Skip to main content

View Diary: I was (mostly) wrong about Elizabeth Warren (125 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  She has as much foreign policy experience (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    True North, Zack from the SFV

    as Obama when he ran for president.  

    Come on, she's better qualified to run for Senate than most male candidates.   That is a big concern, however.  Is Massachussetts ready to elect a woman to the Senate or are they still behind the times?

    "When will our consciences grow so tender that we will act to prevent human misery rather than avenge it?" Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Betty Pinson on Fri Sep 23, 2011 at 10:41:56 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  This is something that's always used against (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Betty Pinson

      candidates by CNN and such, with bulgy-eyed Wolf Blitzer asking portenteous, unanswerable questions like, "will X's lack of foreign policy experience undermine her/his campaign?"

      But it's almost always hogwash, for a couple of reasons: firstly, the "concern" about foreign policy experience almost invariably contradicts the other thing they rattle on about: executive experience. If it happens to be the case that a Senator candidate for Pres. served on the Foreign Relations committee, they'll still say, "well, the other candidate is a Governor, who has experience running a state!" Well, okay, but unless that state had lots of fancy trade missions to wherever, their job is still more concerned with domestic state policy than with matters of international security.

      Look at Bush/Gore in 2000. We all knew that Gore had an infinitely more nuanced grasp of issues of foreign policy -- the Middle East, internecine conflict in the former Yugoslav states, Rwanda, etc. -- and that Bush had been out of country only a handful of times, almost always to Mexico. Did that matter a whiff?

      I recognize that the situation got turned around after 9/11, with foreign policy all of a sudden assuming the lion's share of our attention. Even then, though, we went with the candidate that was "tough" on war, rather than the one who -- having served in a combat capacity -- maybe actually knew more about what he was doing.

      The other reason that the foreign policy shtick is hogwash is because Americans increasingly view foreign policy through the lens of, how does it affect them? In other words, it only registers on their radar to the degree that it seems to affect their pocketbook, their security, their peace of mind. 24/7 news networks, newspapers, and other media outlets have all relinquished their foreign news desks, and now let the BBC cover all the "hard" foreign policy news. This is a measure of their obsession with cost-cutting, to be sure, but it's also a measure of how much they think Americans actually care about foreign news coverage.

      In any event, I'm pretty confident -- as the diarist is not -- that domestic policy, in the form of the economy, is not going away anytime soon as the central issue facing most Americans. I think we're going to wish that it would go away, but that's not the same thing as no longer caring about it: as we get more deeply embroiled in the ongoing cluster**ck that is the global financial crisis, the domestic context is only going to be more prominent in the public's mind, not less.

      Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

      by Dale on Sat Sep 24, 2011 at 06:29:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (145)
  • Community (63)
  • 2016 (41)
  • Environment (40)
  • Republicans (37)
  • Elections (34)
  • Culture (34)
  • Bernie Sanders (32)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Media (26)
  • Labor (25)
  • Climate Change (25)
  • Education (24)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Barack Obama (23)
  • Spam (23)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • GOP (22)
  • Hillary Clinton (21)
  • Science (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site