama is better prepared for this madness.

Many of the best presidents in U.S. history had their character forged before they entered politics and carried to it a degree of self-possession and tranquillity that was impervious to the Sturm und Drang of White House life.

Obama is an inner-directed man in a profession filled with insecure outer-directed ones. He was forged by the process of discovering his own identity from the scattered facts of his childhood, a process that is described in finely observed detail in “Dreams From My Father.” Once he completed that process, he has been astonishingly constant.

(Continued here.)

1 Comments:

Blogger Minnesota Central said...

I have found Brooks to take Obama quite seriously. His column of April 26 presented insight into the depth of Obama’s intellect. It’s refreshing that Brooks is taking a serious journalistic approach to reviewing Obama’s positions for consistencies … rather striking difference from Peggy Noonan who wrote We'll see what Sen. Obama has, what he is, what he becomes. But right now he seems part of a pattern of lurches and swerves--the man from nowhere, of whom little is known, who will bring us out of the mess. His sudden rise and wild popularity seem more symptom than solution."

The choice between Clinton and Obama can be viewed based on what Committee assignments they received. Do you want Defense (Clinton of the Armed Services Committee) or Diplomacy (Obama of the Foreign Relations Committee)? When Obama answered early on in the debates that he would talk to Iran that was the Foreign Relations talking … and Clinton said no (only talk to your enemy during the surrender conference).

7:40 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home