I really want to like Hillary Clinton. I mean I really want to like her as a fellow human being and child of God, but she and her main squeeze ain't making it very easy. Pundits (most of whom I can clearly say I don't like and am quite sure aren't human) are claiming that Barack Obama doesn't offer enough substance for their tastes (they have nothing to chew on) and some, like those in the New York Times are so eager for something to gnash over that they have posited that his drug use was manufactured (a la A Million Little Pieces) because they can't find any people who can report on having seen him impaired.

This from Ruth Holladay's fine blog:

Why is Sen. Barack Obama sweeping states and making inroads with voters who supposedly were on the fence or leaning towards Sen. Hillary Clinton? His Potomac surge, handily winning D.C., Maryland and Virginia, now means he is victorious in 23 of 35 contests, which puts him at the top of the heap in number of delegates. He's on a roll to the convention, with no end in sight.

Why? As Chris Matthews said this morning on MSNBC, Obama is the "Christmas morning" candidate; he makes us feel good about ourselves, our country and our future. He promises -- trite but true -- hope. To bring into contemporary play the words of FDR, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself," ...the only thing we have to hope for is hope itself.

Obama is just that. His considerable strength, in comparison to Clinton, is as much about what he is not as what he is. He is NOT the status quo or the legacy, not the hectoring voice, not the harsh, know-it-all "I only want what is best for you" nanny or big daddy. His policies may be superficially similar to Clinton's, but he is a new day, a new way, a fresh start. He's the kid who "got" the futility and wrong-headedness of the war; she's the adult who fell for the bullshit. [Read the rest]

Ruth's dead-on. I think we're tired of feeling bad about our president and want someone who, while competent enough to get the job done, inspires us to be more and do more.

On the business side, I've been watching the almost religious fervor over Sir Richard Branson, the British entrepreneur. An admitted dyslexic and college drop-out, he's amassed billions and done a world of good by having played to his strengths: burning curiosity, a sense of adventure, abiding passion and deep vision. He can't read a balance sheet, but has surrounded himself with the right people who can execute his ideas, turning his vision into reality. He has people around him with enough "skin in the game" that they're invested in the outcome and not just using their position as a stepping stone to the nexgt one. He has people who tell him to say "no" when he needs to.

Hillary Clinton's jibe at Barack Obama's reticence to have his staff give him paperwork before its needed and his messy desk, left me wondering whether she was running for America's CEO (responsible for vision fulfillment) or its COO (responsible for operations).

This may not make sense (it's late), but I offer it as something to chew on.

Lalita Amos's blog | login or register to post comments