The cynical (and hey, that might be me if I'd gotten out on the wrong side of bed) will say this is an attempt to distract from Mark Penn's firing. Maybe, maybe not. But it's refreshing to see Hillary Clinton take the bold step of demanding that President Bush boycott the Olympics opening ceremony.
This is an issue too important to convert into an anti-Clinton commentary. Over the course of the past 40-some years, the Chinese government has waged incessant genocide on the Tibetan people. Today, the country is predominantly composed of Han Chinese, all while the West looked the other way. Now, we have the gross spectacle of Western democracies like Britain spending millions of their own taxpayer's money to "protect the Olympic torch" by quashing pro-Tibetan protests.
No response yet from our next President of the United States. I'm betting, however, that Obama seconds this boycott call. It's a small gesture, to be sure, given the immensity of the Tibetan people's suffering. And I'd love to see BOTH candidates come out with comprehensive plans for defending human rights (both at home and abroad). But it's high time the world's free nations stopped capitulating to mass murder.
UPDATE: Madashellmellie notes that Obama didn't call for a boycott, but did release a stern call for the Chinese to negotiate with the Dalai Lama on the subject of autonomy a month before Clinton.
Thanks to the commenters here, who have given me a lot to think about. as has been pointed out, it's not like the US has a ton of moral authority to throw around these days. Also, the Olympics are a coming-together in spite of differences, which is a good argument for not politicizing them. The goal should be to do what Obama enjoined Beijing to do, which is to engage in autonomy talks with His Holiness. I have some re-thinking to do on this issue; I'm not so sure any longer than a boycott is the right means toward that end.