The Candidates and World Leadership

By TChris, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:14:03 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Steve Hamm, a senior writer at Business Week, worries about the nation's diminishing role as a world leader.

Over the past eight years, the United States has lost a tremendous amount of influence on the world. The Bush administration's stance on global warming, its bullying style, the war in Iraq, and lack of leadership on fair trade have left the country as an outlier in the global community of nations rather than a true leader. So one of the most important tasks of the next president will be to fix that.

Hamm views John McCain as "positively enlightened" compared to Bush. McCain talks about the need to lead "by demonstrating once again the virtues of freedom and democracy, by defending the rules of international civilized society and by creating the new international institutions necessary to advance the peace and freedoms we cherish." But Hamm quite rightly worries that McCain undermined that position by selecting a vice presidential candidate who counteracts his message. [more ...]

[Palin is] a person who is focused narrowly on the provincial interests of conservative, right-wing Americans (or maybe just Alaskans), who advocates exploiting natural resources and burning fuel rather than conserving and coming up with energy alternatives, and who considers the defense of human rights to be unpatriotic. Imagine how the leaders of the rest of the world would deal with her as president. The United States would be a laughingstock among nations.

Hamm argues that McCain could "start to redeem America in the world's eyes" if he drops Palin, but not otherwise.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, has an immediate advantage over McCain, in Hamm's view.

It's clear from Obama's reception in Europe and the Middle East earlier this year that world leaders would embrace him as a colleague.

Obama, Hamm writes, is "insisting that the values we (or at least some of us) hold dear are fully expressed in how we engage with the world."

Maybe most voters don't care about how America is perceived in the world. President Bush certainly doesn't. But voters who are concerned about the nation's loss of its leadership role in the world should heed Hamm's analysis. McCain isn't about to jettison Palin, given the reception she received at the Republican National Convention. If voters want the United States to regain its standing as an international leader, Obama is the clear choice.

< An Innocent Man's Odyssey and a Good Cop's Downfall | Friday Night Fights: Lies >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

The Candidates and World Leadership | 16 comments (16 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

We can't expect to maintain the position we (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by esmense on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:37:01 PM EST

enjoyed for the half century following WWII. It is a radically changed world. As terrible and destructive as W has been, our position in relationship to other powerful players would haved undergone inevitable change, and diminishment, without him.

It is impossible for either candidate to successfully run without promising to "restore our leadership in the world" -- because anything else is terrifying to people who have no concept of America as anything other than #1 (in most if not all things). But, once in office, their real job will be to find new, effective ways for us to be in the world and relate to other powers -- ways that serve and protect our interests in an environment where our supremacy is no longer unquestioned, and the dependency of others can no longer be assumed.

Except she won't be President. (none / 0) (#1)
by oculus on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:18:21 PM EST

Imagine how the leaders of the rest of the world would deal with her as president.

well (none / 0) (#2)
by connecticut yankee on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:32:39 PM EST

I doubt McCain would run at 76 years old so she could very well be in position in four years.


If Sarah Palin is as incompetent (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by oculus on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:38:16 PM EST

as has been suggested I doubt she will be the GOP nominee in four years. She is expected to flame out and go back to Alaska.


Never stopped Bush. (none / 0) (#11)
by sweetthings on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:14:18 PM EST

Frankly, I'm convinced that there's a sizeable voting constituency in this country for which incompetence is considered an asset.


I just read an article in the NYT (none / 0) (#13)
by oculus on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:18:22 PM EST

in which a woman who drove an hour to see McCain and Palin today sd. "she's me." The woman has six kids, works full time, was a Clinton supporter, but now plans to vote for McCain, all due to her identifying with Palin. So---you may be correct.


: Yes, this is what I have been saying but i keep (none / 0) (#16)
by mogal on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:23:56 PM EST

getting bumped. Sarah Palin is the real thing and women and father's of daughter's who are having a rough time identify with her.

Oh those leftist bloggers! (none / 0) (#3)
by nalo on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:36:37 PM EST

All these leftist blogger Obama supporters at Business Week, why can't they just leave Palin alone?

The author states that Palin holds 2 views that diminish the worldview of the McCain administration -- 1) denying global warming, and 2) abusing human rights at Guantamo. I'd add 3)her views of the war in Iraq as a holy crusade. An VP pick must be evaluated as a potential president.


: The only way that would effect (none / 0) (#6)
by BrianJ on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:44:59 PM EST

Anything is if McCain adopts those positions himself. At this point, that seems like a tossup, since he's on both sides of both issues. (As for Iraq, we're not leaving anytime soon unless China calls in our loans. Our army is sitting on top of 10% of the world's oil reserves; abandoning them before we absolutely have to is folly.)

Interesting... (none / 0) (#7)
by Strick on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 07:59:33 PM EST

So I take it none of you have read this?

Palin shows us how it's done

A week ago few in Britain had heard of Palin...

Her sensational performance at the Republican convention may turn out to be the moment the White House slipped from Barack Obama's grasp.

She was an electrifying mix of passion, energy, optimism and plain speaking. The exact opposite of the slippery, two-faced, depressing bunch of third-raters who parade on our Westminster stage...

Democrats and their Lefty media backers had been sneering that Palin is a small-town nobody, a hick from Alaska put into a job way beyond an inexperienced woman.

Believe me, you will not be hearing that again.

Full of self-assurance and aggression, super Sarah popped Barack's balloon big-time...

It was the most powerful demolition of the Democrat hero I have heard in two weeks on the US election trail...

And consider this: If Obama loses, Hillary Clinton will run for the Democrats in 2012. Opposing her is sure to be Sarah Palin. That would guarantee America its first woman President.

And my fistful of dollars, having seen both in action here, would be on Palin.

Most of all, though, the Palin sensation makes our own Westminster politics look as grey and dull as the leaden September skies. It's dire.

Won't be hearing all that hillbilly schtick again? You mean except in these blogs?

And it seems as if someone envies us our leaders. Biden? Sounds like they have 'em like him by the dozens.

Yeah (5.00 / 0) (#8)
by Steve M on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:02:20 PM EST

That's a world leader speaking, right?


: Fergus Shanahan is pretty d@mn (none / 0) (#12)
by oculus on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:14:58 PM EST

funny but very un-PC.

The Sun (5.00 / 0) (#9)
by TChris on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:08:05 PM EST

is a gossip tabloid with about as much credibility as the National Inquirer.


I just returned from 10 days in... (none / 0) (#14)
by Shainzona on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:19:01 PM EST

London and Ireland and was shocked by two things (and I didn't read the Sun):

The US is non-existent with regard to many in England (and Ireland). I have visited the UK several times and I have never seen America/Americans mean so little to the media and people with whom I spoke. All of their eyes are pointed in other directions in the world.
The coverage of both conventions was balanced (the key speeches took place at 3 AM so people only saw portions of them) - and Palin played very well. It did seem as if people were rooting for her to "knock it out of the ballpark".

Just observations....


Obama appears on O'Reilly (none / 0) (#10)
by nalo on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:11:06 PM EST

Obama Meets O'Reilly: No One Dies!

O'Reilly asked first if Obama believed we are in a "war on terror," a kind of semantic loyalty oath to see if he would hedge on the term. "Absolutely," he said.

Obama pressed his case that the war in Iraq had misdirected America's resources, saying that the surge had worked "beyond our wildest dreams" but placing that in the context of the cost of the preceding five years of the war and reminding O'Reilly that the Iraqis have not yet stepped up to self-governance. (And, in what was probably an intentional dig at McCain, making the point that he knew the distinction between Sunni and Shi'a.)

And to continue to freeze out Fox would go against one of Obama's most consistent messages: that people are sick of red-vs.-blue America divisions and that we should be able to talk with people who disagree with us.

In typical O'Reillian fashion, the host had two analysts on immediately after the segment, essentially to assess how well he had interviewed Obama (verdict: great!), and O'Reilly praised him for coming onto the show. "He's a tough guy, Obama ... I looked at him eye to eye -- he's not a wimpy guy."

Obama's been having a feud with Murdoch and Ailes for a while. So, overall, it was pretty successful. They're starting to think of him as presidential, and re-evaluating just how "scary" they think he'll be:

in the end ratings = $ , O'Reilly's dragging the interview for 4 days.

Bill O'Reilly's interview with Sen. Barack Obama on Thursday brought "The O'Reilly Factor" the second-highest ratings in its history. "The O'Reilly Factor" averaged 6.6 million viewers Thursday night, Nielsen Media Research said Friday. It was surpassed in the ratings only by the March 19, 2003, "O'Reilly Factor" that led into President Bush's nationally televised speech about the beginning of the Iraq War

Were any of you surprised to hear (none / 0) (#15)
by oculus on Fri Sep 05, 2008 at 08:19:55 PM EST

speakers at the DNC say we'll go find bin Laden in his cave?