In an interview with the Reno Gazette-Journal, Barack Obama points out what a leader is supposed to do: leaders are not meant to understand every single detail of every single issue, they’re supposed to hire and lead a team of experts that know better than him. Crooks and Liars has a link to an interesting discussion of the candidate’s language, and how it relates to how they view their roll in the White House.

My personal feeling - and this probably lends itself to my support for Barack Obama more than anything - is that we need a leader with a vision, not a micro-manager with a clipboard.  Despite my obvious differences with Hillary Clinton, I respect her encyclopedic knowledge of the issues.  And while I suspect her ego would forbid it, I think she’d make a great vice president or close ally to the White House in the Senate.  But in the White House, I suspect she would be like the squelching boss I’ve always hated working for: constantly overseeing every little issue while totally losing sight of the big picture.

I don’t doubt but that Clinton would hire a team of advisers to die for.  But I think Barack Obama could hire the same team and get better results.  Just a gut feeling based on personal experience.