Is the hope of Obama supporters, entirely too audacious? Perhaps so, according to one of Obama's own senior aides. In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph in the midst of Obama's big trip abroad, it appears like that famous hope has become a burden wrapped in unrealistic expectations of what Obama can actually achieve if he becomes president.
Greg Craig, one of Obama's top foreign policy advisers with him on the trip said that Obama is well aware of the burden of hope:
He is very conscious of it. He knows he has become a vehicle for peoples' hopes and dreams and expectations and we all fear that such expectations tend to be unrealistic.
In his trip that includes a swing through Europe, Obama is expected to meet with Gordon Brown to encourage the UK to proceed with planned troop cuts in Iraq next year to free them up to redeploy in Afghanistan.
Obama's plan for Iraq also caused a big email misunderstanding this weekend. To see the audacity of the Inbox,
A German magazine, Der Spiegel reported that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki had:
Supported prospective US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's proposal that US troops should leave Iraq within 16 months . . . US presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.
Everyone all the way up to the White House believed this notion — going so far as to accidentally send out the news to a huge distribution list (always check before hitting "Send," folks.)
Making the email oops worse, it turns out that the whole Maliki quote, was actually a huge misunderstanding. Der Spiegel it seems mistranslated. Maliki's spokesman said that statements by Maliki or any other member of the government should not be seen as support for any US presidential candidate.
Are Obama supporters placing unrealistic expectations on what the reality of Obama can actually do? Will there come a point when they find out they've been way too audacious?