Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton would both help restore America's global image, to which President Bush has done so much grievous harm. They are committed to changing America's role in the world, not just its image.It goes on to say how they are impressed with Clinton's experience and concludes that she's more qualified/best choice.
On the major issues, there is no real gulf separating the two.
OK. That's one opinion, but no policy differences of note and generally an acceptance that "experience" wins the day.
I will let three people express the way I would respond...
Bryant Jones, a 25-year-old, white, normally Republican voter, quoted today in Roger Cohen's column:
I'm 25 and for my entire life a Bush or a Clinton has been in the executive office, either as vice-president or president. The United States is not about dynasties.Not a usual for me, but William Kristol on today's op-ed page:
Right now, Hillary Clinton is ahead in the polls in almost all the big states voting. She is a tough and capable campaigner, and she may be able to hold on to those leads. But it is now clear that putting her in the White House brings a hyperactive Bill back in with her. Who needs it? Liberals and Democrats can get basically the same policies without the Clinton baggage, and in choosing Obama, they can nominate a more electable candidate.Most importantly, Toni Morrison, as quoted from a letter printed in the NYT:
In addition to keen intelligence, integrity and a rare authenticity, you exhibit something that has nothing to do with age, experience, race or gender and something I don't see in other candidates. That something is a creative imagination which coupled with brilliance equals wisdom. It is too bad if we associate it only with gray hair and old age. Or if we call searing vision naivete. Or if we believe cunning is insight. Or if we settle for finessing cures tailored for each ravaged tree in the forest while ignoring the poisonous landscape that feeds and surrounds it.And I was not convinced by Mr. Krugman comparing Obama to Clinton in 1992. Huge difference.
Wisdom is a gift; you can't train for it, inherit it, learn it in a class, or earn it in the workplace -- that access can foster the acquisition of knowledge, but not wisdom.
I'm daring to be excited!