Andrew had chosen a different way to put it than "Freddie attacks Reihan." I disagree with Reihan. I'm attacking his position in that Guardian piece, and on the election.
But I'm not attacking him. I really, really admire and respect Reihan.
Update: As if on cue, Reihan expands on his thoughts at the Scene, so check that out. Doesn't change my opinion on his Guardian piece, but it's much more his style. The ability to write long-form, digressive meanders is one of the benefits of the blog format, and plays directly into Reihan's greatest strength (in my opinion), his expansive and playful mind.
I'm still kind of unmoved about appeals to lacking experience necessary for solving technical challenges, because I don't think Presidents actually do much of their own thinking at all on those issues. I think that's why we have Cabinets, and is also why the Cabinet is perhaps of equal importance to the Legislative branch. I think John McCain or Barack Obama will have their economists work on the economy, their Joint Chiefs work on the military, and so on. That's not totalizing, of course, but I think it should assuage some of the worry that these men don't have the day to day know how necessary to be executives. The staffs and advisers won't let them, like, bomb the wrong country accidentally, or inadvertently sell Hawaii to North Korea.
Update II: Reihan responds to me directly here, so be sure to check that out. He's right that I spoke as though he particularly took part in some of those arguments about Obama I was talking about, and he didn't, so I'm sorry for that. I agree with him and cw, by the way, that I don't think Reihan is an advocacy journalist. That's not a bad thing!