Get Shorty
[2008-05-22 11:00]
Barack Obama has stated that, as President, he would talk to America's enemies as well as talk to its friends. Both John McCain and Hillary Clinton have criticized Obama for this stance. Clinton called Obama "irresponsible and... naive"; McCain said Obama's positions are reckless.
When this issue first surfaced, I was surprised that it was an issue at all. Having the president talk to all foreign nations, even if just to reiterate our policies and positions, seemed like a no-brainer to me -- just common sense. So, I was a bit stymied about McCain's and Clinton's point of view.
When President Bush suggested that talking to Iran would be tantamount to appeasement, my first reaction was that this was just more of Dubya's partisan fear-mongering. But it occurs to me that maybe it's not.
Maybe the reason that Dubya, Clinton and McCain are all afraid to talk to America's enemies is because they're not very good at it (talking, that is).
That reminds me of the following scene in the movie Get Shorty in which a weaselly Hollywood film producer (Harry) is coached by a slick operator (Chili) on how to deal with a loan shark regarding a new script (Mr. Lovejoy) [from imsdb.com]:
CHILI: I don't know, maybe I wasn't clear. But I thought . . . I told you to keep your mouth shut.
HARRY: I had to tell 'em something.
CHILI: Never say anything unless you have to.
You tell me you want these guys off your back. Next thing I know, you're saying yeah, maybe they can have a piece of Mr. Lovejoy. I couldn't believe my fuckin' ears.
HARRY: I said I'd think about it. What does that mean? In this town, nothing.
CHILI: That's the difference between you and me, Harry. I say what I mean. I want something from someone, I ask 'em straight out. I want Martin Weir, I go get Martin Weir. I don't fuck around with his trainer's shrink.
HARRY: His shrink's trainer.
CHILI: Take me back to my car.
In this scene, the producer makes implicit promises that he doesn't plan on keeping. To him, doing this is no big deal because he does it all the time. He also has a tendency to talk too much and, consequently, to reveal too much information.
It occurs to me that Dubya, Clinton and McCain are a little like Harry the producer in that they have a tendency to speak without any authenticity -- i.e., they say things that seem politically expedient, but which prove to have negative consequences. In light of this, it would be reckless for them to talk to unfriendly nations without a lot of preconditions and people to rein them in.
For example, at an NRA function, McCain recently criticized Obama's willingness to talk to America's enemies and then characterized Obama as believing that America has no enemies:
It would be a wonderful thing if we lived in a world where we don't have enemies. But that is not the world we live in, and until Senator Obama understands that reality, the American people have every reason to doubt whether he has the strength, judgment, and determination to keep us safe.
From a purely logical standpoint, McCain's statements are completely contradictory. McCain blasts Obama for saying that he'll talk to our enemies, which implies that he recognizes that we have enemies, and then suggests that Obama believes we have no enemies. Run-time Error.
So, either McCain deliberately and blatantly mischaracterized Obama, or McCain actually believes his own contradictory rhetoric. Both options hurt his credibility and demonstrate his complete lack of respect for a fellow American.
Similarly, Hillary Clinton has also mischaracterized Obama in order to improve her own position in the election. She too has voiced profound disrespect for Obama and his supporters, implying that he and they are unrealistic and delusional. While, at the same time, Clinton has demonstrated that she will pander for short-term gain.
As for George W. Bush, he's made so many gaffes and errors in judgment that not only has he lost his own credibility, he's thrown away America's as well.
All this goes to show that these folk are not very good at diplomacy. If these three are willing to lie about and slander a fellow American, I shudder to think what their interactions with world leaders would be like. So it probably is wise for them not to talk to people who don't like us.
Obama, on the other hand, seems to be better at not alienating and not insulting people with whom he disagrees. As a result, I think he'll be more likely to make headway with unfriendly nations (if not with their leaders) than any of the other candidates.