Comments on: John Edwards Wants to Reengage the World

By: Dean's World

Dean's World — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 20:45:14 +0000

You Be the Sorting Hat...

In what is likely to be my sole bit of Harry Potter geekery ever and inspired by James Joyner, I'm going to challenge you w......

By: The Glittering Eye » Blog Archive » You Be the Sorting Hat

The Glittering Eye » Blog Archive » You Be the Sorting Hat — Mon, 20 Aug 2007 20:41:24 +0000

[...] what is likely to be my sole bit of Harry Potter geekery ever and inspired by James Joyner, I’m going to challenge you with a little game. Imagine that the presidential aspirants, [...]

By: Political Buzz » Is Edwards winning the small-scale race?

Political Buzz » Is Edwards winning the small-scale race? — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 00:23:37 +0000

[...] phrase” meant to scare up some votes? (JRE’s anti-Bush foreign policy focus is still drawing the ire of conservatives) Combined with his strong labor message and potentially major backing by union groups and [...]

By: Anderson

Anderson — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:17:27 +0000

Edwards is more Hufflepuff than Gryffindor, methinks. Hillary is Ravenclaw. Obama is a more plausible Gryffindor.

Of course, all the Republicans are Slytherin. I expect we'll see an essay to that effect in the Weekly Standard one day, along the lines of their defense of the Galactic Empire as opposed to the Rebellion.

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:46:41 +0000

Closely on the tail of his dream of a nuclear-free planet is his notion that Iran and North Korea will give up their nuclear programs if we merely demonstrate resolve, talk to them more, and threaten sanctions if they don’t behave. Haven’t we been doing pretty much that for years?

No, no we haven't.

We have NOT been talking to Iran, and for the first 5 years of the Bush Administration, we were NOT having constructive talks with NK. We have been threatening both nations, not talking. Recently, we have returned to the Clinton policy of engagement and negotiation with NK, which has made measureable progress. Unfortunately, the Norks developed weapons while we were being belligerent, because it was ENTIRELY RATIONAL for them to do so.

By: charles austin

charles austin — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:15:10 +0000

I find it amusing when presidential candidates who complain about the imperial Bush presidency define the job they are going to do as president in terms that only an emperor could possibly accomplish.

By: markm

markm — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:56:30 +0000

"Once we are out of Iraq, the United States must retain sufficient forces in the region to prevent a genocide, a regional spillover of the civil war, or the establishment of an al Qaeda safe haven"

I thought genocide was acceptable?...and why would al Qaeda want to go to Iraq if/when we pull out?...seems to me it would be a dangerous place to operate from.

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:43:18 +0000

His Marshall Corps, like Giuliani’s variant, is really just Tom Barnett’s SysAdmin by a less wonky name. I’m skeptical that large numbers of civilians are going to sign up to go into war zones but the idea is otherwise a good one.

Another variant was also proposed by GWB in his SOTU this year. My complaint about such proposals has been where will be budget come from? Defense? State? Bush's plan sidesteps this problem somewhat by making it a voluntary plan analogous to the Peace Corps.

“[I]ncrease our funding for global primary education sixfold, with a $3 billion annual effort to educate poor children in countries with a history of violent extremism.”

I wonder if Sen. Edwards understands that the ability to provide oversight over the use of funds in such countries is generally very low and we'll have to take special care that the additional funds won't be used for political consciousness raising (or bomb-building classes) rather than primary education?