[Posted originally as a reply to a comment on MyDD today, but as it became more substantial, I thought I would post here]
I am an Obama supporter, but I too am glad to hear your praise of Hillary. I think we can all agree that political discourse tends to paint people with a single-color brush, which obscures the truth that politicians are people, too, with multifaceted talents, motivations, and accomplishments. I have no doubt that Hillary is both a compassionate person and an gifted manager/doer, as you have aptly pointed out in her 9-11 support of early responders. I too think she would bring a level of competence to the White House that would be leagues beyond Bush-Cheney. However, let’s not confuse her compassionate heart or managerial prowess with the "Ready on Day 1" or "3am Phone Call" arguments, for they are completely different. In the case of the latter, the issues are judgment, character, and leadership style. This is where millions of people are casting their vote for Obama instead, because we see Hillary lacking critical ingredients in these areas. Here's my take on each of these areas:
ON JUDGMENT
• Much has already been written on her vote to authorize the use of the military force in Iraq — a vote she has only recently claimed to regret. She admits to not reading the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq before her vote. For this action, nearly 4,000 of our countrymen are dead, and upwards of 100,000 Iraqis have perished, with millions more displaced, and all for what? Many like Obama clearly saw the writing on the wall before the war started and many tried to tell our elected representatives what a terrible quagmire this would be.
• More recently, she voted against the banning of cluster munitions in areas of dense civilian population. Why? Probably to keep looking as if she is "tough on terror" instead of doing the right thing. (This reflect both on judgment and character.)
• During Bill Clinton’s presidency, time after time Hillary made terrible recommendations for various posts such as Attorney General – this is all a matter of public record.
• In her campaign for president, her judgment on who to hire and listen to has been seriously flawed and may now cost her the presidency.
• Despite her arguments against NAFTA, the record shows that until recently she was a strong supporter of it.
• But it is has been her own judgment to go negative on Obama and nit-pick things like the plagiarism claim that may have turned many against her as well.
• Her continual changing of message has muddled her campaign, too, as it appears that she really doesn’t know what she stands for (or somehow lacks the ability to communicate it effectively) and so she has come across as more anti-Obama than pro-anything.
POINT: when the going gets tough, Hillary makes the wrong choices, including, importantly, choosing the wrong people.
ON CHARACTER:
Hillary presents a fractured picture when it comes to character. On the one hand, she seems to have the best intentions to fight for democratic principles and family values — her work on SChip is just one example. But her "win-at-all-costs" attitude has turned many people off.
• When she circulated patently false and misleading information about Obama’s record supporting women’s right to choose just before the NH primaries, she was knowingly lying in order to win. She even enlisted a group of female legislators to sign on to the anti-Obama rhetoric, a group that now admits to being manipulated by her. A Chicago-based leader of NOW publicly denounced the tactic as unworthy of a presidential contender, and switched her vote to Obama.
• Many feminists who once supported Hillary are similarly reacting to her voting record and her negative tactics.
• Her campaign to seat FL and MI delegates (after she agreed not to) is widely seen as a absurd power-grab. Her "victory celebration" in FL itself left many scratching their heads about her character and mental competence.
• Her kitchen-sink attacks on Obama are bringing her more disdain, in part because she continues to misrepresent his positions and is increasing playing on fears to get votes, and in part because she doesn’t understand the nature of the Obama campaign to change the way government works, thus making her a kind of "anti-Hope" spokesperson, further alienating many and insinuating that Obama supporters are deluded. No, actually, we see pretty clearly: character assassination, smear campaigns, and irrational arguments are part of the "old politics" that we are wanting to leave behind. We expected more from Hillary than to try to lift herself up by putting others down. Bill Clinton has only reinforced the perception with his callous comments.
• Her dirty campaign and voter-suppression tactics in New Hampshire, Nevada and Iowa are another example of flawed character.
• Her unwillingness to publish her Clinton-era documents or her tax returns is another.
• Her huge contributions from the military-industrial and health care industries are another (together with her unwillingness to repudiate at least the idea of lobbyist money and influence).
• Simply her willingness to let the likes of Penn and Wolfson to so control her campaign shows her lack of both character and judgment.
• I could go on and on, but you get the...
POINT: Hillary does not live up to the values of fairness, truthfulness, transparency, or integrity that we need in our next president.
ON LEADERSHIP STYLE:
• It may have been Hillary’s secretive divide-and-conquer tactics in the failed Health Care initiative during Bill Clinton’s presidency that helped to fuel the Republican comeback that hobbled his second term. But it is her top-down, political strong-arming approach that is the hallmark of old politics that is losing her the election.
• She fails to grasp how her own actions are only reinforcing the kind of leadership that has typified Washington for so many decades. Closed door, back-room deal-making and negative, aggressive tactics are the hallmarks of the old-style government of non-transparent decision-making. Obama has taken a firm stand on changing all of this and instituting a people’s government where transparency is his centerpiece (see this page, for example). Obama passed the most comprehensive ethics reform legislation in the U.S. Senate since Watergate.
• Hillary fails to understand that before you can institute change, you have to win people’s hearts AND minds. She has singularly failed to do this, most especially in this campaign. And while both Hillary and Barack show the ability to reach across the aisle, Barack has a better record of building coalitions and his very style and approach is more bipartisan. I’ve seen very few arguments that claim Hillary is viewed this way; she has fewer legislative accomplishments, including fewer bill co-sponsors.
POINT: Hillary, while a competent manager, has a more partisan, top-down, and less consensus-building leadership style that is the hallmark of the "old politics" that so many want to see changed.
Finally, on the "THE 3AM PHONE CALL" issue:
Let’s get real -- no president is going to be making split-second decisions on matters of national or international importance in isolation. His or her staff, cabinet, etc. will all be part of any response to a serious crisis. If that is so, then much will depend on the people who will be chosen to surround the next president. If we assume for the moment that competent people are chosen by both camps (and even that is debatable, since Hillary’s current foreign policy advisers have largely been hawkish on the Iraq war), that leaves us only with... judgment, character, and leadership style, in order to make our assessment of either candidate’s quality of response to a crisis. For many of us who support Obama, we see a more authentic, transparent style; more tempered, considered judgment; and an ability to listen to others, even if he does not agree, leading to a more rational consensus before committing our national resources or fellow citizens’ lives.
In summation, HILLARY IS NOT READY TO LEAD ON DAY 1: Her judgment, character, and leadership style are not adequate for leading this country in the direction many of us believe we should go. For all of her gifts, she has time and again failed in her judgment, failed to take strong, unpopular stands, and shown character flaws that should cause us to reconsider her fitness for the highest office in the land. But make no mistake, Hillary still has a vital role to play in the Senate, and will continue to make positive contributions to the well-being of our country for many years to come. Do Obama supporters therefore think he is a "perfect" candidate? No, he has flaws, too, and yes, he is less well known than Hillary and other contenders that have since dropped out of the race. But let’s recall that Bill Clinton was largely unknown when at 46 years old he took the reins of this country and helped navigate it into saner, healthier waters. Let’s give Obama the same chance.