Hillary vs. Barack vs. Steve

Filed under: Foreign Policy, Politics — Pete Abel on July 27, 2007 @ 6:00 pm CEST

After reading that headline, you’re probably wondering: “Steve who? I don’t remember a Presidential candidate named Steve.”

Rest easy. You’re not losing your mind. At least, not for this reason.

Steve’s not a candidate, but he is an exceptionally good blogger — viz., Steve Clemons at The Washington Note — who managed yesterday (like we all do sometimes) to “step in it” when he defended Barack and took an uncharacteristically weak jab at Hillary for their respective foreign-policy answers to one of the CNN/YouTube debate questions (and Hillary’s later defense of the same). This morning, after some uproar, Steve backtracked … slightly.

At Central Sanity, I’ve offered my take on Steve’s first and second posts. (In short, if you don’t want to click over, I dissed the first one and thought he was more constructive on the second.)

Now, if you care to share, I’d be interested in your opinions on this topic, because I think it is a critically important one in the overall scheme of evaluating the slate of U.S. Presidential candidates. As I wrote in my CS post:

… we need an adult running the country, not some over-anxious kid so desperate for bullies to like him that he’s willing to go out of his way to sit at their lunch table before he first considers the big picture and takes appropriate steps to protect himself and his friends.

And yes, by “over-anxious kid” I might have very well been referring to Senator Obama.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or willfully misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid use of vulgar language as well as racial, ethnic, or religious slurs.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email.