It is true that we have an historic mission to accomplish in electng Obama. It may be that the most important historic aspect of his election will be restoration of the republic as opposed to the whole narrative of breaking through the race barrier, etc...

As a Democrat I will do my duty and I will work and speak as hard as anyone for Democratic victory in November on every level, but I do not see or hear anything that indicates that Obama, who is supremely cautious and centrist, plans any sort of dramatic policy moves that will right the course of the nation as you seem to think he will if he becomes President. He is a corporate, centrist Democrat and the quintessential characteristic of this breed of cat is incrementalism---often timid incrementalism. That doesn't bode well for bringing about the change he has promised or that people will expect him to deliver.

Over and above that, I'm not convinced, even now, he has the stomach to do what is necessary to win. Yes, it isn't all on him and each of us must do his/her part. But it is absolutely essential that Obama and his campaign stand up and fight to win this election. He has to show leadership not only by delivering a rousing speech when he makes appearances, but by actively duking it out with the opposition. When they make false accusations, when they smear him, his record, and so on they need to punch back and not hold back in the hope that people will respond to his having taken the high road. The high road is littered with the corpses of well intentioned Democratic candidates who shared this approach. It may be a winning approach for the primary season, but it means losing in the general election. We know this beyond question, particularly after 2004.

Obama must, beginning with his speech tonight, immediately seize the initiative and begin to take control of the agenda, the debate and the message of the entire campaign. He must put McCain and the Republicans on the defensive and keep them there. Unless that happens, his chances of victory are slim. If he chooses to hang back and absorb all the lies and accusations, etc... he will lose the election.

At this point, the Republicans have every reason to believe that they can roll Obama just like they did Kerry and Gore before him. Since June it has been a turkey shoot for them attacking at will with only the slightest response from the Obama campaign or the candidate himself. His failure to defend himself has cost him in the polls and they have allowed a despised and weak party to take control of the agenda in this campaign which is the essential ingredient they need to win. It is also the essential ingredient we and Obama need to win the election.

Despite the stellar performance of the Clinton's and the apparent success of the convention this week, if Obama and the campaign don't exhibit a fierce and determined fighting spirit focused on winning in November, we're all in a whole helluva lot of trouble.

Posted at August 28, 2008 4:23 PM in response to The Election of Our Lives

You miss the point but I'm not surprised.

If you haven't seen affluent well educated Democrats express contempt for working people, the less affluent and the poor you haven't been around very long or you haven't been paying attention. It's out there, it's been out there and you can deny it but that doesn't change the reality.

Posted at August 28, 2008 12:14 AM in response to Ask a Stupid Question

"The most serious reason for queasiness is that I assumed, well, serious reason could squeak out a victory this time."

Surely you jest!

Can a serious student or even observer of politics think such naive thoughts? This is preciesly the elitist (yes elitist) mindset that has lost us elections time and again and yet you cling to your own elitism secure in the notion that A) your own prosperity doesn't actually depend upon who is in power, and B)that you are right and every decent, educated, thinking person knows it and that is what is important after all.

You prosper partly because of and get airtime on the very media you deplore. And then you won't name the program you are appalled by because you want to appear on it again. I'm sorry but that seems hypocritical to me. You then condemn junk "culture" instead of condemning the corporate money, power and influence that has produced it.

No doubt you are attracted to Obama because of his good mind and intellectual bent. You likely are very attracted to his thoughtful, but often long, boring answers and his contemplative manner. As a smart fellow you probably identify with those qualities of his personality because you have them too and there's nothing wrong with that per se. But the myopic viewpoint you express is a huge part of the problem we Democrats have in terms of winning elections.

Elections are what they are and they haven't changed much over time. They will never be the civil and enlightened process you no doubt pine away for. Elections are when we fight for control of the government and the power that goes with it instead of shooting eachother dead in the streets until one side surrenders (though I'll confess I sometimes dream of doing that so we can wipe the Republicans out once and for all). There's nothing elegant about the process of literally going to battle in order to control the government. I'd say I'll take the crass shallowness of our elections any day compared to that and if it takes communicating to the white working class then by God that's what we need to do instead of complaining that those unworthy people have to be addressed. They are our allies not our enemies and when prosperous, learned folk
express such disdain for them it is a danger to our party and our chances in the fall.

People see and sense this attitude oozing from many Democrats and that is why the Republican's heckling that Democrats and Obama in particular are "elitist" and "aloof" always stick: because of the many people who are those things and so freely express such contempt for the less educated, less affluent and the less priveleged among us.

Posted at August 27, 2008 5:32 PM in response to Ask a Stupid Question

It's this mindset that Roosevelt was addressing way back when, when he said "We have nothing to fear, but fear itself." There really was nothing to be afraid of even in the Great Depression. It was simply a matter of getting down to the hard work it was going to take to get the country moving again. Under Roosevelt's leadership, that happened and people learned by experience that there was nothing to fear so long as they worked hard to get the country back on it's feet.

Posted at August 27, 2008 4:26 PM in response to Insightful Foreigner Visits New Orleans and Explains This Election

NO doubt about it, this is idiotic on the part of CBS. Ten million different explanations could be given for her motive based on "body language" and this is but one. In this case, it doesn't matter if deep down inside she really is still disappointed and all that bullshit. What matters is what she said last night and that indicates beyond any doubt that, in the best speech she's ever given, Hillary Clinton backed Obama 100% and made a very, very effective case for her supporters and all Americans to do so. If she didn't still have regrets she wouldn't be human. It must be incredibly disappointing to lose such a race and her "body language" via hand gestures may just as well indicate that remorse and disappointment as well as anything else. Bottom line is that this was stupid of CBS and has no meaning or importance at all.

Posted at August 27, 2008 12:27 PM in response to CBS News: Hillary's Body-Language Showed She Didn't Really Endorse Obama

The journalist is insightful and correct. Race is only one factor that the Republican attack is built on and it is used in a secondary way. But it is still an integral and important factor in the Republican plan to smear and discredit Obama.

Because black people generally (like all racial minorities and women) are judged more harshly and have to always meet more stringent tests to achieve the same things as whites, it is easier to cast doubt and raise fears. Because of the higher bar imposed consciously or not by the race factor, when McCain and his campaign make specious claims it is more credible and so on. That's just the reality. Many whites who aren't even racist, if they really examine themselves, will find that the bar is higher, their judgements more harsh and that they maintain double standards when it comes to evaluating whites vs nonwhites.

That Obama does little or nothing to vigorously defend himself and take the initiative away from the Republican swine only enhances the effectiveness of the smears because his failure to defend himself and repulse these illegitimate attacks makes him look weak, ineffective, and cowardly. These are not attributes Americans seek in their leaders. Ever since FDR the Republicans have always used these lines of attack. FDR's popularity allowed him to crush the Republicans regardless of the absurd charges. Harry Truman understood the nature of the opposition and fought them tooth and nail and prevailed in 48. Stevenson failed utterly to defend himself against the charges of being an "egghead" and weak on communism. JFK understood that in order to win the Presidency it is necessary to fight and defend one's self against the false claims and lies of the Republicans. Despite the overwhelming support for Democrats in the aftermath of the assassination of JFK and the unpopularity of Goldwater's right wing nuttiness, LBJ took nothing for granted and crushed the Republicans by making sure the nation knew just how extreme and dangerous they were. Since then, with the exception of Bill Clinton's two campaigns, Democrats seem to have forgotten how to fight and certainly how to defend themselves from illegitimate attacks. It seems Obama, like the other losing Democratic candidates also refuses to fight and defend himself effectively. Only this morning I read about how the Obama campaigning is editing all speeches at the convention to cleanse them of attacks on the Republicans. That's why we don't hear the words "corruption". "lawlessness", "cronyism", "lies", and other perfectly accurate descriptions of why the Republicans must be barred from the White House. Bad sign. Bad sign indeed.

If the Israeli author is correct and if Obama is to win, it seems most observers understand that he will have to fight hard from now until election day in order to overcome those fears and the underlying reluctance to change course. It doesn't seem, however, that Obama himself or his campaign understand this crucial fact.

Posted at August 27, 2008 10:14 AM in response to Insightful Foreigner Visits New Orleans and Explains This Election

Based on what? How about historical data of how far ahead the Democrats always are at this point in time no matter who the nominee is? You seem uninformed about history on this point. Dukakis was 22 points ahead coming out of his convention and he lost. Kerry was waaaay ahead, etc... Obama is now behind according to some polls. His campaign is tepid in terms of message and the entire enterprise has been downright sluggish since the beginning of June--for which there is no excuse.

Your option A has been repeatedly tried and failed. The conclusion on your option B has no basis in fact. Indeed, it is the only viable option. The Republicans would tremble in fear if the Democrats were actually to fight for the Presidency and they would tremble because they know it would mean their doom. Obama's campaign of limp wristed passivity is the only thing that keeps McCain in the game at this point. And your option C doesn't exist.

Posted at August 26, 2008 6:27 PM in response to Rendell: Obama Is "Like Adlai Stevenson ... What The Heck Is Going On?"

sorry for the double post!

Posted at August 26, 2008 4:39 PM in response to Rendell: Obama Is "Like Adlai Stevenson ... What The Heck Is Going On?"

It matters little what Rendell's motives or intentions are with these comments. What counts is that he is right and on this he most certainly is right. And yes, Obama should be 10-15 points ahead at this time. There are many reasons why he isn't. One of them is that his campaign has been assuming the posture of a deer in the headlights for weeks instead of fighting back. Obama's low-key style (which the enemy casts as aloof and out of touch) and his overall manner is actually providing grist for the other side's mill. Yes, it's unfair and untrue, but if Obama doesn't forcefully defend himself he's going to be relegated to the ash heap of history like Dukakis, Gore, Kerry and yes the late, great Adlai Stevenson... of Illinois.

Whatever else he is, Rendell is a seasoned and successful political fighter against Republicans: something Obama has not proved in any way that he is. He has never run against a viable Republican opponent for any office until now. It seems self evident that Obama needs some tutoring on how to win a fight against a Republican given his ineffective and long delayed responses to the smears and lies the McCain people have been heaping on him the past two months.

God willing, the Obama people and the candidate himself will wake up and smell the coffee before it's too late: a la Kerry 2004.

Posted at August 26, 2008 4:36 PM in response to Rendell: Obama Is "Like Adlai Stevenson ... What The Heck Is Going On?"

It matters little what Rendell's motives or intentions are with these comments. What counts is that he is right and on this he most certainly is right. And yes, Obama should be 10-15 points ahead at this time. There are many reasons why he isn't. One of them is that his campaign has been assuming the posture of a deer in the headlights for weeks instead of fighting back. Obama's low-key style (which the enemy casts as aloof and out of touch) and his overall manner is actually providing grist for the other side's mill. Yes, it's unfair and untrue, but if Obama doesn't forcefully defend himself he's going to be relegated to the ash heap of history like Dukakis, Gore, Kerry and yes the late, great Adlai Stevenson... of Illinois.

Whatever else he is, Rendell is a seasoned and successful political fighter against Republicans: something Obama has not proved in any way that he is. He has never run against a viable Republican opponent for any office until now. It seems self evident that Obama needs some tutoring on how to win a fight against a Republican given his ineffective and long delayed responses to the smears and lies the McCain people have been heaping on him the past two months.

God willing, the Obama people and the candidate himself will wake up and smell the coffee before it's too late: a la Kerry 2004.

Posted at August 26, 2008 4:34 PM in response to Rendell: Obama Is "Like Adlai Stevenson ... What The Heck Is Going On?"