Now let’s check in with Barack Obama. Obama by contrast to John McCains site, goes into great detail about foreign policy, staking out specific positions on a host of issues from how to deal with Iran, to the future of NATO, to pursuit of new partners in Asia. Perhaps his team feels the need to counter the charge that Obama lacks foreign policy experience. But whatever the reason, one comes away from an examination of the two sites with the distinct perception that Obama has thought more extensively and more broadly about foreign policy than McCain.

Of course, thinking and saying a lot about foreign policy doesn’t mean you’re thinking and saying the right things. I believe American and the world are in desperate need of a US President who is thoughtful about relationships with existing and future allies, rather than one who rattles a saber at every conflict zone. On trade, I confess I have trouble with Obama’s protectionist rhetoric, but if you look at his cadre of economic advisors, it is clear he understands the benefits of free trade, and seeks only to ensure that American workers are not left in its dust.

In the end, we all make gut decisions about these things, and seek to bolster our decisions with facts. But the facts only go so far. Academics and think tank denizens spend their entire careers amassing data and analyzing how foreign policy should be conducted, and they come up with viewpoints as widely divergent as anyone (the same is true, of course, for almost any policy issue). Most historians agree that then British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain made a grotesque error in appeasing Hitler’s aggression in 1938. But there is vast disagreement as to how to apply that lesson - whether, for example, it should be considered appeasement to allow Iran to have domestic nuclear power. No one wants a nuclear-armed Iran, but what’s the best way to prevent that? Is it Obama’s plan to pursue direct conversations with Ahmedinajad? Or McCain’s insistence that Iran meet certain conditions before presidential conversations can even be contemplated? No one knows, so you decide on gut feeling. I come down on the side of diplomacy. It’s just how I feel.

There’s one last point on foreign policy, as with all issues, that transcends policy, and that is leadership. Whatever a President’s policy perspective, the one thing we count on Presidents to do is lead during a crisis. Television commercials and McCain rhetoric try to portray Obama as a risky choice when the proverbial phone rings at 3am. I think the exact opposite is true. Without being ageist, I can look at McCain and see a man who fumbles over his words and misspeaks far more than he did in 2000, while Obama exercises perpetual self-control. In McCain I see a man who by his own admission makes decisions impulsively, while in Obama I see a prudent thinker who weighs his options and makes decisions - not slowly, but with proper deliberation. In McCain I see a desperate candidate who had to make a splash with a risky vice presidential nominee, while in Obama I see a disciplined manager whose campaign always seems to be in control. Yes, setting aside Obama’s acknowledged strengths on certain domestic matters, I actually prefer to have Obama answering the phone at 3am.

Sure, I probably looked for things to bolster my gut feeling that Obama is the better choice for America’s Chief Diplomat. But at least based on an objective review of what’s there on the candidates’ web sites, and what I read in the headlines, I found what I was looking for.

And here is to a great debate tonight!

takepart Register to vote with Declare Yourself. Also, visit the New York Times to see where the candidates stand on the important issues of this election.

Related:

The Candidates on Foreign Policy: Part 1

Dan Goodman is a veteran of the digital media industry and an avid follower of politics and social issues. He has particular interests in foreign policy, energy, environment, and education, but being opinionated, he’ll write about almost anything. He’s also passionate about finding common ground among seemingly divergent viewpoints. As a graduate student, he founded and edited Spectrum, a journal of student opinion at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, and was later a volunteer for Youth Building Bridges, a DC-area group helping teens from different social and ethnic backgrounds explore their differences and what they have in common.