Hindsight
In hindsight, after February 5, If Hillary Clinton had any strategic sense, she could have recognized that she had an opportunity to publicly cut her ties with what, in her judgment was bad advice, rise up and lead her campaign with her strengths, which are considerable. The benefit from an action like this would have been to show us things we have never seen from her: a demonstrated ability to publicly admit a mistake, a sharp eye for identifying a flawed strategy, and skill at management and correction. She would have gained supporters, another look by Obama-skeptics, and respect for taking charge. But the compounding narrative of unwise choices she has made in this campaign make me question if she has, ever had, or ever will have the skill-set to lead a country.
Barack Obama’s opponents embody exactly the kind of reactionary temperament that is dangerous in a leader. Obama continually defines what I want in a president, in part because he is able to continually adapt using his remarkable abilities to intuit what’s called for. Every experience has been a learning one for him. He’s been an organizer, a teacher, a father, a grandson, a husband, an almost-black man, an almost-white man, a black man, a privileged man, a politician, a team-mate, a loner, a traveler, a writer, a fatherless child. Oh, he indeed occasionally displays conceit, but more often than not his delusions are confined to minor vanities, like his abilities on the basketball court. No one running for President of the United States should come to the door without an ego, or enter without self-assuredness. A key characteristic a great leader must have is the ability to objectively self-examine and to recognize honest and intelligent criticism.
