“ U R con-fuzing meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee” bff Mary emailed me this AM. I had just spent 45 minutes the day before attempting to steady her wavering resolve to vote for Hillary in Tuesday’s Primary, then I forwarded an email from another friend who is trying to get out the vote for Obama. What gives?
I’ll admit it – my own resolve is wavering – I can’t even rely on my marginally-related-through-heritage connection to the Kennedy clan to help me make up my mind: Caroline and Teddy are stumping for Obama while Bobby’s kids are standing by Hillary.
Last Sunday, Caroline Kennedy’s endorsement of Obama had me on the fence for the first time since the campaigns began.
Then I read George Packer’s excellent article on Clinton, and the different between her perception of leadership and Obama’s, in the New Yorker:
“The alternatives facing Democratic voters have been characterized variously as a choice between experience and change, between an insider and an outsider, and between two firsts—a woman and a black man. But perhaps the most important difference between these two politicians—whose policy views, after all, are almost indistinguishable—lies in their rival conceptions of the Presidency. Obama offers himself as a catalyst by which disenchanted Americans can overcome two decades of vicious partisanship, energize our democracy, and restore faith in government. Clinton presents politics as the art of the possible, with change coming incrementally through good governance, a skill that she has honed in her career as advocate, First Lady, and senator.”
“Obama spoke for only twenty-five minutes and took no questions; he had figured out how to leave an audience at the peak of its emotion, craving more. As he was ending, I walked outside and found five hundred people standing on the sidewalk and the front steps of the opera house, listening to his last words in silence, as if news of victory in the Pacific were coming over the loudspeakers. Within minutes, I couldn’t recall a single thing that he had said, and the speech dissolved into pure feeling, which stayed with me for days.”
My point to bff Mary was that I’m just not sure this country can turn itself around on pure feeling and the politics of kumbaya. We need someone who can think critically, who can roll up her / his sleeves and effectively manage us out of this crisis. We can’t afford someone whose strongest suit is their ability to inspire.
Then Frank Rich, who has faithfully articulated my sentiments about the Bush administration many a time, came out with his essay in today’s New York Times:
“What we also know is that, unlike Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Obama is not hesitant to take on John McCain. He has twice triggered the McCain temper, in spats over ethics reform in 2006 and Mr. McCain’s Baghdad market photo-op last year. In Thursday’s debate, Mr. Obama led an attack on Mr. McCain twice before Mrs. Clinton followed with a wan echo. When Bill Clinton promised that his wife and Mr. McCain’s friendship would ensure a “civilized” campaign, he may have been revealing more than he intended about the perils for Democrats in that matchup.”
Hmmmmm. And then this email plea from my old friend Jon…
“I got started in politics working for Eugene McCarthy back in 68 and worked
my heart out for many candidates until I turned 17. At which point I became
disillusioned with the American political system. I had a glimmer of hope
renewed with Clinton – only to see his willing engagement in attack/reattack
politics squander his administration and its potential.
I feel that we need someone who can rise above the internecine warfare in
Washington that produces such profound apathy in our country. Apathy in
otherwise idealistic people such as myself.
I believe that Barack Obama is the one person running for president who can
change the debilitating politics of the last 20+ years and can rally the
country around some of our most pressing national problems: the war in Iraq,
institutionalized poverty, health care, energy and the environment.
While I appreciate Hilary’s incredible grasp of the issues, her proposed
policies and her ability to debate, I do not feel that she is capable of
creating any kind of consensus with which to enact her programs. I believe
that Hillary and Bill believe in “politics” to the detriment of policy.
Bill’s behavior in South Carolina, convinced me that they learned nothing
from their disastrous years in the White House with its constant calculation
and stonewalling.
Internationally, electing an African American, with an African father, a
last name Obama, who lived in Indonesia for 4 years as a child will go a
long way toward healing the perception in the world that America is a self
centered, xenophobic, intolerant nation.
Finally because I feel that the “experience” issue is still troubling to
some of you – I would just say Nixon – one of the most “experienced”
politicians of our time.”
You may reach him at www.jonreiss.com
My heart or my head? In my heart, I have wanted to vote for a woman for president since I was a young girl. And my head tells me to vote for the bright, competent and battle tested CEO-type: Hillary. But my heart longs to be inspired, and I never saw a corporate boardroom I didn’t like (and I’ve seen more than a few).
Why do I suspect that I won’t know who I’ll vote for until I actually punch the card?
In the meantime, I will turn my attention to something else I read in today’s NYTimes: PUDDING!
But which will it be: the rice pudding with cinnamon and brandy? Or the Guadduja, with its hazelnuts and bittersweet chocolate?
Must everything in life be a decision?
Vox Pop Sudari 