A positive take on Obama from a Republican, or former Republican

[Hamlette]

There's no question that Obama needs major work in foreign policy. But he is obviously better informed at this point than, say, George W. Bush was in February 1999. And Obama's internationalist pedigree seems to me a golden opportunity for the United States.

I don't think many Americans have fully absorbed yet what the Bush administration has done to America's soft power abroad, to the moral reputation of America, to the respect that many around the world once had for America's democratic institutions, even if they differed from U.S foreign policy. Bush's torture and detention policies, his cringe-inducing diplomacy, his proud lack of interest in other cultures and societies has deeply weakened this country's international clout. Electing a half-African president, with Hussein as a middle name, who attended school in a Muslim country: it's almost a p.r. agent's dream for America. It would instantly give this country a fresh start in the world after the disaster of the Bush-Cheney years. It isn't enough: Obama will need skills and determination in the terror war. But soft power helps; and Obama would put it on steroids. As for youth, Tony Blair was 43 when he became prime minister; Obama would be 48. What's the problem?

(Photo of Obama's formal - and exhilarating - announcement today by Scott Olson/Getty.)

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/

I love it. A whole new view I'd not thought of.

I'm hoping that people will at least listen to Sullivan. I know many of you hate him but I think Glenn Greenwald said it best "Sullivan was one of the very few conservatives who repudiated Bush and the Bush movement when Bush was still popular. I think Sullivan is an excellent writer and a commendable and insightful political thinker. As is evident from his book and his blog, he explicitly examines and frequently re-visits the first principles underlying his beliefs, which is why he is open to rational opposition and to changing his mind about his political views, even on fundamental questions. That is a trait that is all too rare. On balance, though, I think the virtues of Sullivan as a political commentator easily outweigh his sins, and The Conservative Soul illustrates why. When he was cheering on George Bush and the Iraq invasion in 2002 and 2003, Sullivan was a virtual hero to Bush supporters. He was far and away the most popular right-wing pundit at the time, and he had a large and loyal constituency. He could have easily maintained and even expanded that popularity -- and preserved the material and other advantages which accompany it -- simply by adhering to his views.

But he didn't do that. He gradually recognized what the Bush movement really was and, as a result, turned on the President and repudiated the political movement which was his fan base. He did so even though he had to know that he would never really be welcomed by liberals, with whom he had been warring for a decade at least. http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2007/01/andrew-sullivan-and-hollow.html

[MadMaddie]

1. I have to agree about Sullivan...he has come around like many

Republicans...who realize the total devastation of the US by this administration.

I will never forgive him for beating the drums for war withought asking the questions that should have been asked.