Quantcast
 
 
 
Top Story
The GOP Convention: Maverick in Name Only
My Journey to the Top
 
 
Latest News
2-time champ Serena Williams back in US Open final
 
 
expand

The Power of Personality

When I talk to people in a foreign country, no matter how strange, they are always familiar to me.

By Fareed Zakaria | NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Dec 24, 2007

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: rossmorgan @ 02/13/2008 10:56:54 AM

    Comment: I believe Mr. Zakaria is echoing what Anthropologists have been saying for years. The ability to travel cultural distances can lead to more substantive and accurate views of the world. Obama's complex identity and personal biography make him a compelling candidate not only because of his international experiences as a youth, but because he emobodies many aspects of American identity. He is bi-racial, grew up poor yet attended elite institutions for his formal education. Thus, Barack Obama, in a sense, fits in everywhere and nowhere at the same time. His unique identity politics compell him to be a uniter. This is not simply rhetoric but comes from a desire to see the world through different prisms as Mr. Zakaria puts it.

  • Posted By: Zatoichi @ 01/29/2008 2:12:26 PM

    Comment: An american foreign policy based on a non-european heritage vantage point is exactly what the world needs right now. Hillary will never know the indignity of sitting in an american public cafe and have an old white lady sitting in the next table scurry away for fear of your dark color, exotic dress or foreigh toungue. This is the end of the remnants of wetern european dominated cultural imperatives which have lingered in subtle ways to continue to dictate the terms of global egalitarianism. Just as the U.S. had 2 civil wars to liberate african-amerians, so too will the citizens of former european colonies have to purge themselves of their european masters, and thank god we may now have an American president to lead the way. And yes it is intuitive understanding, mainly because it is existential - certainly John Kennedy understood about being the outsider as a catholic in his wasp dominated world of the previous century.

  • Posted By: danee41 @ 01/14/2008 1:02:01 AM

    Comment: He isn't simply saying that a person must be from another country to handle foreign affairs. He is saying that being able to personally identify with other non-Americans and "[feeling] it in your bones" is just a powerful way, not the only way.

  • Posted By: fireweed @ 01/09/2008 1:34:20 PM

    Comment: Perhaps Zakaria's PhD in international relations has made him incapable of judging the capacity of Americans to think beyond their culture? At very least, he has lost his ability to recognize and think outside of his own personal biases. His article 'The Power of Personality' is exactly the kind of ethnocentrism that he suggests himself and other non-Americans are inherently free from! The ability to see beyond one's culture is a learned skill - not a birthright. All cultures, by definition, carry emotional biases towards the ways of others, sometimes good sometimes bad. To suggest that being from some place and culture other than America, or having parents from those origins, somehow exempts you from ethnocentrism is inane.

    Ultimately the values Fareed is getting at are valid and appreciable. But I, as an American who challenges myself constantly to see beyond my culture, am offended when he, for instance, suggests that Americans are incapable of recognizing the complex cultural and psychological significance of the burqa. Sure, Americans in general have a penchant for projecting their values, for believing that we have discovered the one right way to live in democracy. But who doesn't project, really, when it comes to ideas like morality and justice?

    Any good citizen will not look at the color of a candidate's skin or the origin of their parents and assume that means something about their character or intellectual and political mettle. Trust me on this, even though I DON'T have a PhD in international relations, I know what I'm talking about.

  • Posted By: ajay4777 @ 01/08/2008 10:04:28 AM

    Comment: Theodosius
    Rather than equating the three components, shouldn't experience and identity be consideres as causal, leading to judgement depending on one's ability to draw from and apply them?
    That would mean that an ability to determine the person best suited to lead could be based on their ability to show good judgement even if the reasons behind that ability are not known. As you stated, Obama raised that question regarding Clinton. But I think both Obama and Zakaria give too much weight to the life experiences. As Zakaria admints, he could not be effective without his learned 'expertise'. His endorsement of Obama was tempered with the caveat "I never thought I'd agree with Obama" so don't be too hard on him for liking a somewhat kindred background.

    Bottom line, it takes both components with a high level of skill in using each, and supported by a nearly super-human ability to glean through and draw from those in one's advisors. I wish both candidates would read and take to heart Mr. Zakaria's writings.

  • Posted By: Theodosius @ 01/04/2008 2:55:48 PM

    Comment: I am disappointed by this article, despite being a big Zakaria fan overall. He is quite explicit in saying that Americans with extensive international exposure still will not measure up to non-native Americans in the realm of foreign policy savvy. I find this notion absurd.

    I also don't think the debate has only two positions. I would say there are three components to foreign policy savvy: either experience or identitiy or judgement. A person sharing Zakaria's personal story but with fundamentally flawed judgement would have a less intelligent foreign policy perspective than someone who had spent their entire life in a small town in Missouri or Alaska, yet had impeccable judgement.

    In any case, Obama's identity is not really like Zakaria's. Zakaria was a foreign national who spent a significant portion of his life outside the U.S.. Obama lived abroad until he was 4 years of age. I honestly don't think identity formed as a very young child forever elevates your foreign policy judgement. In fact, I find this notion absurd.

    In any case, leaving judgement out of the debate is a fatal flaw in Zakaria's article, and it is a flaw that Obama does not share. He has questioned Clinton's judgement independent of considerations of the value of identity as opposed to experience. It is odd to seem to support someone in the manner Zakaria has done so- and with such a simplistic view of what makes a solid foreign policy approach.

  • Posted By: Theodosius @ 01/04/2008 11:52:27 AM

    Comment: test

  • Posted By: Chaotician @ 01/04/2008 11:43:06 AM

    Comment: I quite agree. Nobody who wants to deal with foriegn policy of the United States should be allowed to do so who has either lived as a foreign national for at least 10 years or had immersion experience as a international american worker for at least 10 years. Both should preferably be in multiple cultures.

    I am always astonished at the bewildering and amusing misinformation so many americans have about the rest of the world. For peopels who think they can lead the world somewhere, it is usually a good idea to have some idea of where these peoples are and what some of their interest and values might be! I can tell you with strong credibility, that staying in tourist hotels at any level and doing the tourist bit for a week or 2 does not scratch the surface. It is amazing how many of our "leaders" do not even have passports, much less have traveled to any other culture.

    I have had extensive work and travel experiences in Europe and Asia and I doubt that I have much understanding of many cultures. In addition, most of the world has changed dramatically in the last 20 years; so many of our thought leaders seem to think the world looks like it did at the end of WWII...that is one thing I am sure is not true!

    Most Americans seem to think the rest of the world is just some chopped down version of rural America or else just dirt shanty towns. The cultural complexities hae no reality for America; how can we possibly assume some superior position to lead diverse peoples to some shared goal? We share nothing at all!

  • Posted By: mihon @ 01/03/2008 5:43:47 PM

    Comment: Why would you think that we should shape our direction or policies based on anything "other" than American experiences? How would you know the wants and needs of the Iowa farmer, or the kid from Compton unless your experience is based here? Its nice to have an international perspective, but it is necessary to be grounded in our own truths.

  • Posted By: BVOnewsweek @ 01/03/2008 3:56:54 AM

    Comment: The title of the article is wrong. Everybody has a personality but not everybody has life experiences which empowered him or her

  • Posted By: BVOnewsweek @ 01/03/2008 3:49:19 AM

    Comment: Every human being has a personality but not everybody get life experiences which empowered him or her..
    Adriaan H, Boon van Ostade, Bandung, Indonesia

  • Posted By: Verbatim128 @ 01/02/2008 6:16:23 PM

    Comment: piratepolly: We all have different takes about written material. Maybe you should read my comment again more carefully, and be a little less presumptious.

    Zakaria starts off by saying: ""There's a debate taking place about what matters most when making judgments about foreign policy???experience and expertise on the one hand, or personal identity on the other."" I haven't even bothered to comment on that but I will now. Neither of the choices matter most.
    What matters is HOW the foreign policy judgements are made; HOW is the knowledge from experience and expertise used so that personal identity is more than felt in the bones.

    I wrote this little paragraph some time ago, it relates well to the need to make American foreign policy reasonable and just--which I believe was at the heart of Zakaria's article--but don't think for a minute that his notion of personal identity trumps expertise, both are incomplete without this:

    A little knowledge is a dangerous thing? What about a lot of it, poorly digested?
    Knowledge which doesn???t go beyond recitation or exhibition of any amount of learning, knowledge with little understanding, that is the dangerous thing. Without personal judgement filtering and sorting, interpreting and further thought inspiring, all that knowledge is not just dangerous but deadly. It is, many times, what they shamelessly call ???expertise???-- a blank cheque to screw up.

    Finally, thank you for translating Zakaria's sarcastic humor for me. Read the article carefully to see his heavy use of credentials, such as here: ""I've spent my life acquiring formal expertise on foreign policy. I've got fancy degrees, have run research projects, taught in colleges and graduate schools, edited a foreign-affairs journal, advised politicians and businessmen, written columns and cover stories, and traveled hundreds of thousands of miles all over the world."" I know, he just discovered that his personal identity has rounded up nicely all that expertise.

  • Posted By: piratepolly @ 01/02/2008 2:19:53 AM

    Comment: verbatim128-- Zakaria DOES feel it in his gut. That's his whole point. His last comment is a bit of sarcastic humor. Maybe you should read the article again more carefully.

  • Posted By: ODOYO @ 12/30/2007 7:06:36 PM

    Comment: India is paralysed now before the nukes of Pakistan.Indians can only do one thing that is pray to God.And the impression about Pakistan that when Nukes are with Islamic Possible Government what happens ,The answer is any Any Religious leader ,the Head of the Government will immediately diffuse the Nukes and dismental the Programm because in Islam Nukes are Haram,Prohibited

  • Posted By: Verbatim128 @ 12/29/2007 6:30:49 PM

    Comment: "" Trust me on this. As a Ph.D. in international relations, I know what I'm talking about.""
    What a pathetic way to end a plea for making American foreign policy reasonable and just : "being able to feel it in your bones". Why not in the gut?

    Yes, we trust you and your PhD just as much as we trust Condi and her pH.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/27/2007 11:58:10 PM

    Comment: Kashmir has now come to the forefront Zakaria. I am anxiously awaiting your article on al queda and their alliance with the kashmir rebels. Will India use it s arsernal on its neighbor if extremist elements take a hold of the government.

  • Posted By: b56sigma @ 12/27/2007 7:25:53 PM

    Comment: Who are these people like Zakaria who are transplants from other cultures and want to use the United States as an adopted country to hasten the end of the U.S. as we know it and transform the way we deal with third world countries? The U.S. literally stopped the most violent assault on freedom in WWII and then rebuilt the countries we destroyed. We are onew of the youngest countries and the oldest Democracies at the same time. What we do not need at this stage of our development is a massive influx of immigrants from turbulent and failed societies telling us how to do business. I don't care how many degrees Mr Zakaria has or how he fluffs up his resume or how warm and fuzzy he gets on his Gulliver travels - if he didn't come here to become an American and defend this country and leave his Indian village - then maybe he should go back home. I served in Vietnam, Somalia, and Iraq - and have people in my family who died in both World Wars - my generation is tired of pseudo intellectual immigrants using the United States like a house of prostitution for economic and social gain and then having the unmitigated gall to immediately begin criticizing the very government and people who embraced you. What did you bring to the U.S., Mr. Zakarias? Why did you come here? There is nothing in your article that even makes a passing reference to the people in this country who welcomed you.

  • Posted By: ODOYO @ 12/26/2007 4:51:57 AM

    Comment: Who has given Israel the right to have nuclear weapons and strike the other nations even now with nuckear weapons to launch its expansionist theology.And all other factors including Iran are only areaction to that.
    If Israel guarantees not hiting the niebours and stop expantionist policy no one needs to produce destroyers like WMD.While every nation in the world is equal.whether it is USA with super power opr Leichtenstein in Western Europe with 35000 people.They have equal rights.Either all should not have WMDs or why all should not all?

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/26/2007 2:23:44 AM

    Comment: Iran does not have the capability of striking Israel with a nuclear attack. There all talk and NO weapons just like Hussein. Does a country have the legal right under international law to strike a nation if they have not been attacked? In fact, attacking Iran does not solve the problem of Russia's vunerable nuclear arIsernal. IF you really want to solve a problem you have to go to deal with the source of the problem which is Russian and it's breakaway Republics. They do not seem to mind sharing their technologies with the highest bidders. Terrorist will take a page out of the Chinese playbook; why re-invent the wheel when we can just steal it and put our sticker on it. We continue to invent that certain countries in The Middle East have the military capbilities to compete with Israel. We are completely taking our eyes of the real threat; the source of nuclear proliferation; China and Russia. All the Iranians want is attention. The regimes only chance is AntiAmericanism.

  • Posted By: ODOYO @ 12/25/2007 2:28:36 PM

    Comment: I THINK ALL THE AMERICANS ARE ILLEGAL IMMEGERANTS FROM EUROPE!

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/25/2007 3:56:54 AM

    Comment: Everyone wants to see an image OF THEMSELVES IN THE WIHITE HOUSE' IS OBAMA NOT THE CLOSEST RACE TO ZAKARIA. WITHOUT GOING INTO A BIG ERSONALITY EVALUATION, IT MAKES SENSE THAT OBAMA IS A FOREIGNER' S DREAM, THE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT SEES AMNESTY, THE DISENFRANCHISED FOREIGN OLICY EXTERT' FEELS INCLUDED, AND THE DREAM OF UNIFICATION IS REALIZED WHERE EVERYONE CAN REALIZE THE AMERICAN DREAM FROM ANY CAST. tHE REALITY IS THAT ONE MAN CANNOT FULFILL EVERYONE'S DREAMS, IT IS A MOVEMENT' LIKE CIVIL RIGHTS, MILLIONS OF HUMANS FROM ALL RACES DEMANDING A CHANGE. ANTIWAR MOVEMENTS ARE THE CLOSEST THING, THEY LIFTED THE DEMOCRATS INTO CONGRESS, LITTLE DID THEY KNOW THAT THEY WERE VOTING IN THE SAME FORCES.. iNSURANCE COR, DRUG COM, WEALTHY ESTABLISHMENTS, ALL RUN THE MACHINERY. THEY HAVE TO WANT CHANGE, WHY ON EARTH WOULD THEY WANT CHANGE, THEY MAKE BILLIONS EVERYDAY AND MAINTAIN US DUMB.

  • Posted By: rsbens @ 12/24/2007 6:23:35 PM

    Comment: I read Obama's books in order to better understand him and his personality. Mr. Zakaria has captured Obama's person quite aptly and clearly defines why Obama has the qualities needed to lead this country while showing the rest of the world that we are ready to rejoin the forces of good.

  • Posted By: Dr.Rauch @ 12/23/2007 4:33:15 AM

    Comment: I think Obama's Shift of International Terror and Threat Counter Policy from Iran is based opon his experienced and knowledge after living in Asia and closely studying what Iranis actually think.Iran and Irani people have never been a threat to people of USA.Because they have acontrolled school of thought which is commanded by a highly learned supreme leader who can not allow them to do act of terror agaist people individually or following some self interpreteing religious leaders .It is the foundation of the Faith in Iran.While the supreme Command may never allow the people to carry the attacks of terror on people because it wil negate his position as afaith ledaer which promises to protect Humanity and follows Imam Ali who treated the Jews accordimg to Torat,Christians according to Bible and the Muslims acording to Koran.

  • Posted By: lsindo @ 12/22/2007 5:34:47 PM

    Comment: Since I began living abroad over 12 years ago, my views on my own country, the U.S. have changed greatly. And I believe in a good way. I am now much more open minded as I have been educated by my international surroundings and seen the world outside of my own country. When I go back to the U.S. to visit I am apalled by the media's view of the world. And I do blame the media is it is the only outlet for most Americans to see the world byond their own.

  • Posted By: lsindo @ 12/22/2007 5:28:50 PM

    Comment: I found Mr. Zakaria's article very agreeable in many points. I have spent 13 years living abroad, both in Europe and currently in Indonesia. When I go back to America and discuss politics with my family and friends, I am appalled at their ignorance on the rest of the world. What information they do have is based on some sort of rednecked view that frankly is embarrassing. I believe there is no better way to know your country than to go outside of it and see youur culture from the outside looking in

  • Posted By: shahnagri @ 12/22/2007 4:52:44 PM

    Comment: Farid has been my favourite 'Fancy writer' for Newsweek since my Graduation days at Karachi University.His aproach is always interesting ,his notion on Obama with examples of a German Jew turned American Mr. Kassinger ,Mr.Khalilzade or some other immegerants who gave mervolous and efficient nput is beyond any question.But to be apresident,it makes more difficult for aperson who is immigrant.Because the President of America is the President;who sometimes may go at extreme nationalism to prove his nationalism with the host country.Look at Austrian Hitler who went crazy in proving himself a German nationalist and gave Germany the extreme wrath.
    Mauj Alvi

  • Posted By: umoja @ 12/22/2007 2:45:57 PM

    Comment: jojoc10 and steve02001: Thank you for 'getting' Fareed Zakaria's point of view. He points out in a self-deprecating way that you do not have to have a ph. D (and if you do, it only sustains you to a certain point) in order to understand the other side of the world and foreign policy options and prescriptions associated with it. In fact, he proposes idea that the best and viable approach is actually throwing out any "elitist" approach in favor of a "personal identity", as in being able to identify yourself with the other side in the foreign- or global policy equation. Those with this predisposition would more than likely be successful in the contemporary state of global affairs. Culture, personal identity, and a global interdependency worldview always tromps any "elitist" prescription in foreign or global policy. And that is what Fareed Zakaria actually said.

  • Posted By: umoja @ 12/22/2007 2:43:36 PM

    Comment: jojoc10 and steve02001: Thank you for 'getting' Fareed Zakaria's point of view. He points out in a self-deprecating way that you do not have to have a ph. D (and if you do, it only sustains you to a certain point) in order to understand the other side of the world and foreign policy options and prescriptions associated with it. In fact, he proposes idea that the best and viable approach is actually throwing out any "elitist" approach in favor of a "personal identity", as in being able to identify yourself with the other side in the foreign- or global policy equation. Those with this predisposition would more than likely be successful in the contemporary state of global affairs. Culture, personal identity, and a global interdependency worldview always tromps any "elitist" prescription in foreign or global policy. And that is what Fareed Zakaria actually said.

  • Posted By: umoja @ 12/22/2007 2:43:02 PM

    Comment: jojoc10 and steve02001: Thank you for 'getting' Fareed Zakaria's point of view. He points out in a self-deprecating way that you do not have to have a ph. D (and if you do, it only sustains you to a certain point) in order to understand the other side of the world and foreign policy options and prescriptions associated with it. In fact, he proposes idea that the best and viable approach is actually throwing out any "elitist" approach in favor of a "personal identity", as in being able to identify yourself with the other side in the foreign- or global policy equation. Those with this predisposition would more than likely be successful in the contemporary state of global affairs. Culture, personal identity, and a global interdependency worldview always tromps any "elitist" prescription in foreign or global policy. And that is what Fareed Zakaria actually said.

  • Posted By: jojoc10 @ 12/22/2007 12:48:58 PM

    Comment: jimslimo: I think you can take that last remark in which he references his degree another way. I would like to think he mentioned that sarcastically as a jab at himself, just as he takes a jab at all of those who claim to fully comprehend all foreign policy matters (which in his estimation would be impossible). He credits Mr Obama for his "power of personality," all the while being self-depricating saying that despite all of his fancy degrees, he still does not hold of all of the answers. I think it would require you to re-read his article to understand the point he actually emphasizes in the line that you have pulled out as "elitist."

  • Posted By: jimslimo @ 12/22/2007 11:21:52 AM

    Comment: Always a pleasure to read Dr. Zakaria's articles. This one was terrific until the last 2 sentences which sounded so elitist. To wit: "Trust me on this. As a Ph.D. in International relations, I know what I'm talking about."

  • Posted By: opus @ 12/22/2007 7:36:52 AM

    Comment: I would never deny that Americans tend to see the world through an American telescope, but let's not forget we don't have to go to the mountain, the mountain is here. Our nation is also uniquely filled with diversity, whether it is accepted or not. As for Mr. Zakaria's "She's been involved in foreign policy for eight years in the White House (though in a sideways fashion as First Lady) ", "defense" of Senator Clinton, it's quite clear he's speaking from his limited gender view. So far, we are holding Senator Clinton up to the male model we are used to. As a female, she offers a unique perspective no other American leader has, and in my book, her gender is her biggest asset. And yes, she does have Bill. And Bill has Hillary. Amazingly there are men in power who view their spouses as true partners and equals. John Edwards is also one of these men, yet when Elizabeth is out on the trail, the media puts her in her place as merely a spouse. I see Fareed's comments as more of the same b.s. we've been getting from the media for years - artificial and without substance.

  • Posted By: opus @ 12/22/2007 7:24:24 AM

    Comment: "She's been involved in foreign policy for eight years in the White House (though in a sideways fashion as First Lady) and then seven years as a senator. Most of the Democratic Party's blue-chip foreign-policy advisers support her. Plus, she has Bill."

    Quite the petty and xenophobic comment. While I would argue that Laura Bush fits the "sideways fashion of First Lady" description Zakaria offers, I would never put Hillary Clinton in the same category. In fact, as First Ladies go, she's in the same ilk as Eleanor Roosevelt. I give kudos to men like Bill and John Edwards who have the courage and conviction of viewing their wives as equals and partners, rather than trophies and arm candy. Senator Clinton's experience as a successful woman in a country such as ours makes her uniquely qualified and insightful into the complexities of other nations. There are differences in gender, and so far, Hillary is being compared to the male model, which, quite frankly has gotten us in the mess we are now. There are strenghts she brings that are ignored for fear of getting into the gender debate, but now is the perfect time for this discussion to take place.

  • Posted By: steve02001 @ 12/21/2007 6:09:47 PM

    Comment: Having been born in another country, but having lived most of my life in the U.S., I can see Mr. Zakaria's point; it gives you a different prespective on things, you're not as xenophobic, you're more open to other foreign views. I always chuckle when people, who have never been outside their home State, much less the US, say that the US is the greatest country in the world. George W. never traveled abroad much and see the mess he got us into by not understading the other side? The world is getting smaller and we need someone that can see the other side's point of view; that someone is BARACK OABAMA!

  • Posted By: Laila @ 12/21/2007 5:03:34 PM

    Comment: There is something disatrously wrong with America when someone like Fareed Zakaria can become Editor of Newsweek and writes, " Zalmay Khalilzad was, by common consent, a superb ambassador in Afghanistan and Iraq." What planet does Mr. Zakaria live on? As a Pakistani who knows Afghanistan very well (never mind that I went to an Ivy leage school), I can tell you that the seeds of the current mess that Afghanistan is in today, were sown by Mr. Khalizad who failed to form even a working relationship with Pakistan - the key U.S. ally. His tenure in Iraq too was an unmitigated disaster and saw the rise of pro-Iran cleric Muqta-Al Sadr as a powerful leader. Perhaps, Mr. Zakaria needs to do some on-site internship in these troubled parts of the world to get a dose of reality.

  • Posted By: Laila @ 12/21/2007 5:02:49 PM

    Comment: There is something disatrously wrong with America when someone like Fareed Zakaria can become Editor of Newsweek and writes, " Zalmay Khalilzad was, by common consent, a superb ambassador in Afghanistan and Iraq." What planet does Mr. Zakaria live on? As a Pakistani who knows Afghanistan very well (never mind that I went to an Ivy leage school), I can tell you that the seeds of the current mess that Afghanistan is in today, were sown by Mr. Khalizad who failed to form even a working relationship with Pakistan - the key U.S. ally. His tenure in Iraq too was an unmitigated disaster and saw the rise of pro-Iran cleric Muqta-Al Sadr as a powerful leader. Perhaps, Mr. Zakaria needs to do some on-site internship in these troubled parts of the world to get a dose of reality.

  • Posted By: umoja @ 12/21/2007 12:05:32 AM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment
    I do not understand why so many people could miss what Fareed Zakaria is trying to point out here. If you are a minority in a country like the United States of America and you are a first or second generation with strong and dorminant cultural link to a different country or people, let alone being a product of a racially mixed family like our future president Sen. Barack Obama. Obama's background is a thing to be envied, especially in the 21st century where global interdependency is becoming a local neigborhood affair. Think what can be be acheived diplomatically with leaders like Obama in power? The balance of power is shifting from the West to the East (China and India on the fast lane) and for America to leverage her power in this new century, a new perspective and consciousness is needed to direct foreign - or I should say global policy. Dr. Fareed Zakaria, keep on keeping on educating us on these new global paradigms even though it's too deep for others to understand.

  • Posted By: Mwalimu @ 12/20/2007 10:57:22 PM

    Comment: Before Fahreed Zakaria praises Henry Kissinger, he should interview Chile???s president, Veronica Michelle Bachelet Jeria, who, along with both her parents, were tortured by General Augusto Pinochet, the military dictator who seized power in a coup that deposed Chile???s democratically elected government. Kissinger engineered the coup to brought Pinochet to power.Thousands of Chileans were tortured and executed because of Kissinger. In fact, Kissinger actually favored anti-communist, ???authoritarian??? regimes, and many of these regimes had worse records of human rights??? violations than the communist regimes in the so-called Evil Empire. Perhaps Zakara can find out from Bachelet what sort of torture she endured, and perhaps he should subject himself to the same torture, just to see how it feels. Zakara wrote a pompous article about the way people on other countries see America. Very well. How do the millions of people who were tortured in the name of the American way of life feel about America? How do all the innocent people tortured in Abu Ghraib by Americans feel about America? Are these questions that Zakaria cares to examine? I realize that Zakaria has a PhD in international relations, but Pangloss in Candide had PhD as well. As a retired school teacher, I spent a whole life time trying to undo the messes made by misguided ???reforms??? perpetrated by PhD???s in Education, most of whom couldn???t survive a week in a classroom in my school. In many cases, PhD is just another name for educated fool.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/20/2007 10:11:30 PM

    Comment: Let's be fair to Obama. He has served 8 years in the Illinois State Senate prior to becoming a Illinois Senator. That is like being Governor for eight years. He has over a decade of elected experience. He started from nothing and was voted in and re-elected by his constituency because of his steady progress as a soltions oriented representative. As a Senator in Washington D.C he has served on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, In addition, he is a member of the the Foreign Relations Committee and served the Veterans Affairs Committee and In 2005 and 2006, he served on the Environment and Public Works Committee as well. Obama has always exceled beyond his years and his peers have always looked to him for leadership. At Harvard he had to be twice as good as everyone else in order to attain the status as the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.

    Hillary Clinton rise is much different than Obama's. From the time she was a student she has been involved in politics. She served as first lady; and then as a Senator. She never represented Illinois but rather New York. She has gained invaluable experience in the White House and is a successful Senator. I think the fact that Obama had no WHITE HOUSE PLATFORM TO REACH TO THIS POINT IS A TESTIMONY to his Wisdom, Skill and Determination. You cannot be "inexperienced" and Have OBAMA's Credentials.

  • Posted By: jojoc10 @ 12/20/2007 7:27:43 PM

    Comment: CS4455, I think you completely missed the point of this article. Perhaps you need to go back and re-read the message he is trying to present to you. Moreover, maybe you just need to go back to school so that you too can one day understand him.

  • Posted By: hody1953 @ 12/19/2007 12:14:28 PM

    Comment: I agree with your viewpoint on this matter commpletey. It is the same with Christains not being able to understand how non-Christains feel opressed in this country. The Christains can't understand the problem because they do not see all of the overt references to Christianity. As someone that has been on both sides of the issue (I was an evangelical preacher in the deep South, and now I am what most would call an agnostic) I can better understand the problems.

  • Posted By: GHOST OF THOMAS PAYNE @ 12/19/2007 8:56:03 AM

    Comment: Obama has an instintive ability to separate trash from wisdom as he listens to his advisors... Add that to his multivaried background, his very high IQ - and you have a RARE, PENETRATING mind, rarely seen in those we elect. Among the candidates, only OBAMA has the tenacity and vision to FREE US from those who run most other campaigns on either side - and begin to respond to the cry which is HOPEFULL still deeply engraved on our souls, indeed our very bones: GIVE ME LIBERTY.... LET US BREATHE PROUDLY AGAIN !

  • Posted By: cs4455 @ 12/19/2007 8:54:08 AM

    Comment: What is this, a resume or a news commentary? Looks and smells like a resume to me. My biography, my degrees, my phd. It's more about the author than Obama, the presidential campaign or anything else. Apparently he's an international mastermind with very little in common with the rest of us, and very little upon which to relate to us, which ultimately leaves his words, interpretations and opinions moot - at least as far as a significant piece of news commentary is concerned. As intelligent as the author believes he is I think it is unfortunate he used this piece to voice his credentials instead of writing something interesting or relevant to the Newsweek readership.

  • Posted By: ademeyer @ 12/19/2007 8:07:34 AM

    Comment: I don't know, Fareed. I want to vote for Obama, for all the reasons you stated, but often, after I see him speaking I think "uh, noooo." I honestly don't think its race, or politics. I want to vote for this elegant, liberal guy, believe me, its just something in his temperament tells me he's not cut out for the brutal world of Presidential politics. There is a reason you chose academia and journalism, no? I don't see you aiming for the position of business CEO either. Temperament.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/19/2007 6:12:54 AM

    Comment: THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY. WHO's side DO YOU BELIEVE.

  • Posted By: South Carolina Joe @ 12/19/2007 5:40:40 AM

    Comment: WAKE UP AMERICA!!! Neither Obama nor Hillary are even close to being "PRESIDENTIAL MATERIAL"!!! For that matter, neither is that father of DOG TORTURER/MURDERER Mike HUCKABEE! This is our country's future we're dealing with!

  • Posted By: rockefeller @ 12/18/2007 11:59:41 PM

    Comment: ever since, i have always trusted Mr. zakarias judgements. on foreign remedies and everything and so far i can say, HE IS MAKING SENSE! compared to those.... u know what i mean...

  • Posted By: rockefeller @ 12/18/2007 11:59:31 PM

    Comment: ever since, i have always trusted Mr. zakarias judgements. on foreign remedies and everything and so far i can say, HE IS MAKING SENSE! compared to those.... u know what i mean...

  • Posted By: rockefeller @ 12/18/2007 11:58:48 PM

    Comment: ever since, i have always trusted Mr. zakarias judgements. on foreign remedies and everything and so far i can say, HE IS MAKING SENSE! compared to those.... u know what i mean...

  • Posted By: rockefeller @ 12/18/2007 11:58:10 PM

    Comment: ever since, i have always trusted Mr. zakarias judgements. on foreign remedies and everything and so far i can say, HE IS MAKING SENSE! compared to those.... u know what i mean...

  • Posted By: sirius13 @ 12/18/2007 8:30:44 PM

    Comment: Fareed is spot on with his comments. Though I'm sure that his PhD goes a long way in providing the structure towards his exceptional understanding of International affairs. What he does not mention is that his exceptional early education and formative years contributed to this understanding much more than his study towards his PhD.

  • Posted By: sirius13 @ 12/18/2007 8:27:18 PM

    Comment: Enter Your Comment

  • Posted By: bluz13 @ 12/18/2007 4:35:03 PM

    Comment: With you all due respect, you continue to write articles are more opinion and sound hollow. There's no substance or depth in what you write. You are greatly mistaken to believe that as an Indian-American living in the US (there are 3 million more like yourself), you can claim "I know intimately the attraction, the repulsion, the hopes, the disappointments that the other 95 percent of humanity feels when thinking about this country". Is India's population 95 percent of humanity or have you travelled to every country in the world? Can you, for instance, elucidate why is America fighting in Iraq? Can you use your PhD to tell us why Pakistan and Bangladesh are failed states but not Malaysia and Indonesia? You sure know what you are talking about but regrettably it does little to add to our knowledge.

  • Posted By: Trinity_Lee @ 12/18/2007 1:02:14 PM

    Comment: America will steadily be on the decline as a world power and influence if we do not have a President who has the eyes to see America the way it is perceived by million upon millions of outsiders. This type of sensitivity of vision can not come from someone who has been diluted by a stagnant thought process and pattern known as ???Old Washington???.

    This article is right in the fact that having someone as Commander and Chief who knows innately how America is viewed by those that are not American is as invaluable trait during these and coming times. A former president was right in referring that Obama would be a gamble, I say, who wouldn???t be especially if they were really about change.

  • Posted By: Soop @ 12/18/2007 11:32:18 AM

    Comment: So, pale face can't possibly understand international issues or have solutions? US foreign aid, from both the government and private donations, has never been higher. But we are still hated? I think everyone knows why this is.

    Vote Democratic so at least we don't have to hear about this for a few years. After all, did you hear much about the homeless, the poor, the economic gap during the Clinton years? Didn't take long after Jan. 2001 for these old problems to crop right back up. Surprise surprise.

  • Posted By: Soop @ 12/18/2007 11:27:08 AM

    Comment: Soooo, pale face can't possibly understand international matters? US international aide, both from the government and private citizens, has never been higher. Yet we are allegedly roundly hated. I think everyone knows the answer.
    Vote Democratic just so we don't have to hear about these problems for a few years. Just like you rarely heard about poverty the homeless or during Clinton's years.

  • Posted By: valentim @ 12/18/2007 10:58:15 AM

    Comment: That's exactly one of the main problem with Obama : he "thinks" with his 'bones' and, in my opinion, that's dangerous for a President. For instance: on the Iraq resolution all others Senators, including Edwards, after receiving the information, voted for the war. Obama, without having received the complete information, took the position of beng against the war. How could he be against ( or for) if he haven't got the information? ( and "en passant",if you don't have the same information you cannot accuse the others of beng wrong , it's not intellectually honest). When President, how will he decide? Based on his 'bones'? The probability of getting it right will be very slim, and you, being a Ph.D. should know it. I bet that your Ph.D. is much more relatedwith hard work and brains than with bones. But I understand you : each time I go to a movie and I begin to move on my seat, this means to me that the movie is not good. But I'm not a movie critic nor a President.

  • Posted By: climbmts1 @ 12/18/2007 10:57:58 AM

    Comment: Although, I was born an American, my parents were immigrants from Italy. Before coming to the US, they lived through the Depression and WWII there, and then lived in Argentina for a number of years in a house that had a dirt floor. I learned to speak Italian, before I learned English. The stories that my parents told me about their lives before coming here created the foundation of my personality. This background along with my ability to speak another language differentiated me from my contemporary childhood friends. My worldview was larger than their's, encompassing not only my local community and my country, but that of the old country as well. No doubt, these two things created a strong desire in me to travel to visit other countries and experience their cultures, since I knew that the world was bigger than just the United States. I've been fortunate enough to travel to Italy a number of times to see my relatives, and have visited numerous other countries as well. Not being trapped in an American-centric mentality, I've generally enjoyed my travels and constantly analyze events from more than just the US media perspective (which is extremely US-centric and status quo reinforcing). By contrast, I find most of my contemporaries, my fellow workers and neighbors, seem to have very little interest in the rest of the world and have traveled very little. I thank my parents, because they planted the roots that made me a world citizen, not just an american citizen. They opened the world for me.

  • Posted By: SAQIB @ 12/18/2007 10:51:03 AM

    Comment: THE article power of personality although in submissive tone gives good counsel to the formers and reformers of the American policy towards the world.The time has come to stop and ponder over the shortcomings and achirvements of the past century and formulate a new policy according to the situation on the ground as has been reffered by the writer.The whole world is waiting for the outcome of the elections that would surely be the trendsetters of the new American foreign policy

  • Posted By: jforauer @ 12/18/2007 10:09:15 AM

    Comment: I like this article. But where was Fareed's 'insight' when he decided to support the invasion of Iraq? I felt from my years of living abroad that I had a different perspective on the world i.e. that invading Iraq was probably a bad idea. If Fareed can be wrong and Obama right on this issue, how helpful can this be? Hillary still has that Washington political infighting experience to push the beast forward.

  • Posted By: runninrabbit @ 12/18/2007 9:27:59 AM

    Comment: When judging Hillary and Barack, one can judge the experience-to-outcome ratio. Hillary may have traveled the world as first lady, but she still got hoodwinked by Bush on Iraq. Obama's world citizenship may trace to his formative years, but he seems to have deeper instincts for when he is being hoodwinked. In development, there are often critical periods when things need to form by a particular time. Hillary is over the hill for developing well tuned radar for subterfuge, and we have an expensive and deadly war to prove it. Any good manager knows to choose for the track record of good decisions, not the years on the resume.

  • Posted By: ocholaphilip @ 12/18/2007 8:47:47 AM

    Comment: I agree with Zakaria. I happen to have a similar background and I have interacted with thousands of Americans of differant cultural background and at various educational levels; I have watched political debates involving international affairs on TV; I have listened to the current President fielding questions on foreign policy. One thing baffles me: How can such a powerful country be inhabited by citizens who are so ignorant of what is happening beyond the borders of their country? In extreme cases I have met people who don't know and are not bothered by what is happening in other American States. In terms of foreign policy,Hillary knows nothing compared to what Obama knows; Obama has lived it.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/18/2007 4:31:21 AM

    Comment: Let's be fair to Obama. He has served 8 years in the Illinois State Senate prior to becoming a Illinois Senator. That is like being Governor for eight years. He has over a decade of elected experience. He started from nothing and was voted in and re-elected by his constituency because of his steady progress as a soltions oriented representative. As a Senator in Washington D.C he has served on the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, In addition, he is a member of the the Foreign Relations Committee and served the Veterans Affairs Committee and In 2005 and 2006, he served on the Environment and Public Works Committee as well. Obama has always exceled beyond his years and his peers have always looked to him for leadership. At Harvard he had to be twice as good as everyone else in order to attain the status as the first African American president of the Harvard Law Review.

    Hillary Clinton rise is much different than Obama's. From the time she was a student she has been involved in politics. She served as first lady; and then as a Senator. She never represented Illinois but rather New York. She has gained invaluable experience in the White House and is a successful Senator. I think the fact that Obama had no WHITE HOUSE PLATFORM TO REACH TO THIS POINT IS A TESTIMONY to his Wisdom, Skill and Determination. You cannot be "inexperienced" and Have OBAMA's Credentials.

  • Posted By: ChristopherArns @ 12/18/2007 1:06:49 AM

    Comment: Nicky should pick up a history book. He/she might do well to remember these two guys:

    1) George Washington. Experience: Lost 8 of 12 battles he fought in the American Revolutionary War. Result: Still won the one that mattered. Became "Father" of his country.

    2) Abraham Lincoln. Experience: Served 2 years as a Congressman. Result: Still managed to save the Union.

    Perhaps "experience" is less important than some think. Maybe personality and leadership are not learned but simply present in the right individuals. And perhaps Obama qualifies.

  • Posted By: NickyK33 @ 12/17/2007 11:18:38 PM

    Comment: Unfortunatel, Obama does not have enough experience to be President. Never in our history have we elected a 2 year Senator, every other President has had more experience. Therefore, the Democrats cannot win the whitehouse should Obama become the nominee. Every Republican has more experience than Obama.

    I for one - want a sure thing, so I will be voting for Hillary clinton

  • Posted By: NickyK33 @ 12/17/2007 11:15:56 PM

    Comment: Too bad he doesn't have any experience to be the President. Charming - just ineffective. Maybe in another 8 years.

  • Posted By: monicalewinsky69 @ 12/17/2007 10:26:55 PM

    Comment: Did the Clintons sick their minions onto this discussion thread as well? Seems she can' win it for herself so she has to rely on her husband and others to pick fights for her.

    Bravo Fareed on a thoughtful column. Barack Obama is exactly what this country (and the world) needs right now. Enough of the Clintons already. She doesn't deserve it anyway. It's time for a *real* real change

  • Posted By: justalibre @ 12/17/2007 9:58:34 PM

    Comment: Maybe Fareed's vast personal experience informs his foreign policy judgements. But there is an enormous difference between the cosmopolitan upbringing of Fareed Zakaria and that of the presidential candidate. Obama lived overseas for just a few years when he was a very small child. That, by itself, hardly gives him the background to become president of the United States. The rest of his resume, by the way, is also woefully sufficient.

  • Posted By: justalibre @ 12/17/2007 9:54:26 PM

    Comment: Maybe Fareed's vast personal experience informs his foreign policy judgements. But Obama lived overseas until he was 4 years old. That, by itself, hardly gives him the background to become president of the United States. The rest of his resume is also not sufficient.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 6:47:02 PM

    Comment: To; thibaud you have made interesting comments. I think Zakaria was talking too much about his own experience. In a way he represents the 95% of the world that is apparently disenfranchised with America. He is desperate for a Candidate, as we all are, to bring unity and peace. The Bush Administration has sparked fear around the world. This is not necessarily a "bad thing". WHy? Bush softened them up for the next democratic President of the United States. The world now realizes what happens when you attack the WORLD"S ONLY SUPERPOWER.

  • Posted By: t_thibaud @ 12/17/2007 5:41:56 PM

    Comment: This has to be one of the sillier Zakaria pieces I've ever read. Obama's not only not a foreigner, he doesn't even speak a single foreign language! Sheesh... I'm a Democrat, but I'll be the first to recognize that the Utah mormon in this race has more face to face experience in talking with, listening to and persuading foreigners-- in their own language-- than Obama does.

    The notion that Obama has any unique insight into foreign cultures, let alone any far-reaching knowledge or experience of interstate relations, is a joke. Prior to a couple years ago, the dude spent his ENTIRE adult life in Morningside Heights, Chicago, and Springfield, Illinois.

    Obama's skin contains more melanin than the average US pol, fine. BFD. He's not a foreigner, not even close. His time spent abroad was as a small child. He may well have deep memories of Indonesian food, or schoolyard games, or the particular look and feel of a madrassah, but I doubt his sojourn gave him anything in the way of insight into Southeast Asian interstate relations.

    Now compare Obama's overseas experience with that of recent US presidents and presidential candidates:

    John McCain: 5 years surrounded by Vietnamese captors, several more years in the middle of a southeast asian war in a former French colony, a war that also involved the US, the USSR, th PRC and Australia. McCain has probably spent another year in toto in fact-finding and other official travels to Asia, the middle east, and Europe.

    Dwight Eisenhower: assistant military adviser to the Philippine government, 1935-1939. Various senior military posts in the Asian, European and African theatres, 1941-44. Supreme Allied Commander for Europe, 1944-45, Supreme Commander for NATO, 1951.

    Jack Kennedy and John Kerry : combat experience over several years in the Asian or European theatres. Multiple official visits to those regions. Family ties to prominent or well-connected foreign families in Britain and Portugal. Fluency in foreign languages: Kerry was fluent in French, Kennedy spoke passable German.

    Other presidents and presidential candidates who had more experience than Obama include GHW Bush (Ambassador to China, combat experience in the European theater); Bill Clinton and Bill Bradley (Rhodes scholars at Oxford); Bob Dole, George McGovern, Bob Kerrey (combat experience in Europe and Asia).

    Fareed, I know Obama comes across as a brotha', but please. Don't insult your readers' intelligence.

  • Posted By: CFR999 @ 12/17/2007 5:22:15 PM

    Comment: Who an ambassador personally identifies with or relates to may have some bearing on his or her qualifications, but placing this artificial fork so high in your argument - expertise vs personal identity - makes little sense. Your sentiment is well taken: seeing our homeland as outsiders us is a percept too few foreign policy specialists have in their toolkits. Our current president is a prime example. But it's only faintly provocative (and not very constructive) to set a split so high in your argument that forces us to choose between personality identity and expertise. This duality is academic, theoretical hokum. I want both and more.

  • Posted By: rcglad @ 12/17/2007 4:47:31 PM

    Comment: I wouldn't vote for you for president either. All those CEO's that you mentioned also have experience that prepared them for the job. I lived over seas as well. Does that make me qualified to be president? Of course not and its quite telling that you didn't actually discuss Mr. Obama's qualifications. In fact, you only seemed to talk about yourself, which strikes me as a little odd.

  • Posted By: Anduril919 @ 12/17/2007 4:26:32 PM

    Comment: Forgive me if I express my incredulity. Obama's understanding of foreign affairs as a 6 year old trumps the foreign affairs experience of somebody who actually did the work? This is an unbelievable bending over backwards to deflect criticism of Obama's lack of experience. Face it. Obama is a lightweight and the most inexperienced person to seek the nomination since World War II.

  • Posted By: Anduril919 @ 12/17/2007 4:25:54 PM

    Comment: Forgive me if I express my incredulity. Obama's understanding of foreign affairs as a 6 year old trumps the foreign affairs experience of somebody who actually did the work? This is an unbelievable bending over backwards to deflect criticism of Obama's lack of experience. Face it. Obama is a lightweight and the most inexperienced person to seek the nomination since World War II.

  • Posted By: Maariyaa @ 12/17/2007 3:04:58 PM

    Comment: Home grown Americans regardless of their Ivy League diplomas tend to miss mundane and nuance in foreign cultures whereas those of us who have been exposed into other cultures can examine and sometimes appreciate unspoken gestures when dealing with people in other parts of the world.

    • Posted By: paddu317 @ 12/17/2007 15:48:23

      Comment: So? That is too general to counter (I am not a homegrown American and it is easy to agree with what is said). The question is how do candidates translate such experience into policy and governance. How successful will they be given their track record in related activities? My point is that identity, intellect, motivation, work ethic all have to be there. I would settle for intellect , motivation, and work ethic ( and a superb secretary of state, a la Zakaria) if identity is absent -- not the other way around.
      Taking the assertion to an extreme, then home grown Americans do not exhibit good foreign policy judgment as presidential candidates or presidents? Let us not judge everything through Bush world.

  • Posted By: Maariyaa @ 12/17/2007 3:04:02 PM

    Comment: Home grown Americans regardless of their Ivy League diplomas tend to miss mundane and nuance in foreign cultures whereas those of us who have been exposed into other cultures can examine and sometimes appreciate unspoken gestures in other parts of the world.

  • Posted By: paddu317 @ 12/17/2007 2:53:15 PM

    Comment: Please take a look at Steve Clemons's blog at
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/obama-vs-clinton-on-putt_b_77093.html
    to see why I said what I said in my earlier comment.

  • Posted By: paddu317 @ 12/17/2007 11:52:33 AM

    Comment: The missing part is the equivalent of a Ph.D. in international affairs in Barack Obama. I think Bill Clinton articulated this point well on Charlie Rose when he said (paraphrasing) that a lot of people have the best of intentions but to translate them to working programs is where they flounder. It is how long you have been in the game and who you know and who you can bring in to execute your vision. Obama has not been in the game long enough. He does not inspire enough confidence that he is ready to do the hard work needed -- he is basking in the glory of his own words right now and it can be intoxicating. So identity alone will not cut it.

    • Posted By: upper left @ 12/17/2007 17:33:35

      Comment: The Clinton's seem to greatly underestimate the experience that Obama does have: he graduated magna *** laude in International Affairs from Columbia one of the top IA programs in the world. He has a JD from Harvard. He has served on the Foriegn Affairs Committee for the past three years.

      Simply put, Obama has far more experience than Bill Clinton had when he was elected President. He has far more knowledge and experience than GW Bush. Obama has more experience than Huckabee, Romney or Giuiliani.

      The question isn't who has more experience; the question is who has enough experience and then who has demonstrated the best judgement and put forward the best proposals. I think Obama has "enough experience" and I think he has demonstrated the best judgement on Iraq and Iran.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 5:44:57 AM

    Comment: OBAMA has shown that he has excelled at every level of government. He really has a grasp for issues, domestic and foreign. He has proven he can overcome gridlock to get things done. What more experience does he need? I think he is ready to take his agenda to the National Level. He is very fimiliar with the obstacles that stand in the way of progress(his experiences in the Senate). Being a Harvard Law School Graduate and an Editior; I do not think anyone is going to fool this guy. The other candidates have one BIG PROBLEM. They all voted for the "War"(Except Ron Paul).It is like all those years of experience did them no service when it came time to vote for the War. They all lacked the courage to make the right decision. They backed down because they were scared for their political careers. This is why PERSONALITY is so important. Obama just has something the other candidates do not. The Republicans led by my friend Karl Rove bullied and scared the democrats to vote for the war. Where were the tough democrats that we see parading today. There irresponsible funding of the war has also led problems like Blackwater. Many of the foreign policy strategies in place today; democrats voted for. Do you really think something like Blackwater would happen under an OBAMA Presidency. . All the experience in the world cannot guarantee you will have the courage and the skill to make the difficult decisions as President of the United States of America. Are the American people really taking a risk with OBAMA or have they already taken bad risks with the candiates that already exist. Ask that question to the Anti-War movement. Ask that question to the Senate Finance Committee. Do the American people want a fresh start. Do they want old animosities and vandetta's to resurface. I like Edwards, Obama, and Clinton. I think they are all capable of handling the job.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/17/2007 4:02:14 AM

    Comment: BARAK OBAMA needs to welcome the "EXPERIENCE" question. He needs to explain why he would consistently make the correct decisions as President. One question that people are anxious to know about is how will he handle those who try to undermine his Presidency. He needs to sight examples where his judgements were just as sound as Hillary's. He should not get defensive about the experience question because it is a legitimate concern. He needs endorsements of people he's work with in the past. People need to hear testimonies. If he is unable to bring all factions together how will he deal with it as President. He should mention that he learned from the Clinton's and studied them closely. He's learned from their successes and their mistakes and he has incorporated their experiences with his own. That the Clinton's experiences have only added to his life-long experiences. The true test is when things go wrong. Will Obama be able to keep things together. Hillary has proven that when things go wrong she can handle it.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/16/2007 9:47:50 PM

    Comment: You also would like to look at the Taft family which has links to the Russels and Taft Benson
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft_family
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Jacob_Astor%2C_3rd_Baron_Astor_of_Hever
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astor_family

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/16/2007 9:00:20 PM

    Comment: The Russel Trust is a secret society. This subjects them to many Conspiracy Theories. Since our President and many others in government are assoiated with this organization it would be wrong for me to read into things that cannot be proven. I just want to show who owns the world's capital(VERY FEW) and how they influence every government in the world directly or indirectly. We are becoming a GLOBAL COMMUNITY; and eventually there will BE ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. George Sorros manages the Queens investments. These powerful families FUND CLUBS LIKE THE PARIS CLUB; THIS ORGANIZATION ALONG WITH OTHERS FUND THE IMF AND WB. We need to support a policy of Peace and Prosperity For ALL. Many people from these families have made tremendous contributions to American Society. Bloodlines are very important in American Society because they determine what fraternity you belong too. I see nothing wrong with that. My purpose is to eduate the electorate. The more the "voter knows"; the more honest, and less scripted politicians will be. And then maybe we will realize that leaving people behing does not work; WE need a President who won't forget about us. A President that can convince these powers to use their wealth and ownership for the better good of ALL and not just for their own narrow interests.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/16/2007 8:59:57 PM

    Comment: nbrhi60624:You will see after visiting the links below and a little research that these families dominate both political parties.Remember, that George Bush is a Russel Trust member. Research the
    Astor, Bundy, Collins, DuPont , Freeman, Kennedy Li Onassis Reynolds Rockefeller Rothschild
    Russell, Van Duyn families.
    Bush's fraternity now dominates his administration. You will find no matter who is in power, these fraternities are represented by a family member in any administration CAN ANY of these Candidates Bring these fraternal orders together in order to improve the LIVES OF ALL AMERICANS.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_G._Collins
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Jacob_Astor
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bundy
    TYPE IN ALL THE FAMILY NAMES AND YOU WILL SEE THE CONNECTION. A FEW FRATERNITIES CONTROL BOTH PARTIES CAPITAL.
    William Putnam "Bill" Bundy
    Raised in Boston, Massachusetts he came from a family long involved in politics. His father, Harvey Hollister Bundy, was a diplomat who helped implement the Marshall Plan. Bill was raised in a highly accomplished, highly intellectual family. After attending the Groton School and Yale University (where he was one of the first presidents of the Yale Political Union), he entered Harvard Law School but left to join the Army Signal Corps during World War II. During this time he worked at Bletchley Park in Britain as part of the top secret ULTRA operation to break Nazi codes.
    During the 1950s he worked as an analyst for the Central Intelligence Agency. During the Kennedy years he worked for the Secretary of the Navy and during much of the LBJ era was an Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific affairs. After resigning from the executive branch in 1969 he taught at MIT and then edited the influential journal of the Council on Foreign Relations (of which he was a member), Foreign Affairs, from 1972 to 1984, after declining the offer of the Council's chairman, David Rockefeller, to be the Council's president.
    His brother, McGeorge Bundy, was also an integral part of the both the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. Bill was married to Mary Acheson, the daughter of Truman's Secretary of State Dean Acheson. Bill and Mary had three children, Michael, Christopher, and Carol.
    Bill was somewhat to the left of his brother politically, and was a spirited opponent of Joseph McCarthy. He was also considered one of the administration's more dovish members on Vietnam.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_G._Collins
    Please note that Henry Taft Benson(Mormon president) and members of the Russel family started the Russel Trust(Skull and Bones Society. Benson was a fan of the John Birch Society.

  • Posted By: soundiata @ 12/16/2007 7:04:45 PM

    Comment: Marlo, your comment is totally out of the context here. America surely needs someone that can restore confidence in the U.S oversea. Someone prepared to talk to our friend as well as our enemies abroad. Who else could do that better then Obama?

  • Posted By: Jena @ 12/16/2007 5:15:27 PM

    Comment: But... Where does this comment of yours take you/us?

    `I couldn't do my job well without the expertise.`

  • Posted By: Marlo @ 12/16/2007 2:52:22 PM

    Comment: Oh please.....Regarding Obama : "his judgment was formed by his experience as a boy with a Kenyan father???and later an Indonesian stepfather???who spent four years growing up in Indonesia, and who lived in the multicultural swirl of Hawaii." Who gives a #### where he lived? Obama needs Oprah to help him get voters ....isn't that proof enough?

    • Posted By: Yaw N. @ 12/17/2007 19:20:13

      Comment: "Obama needs Oprah to help him get voters...isn't that proof enough?"

      Gee hyperbole much?

    • Posted By: Yaw N. @ 12/17/2007 19:18:26

      Comment: "Obama needs Oprah to help him get voters....isn't that proof enough?"

      Gee hyperbole much?

    • Posted By: Bornita @ 12/16/2007 15:56:51

      Comment: I think that sounds like an excellent background for making wise decisions.

  • Posted By: UmNur @ 12/16/2007 1:26:52 PM

    Comment: Mr. Zakariah, I know what you mean, even though I was born and raised in the US, as were my parents and many generations before them. As the economic gap between the rich and poor grows wider along with their respective senses of deprivation and privelege, an increasing number of Americans are born foreigners in their own country. I think Obama knows that and speaks to us. Now that we "foreigners" are the majority, the question now arises: Will the majority rule?

  • Posted By: UmNur @ 12/16/2007 1:24:29 PM

    Comment: Mr. Zakariah, I know what you mean, even though I was born and raised in the US, as were my parents and many generations before them. As the economic gap between the rich and poor grows wider along with their respective senses of deprivation and privelege, an increasing number of Americans are born foreigners in their own country. I think Obama knows that and speaks to us. Now that we "foreigners" are the majority, the question now arises: Will the majority rule?

    • Posted By: Bornita @ 12/16/2007 16:05:25

      Comment: Poverty and discrimination affects everyone. We all interact in this world, therefore the problems of Africa and Indonesia makes everyone's quality of life a little poorer, sure they are rich but they can't enjoy their money if they ruin the planet. I also think that Obama is the best candidate at the moment. He has the best solutions for eradicating the causes and symptoms of extreme poverty. Of course he will have to proove his effectiveness and peaceful shrewdness further. Sustainability and the spread of sustainable happiness is what I am interested in.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/16/2007 3:05:30 AM

    Comment: Do you know that 80% of the world's capital is owned by 12 families. They already run the world through organizations like the Paris Club; who inturn fund the IMF and World Bank. Look at the power oil companies have on the world. You are confusing conspiracy with reality. But thank you for your commentary EUB. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft_family-If you go to this website or url, you will notice the development of the Taft family one of the most poweful families in America. Along with a few other families, they were able to establish a number of fraternities which contorl both parties political machinery.

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/16/2007 2:23:26 AM

    Comment: Remember, that George Bush is a Russel Trust member. Research the
    Astor Bundy, Collins, DuPont , Freeman, Kennedy Li Onassis Reynolds Rockefeller Rothschild
    Russell Van Duyn families.
    Bush's fraternity now dominates his administration. You will find no matter who is in power, these fraternities are represented by a family member in any administration CAN ANY of these Candidates Bring these fraternal orders together in order to improve the LIVES OF ALL AMERICANS.