Hillary's MLK Jr. Moment

My Question:
Should the White House Be A Test-Tube for Domestic and Foreign Policy Experiments?



A Fox News talking point from a news item related to a short interview between reporter Major Garrett and 2008 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is absolutely wrong.

The article by Fox News' Aaron Bruns claimed that Clinton “appeared to diminish the role Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. played” in the bringing about of Civil Rights.

To myself, an unbiased viewer, it looked as though Senator Clinton was trying to shrink Senator Obama’s lofty and dramatic rhetoric down to 'actual size'.

At the end of the day (using some of Clinton's words from the interview), being “able to get it through Congress” is something she’s been doing longer. The ability to inspire by the “power of dreams” is a worthy and necessary talent for all social justice leaders. When she spoke of the dream "becoming reality..”..she seems only to be saying she thinks she can do it better than Obama can.

Perhaps she should just say, "I think I can do [these things] much better than Obama can."

But I think I understand her message, however confused some may be about it. Jesus Christ has inspired people for over 2000 years…Moses and Abraham for much longer … and they never had to pass a law in any Congress in order to keep us bathed in the light of faith and hope. Many believe Moses handed down law from a source beyond our human existence. Whenever a law that best forwards social justice is passed in the name of the people of this country, the law was one that had likely been created long ago...born in the hearts of men and women; born of inspiration and faith.

There is no doubt that Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a man of God and an inspirer for the ages. I trust that Hillary Clinton was by no means discounting Rev. Dr. MLK Jr. by showing how his wonderful dream was put into action…and pointing to the Presidents who helped to facilitate the dream through signed, dealed, and delivered legislation.

Ask yourself, regardless of who you may be supporting for 2008, isn’t it just a bit of a stretch to say the newest Senator of the top-tier-three is an inspirer of the ages and a JFK and an LBJ all wrapped up in one..and more capable than Clinton (or Edwards, for that matter) to get his agenda through Congress?

How has he ever proven it?

Shouldn't we be asking those questions?

If your answer is "No", I'd ask: Why the blinders?

If Hillary’s pointing that out, more power to her for the reality check. We should be doing our own vetting of the candidates, not just for personality, but for what they know and what they've accomplished. Both Clinton and Edwards may not be perfect, and I think Hillary was reminding us what happens when imperfect, untested people suddenly find themselves in the White House.

A new generation of young, enthusiastic voters stand to be disillusioned once again when heads-in-the-sky meet the very real difficulties associated with compromise and consensus and Washington, D.C.

With a gathering storm outside our nation's borders, should the Oval Office be a test-tube, particularly for foreign-policy experiments?