I am sick of this “change or experience” debate. When President Bush ran for his first term, he was against nation-building and scaling down the size of the military. The fact is, in order to really tell if someone is going to create change, we need to look at what they have done. Barack Obama talks about change, and Hillary Clinton makes it happen. There is something very appealing about Obama. He is an excellent orator with a great message and a great book to accompany it. He is a man who can give hope to millions. However, Hillary Clinton is in a better position to actually bring the change Obama is talking about and has succeeded in bringing change in the past. Therefore, Hillary Clinton should be our president, and Obama a possible vice president.
Just think about that for a second. Hillary Clinton has the political capital because of her years in the Senate and her connections established during her husband’s presidency. Bill Clinton as first gentleman could focus on repairing U.S. relations around the world. Obama, as vice president, could heal a nation by reaching out to Americans and giving us hope to go on. That’s a team you truly cannot beat.
Obama would serve better as a vice president because of his lack of experience in Washington D.C. He knows a problem exists, but has not been in Washington long enough to know how to fix things. Clinton, on the other hand, has the political savvy to make change happen. Obama as vice president could focus on uniting the people under a common message and encourage people to vote senators and congressmen out of office who are resistant to change.
Obama touts universal health care, yet never tried to make it happen during his two years in the Senate. Clinton, however, tried to get universal health care passed in the 1990s. When she failed, she pushed Congress to pass the State Childen’s Health Insurance Program, which provides health care to poor children whose parents cannot afford it. Recently, she added appropriations to a bill to give better medical care to 9/11 rescue workers, so they do not have to go to Cuba with Michael Moore to get care.
Obama also wavers on foreign policy. When Gen. Petraeus testified in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama gave a 7-minute speech instead of asking questions. When the Boston Globe asked Obama if we should stay in Iraq in the event of genocide, Obama said no and added that the United States does not have a responsibility to end genocide. A few weeks later, Obama said we should unilaterally invade Pakistan – an ally of ours with nuclear weapons – if they fail to produce Osama bin Laden when our intelligence suggests he is in the country. Obama is unwilling to act unilaterally to prevent or stop genocide, yet he would invade a nuclear-armed country to kill a single man.
Hillary Clinton really does not have a lot of wiggle room to avoid making Obama vice president. Obama and Clinton pretty much split the vote in many states. Should one not choose the other, a rift could form in the Democrat Party. This would result in Obama supporters and/or Hillary Clinton supporters not showing up to vote in the general election. Should Obama refuse – possible after the bitter debate in South Carolina – John Edwards might step in. Edwards has the same message as Obama, and would be a great asset while pushing for universal health care.
If Clinton is president and Obama is vice president, the Democrat Party will have an unstoppable ticket – hopefully something both Clinton and Obama recognize. Obama’s charisma will raise people to their feet. Clinton’s political savvy will bring about the change we need and Bill Clinton’s charm will win back support from our allies. After eight years of being vice president, Obama will be ready to seek the presidency.