Posted by
Andrews on Tuesday, August 12, 2008 3:05:28 PM
I already have
one open question for Obama supporters, which none have yet tried to answer. However, while I wait for a reply to that question, I have another, shorter question.
Obama has made clear, that
his foreign policy is based first and foremost on his belief in the
omnipotence of negotiation, the idea that talk can resolve all our
problems in international affairs.
Now, whether or not negotiation is as effective as he claims, how can he claim he will zealously represent the interests of our nation in such debates when he is afraid to face a fellow senator in townhall debates? When he is intimidated by mediators at primary debates with members of his own party? And when he can
barely speak coherently when deprived of a teleprompter? Who insists even
a fawning media must treat certain topics as
off limits?
How do you expect a man so terrified of confronting difficult questions in the safe setting of a presidential election to face openly hostile negotiators when questions of life and death depend on his performance?
Even if he is right and negotiation is the best approach, is it possible to argue that Obama is the right man to carry on those negotiations?