Is there any evidence that the candidates running for presidency in the general election shouldn't reflect the basic parameters of our current political order? I don't mean "shouldn't" in the moral sense (we all know they SHOULD do the right thing). I mean is there reason to be surprised that Obama is silent on this issue?

Getting mad or frustrated at Obama seems to be a bit crazy. It would be one thing if we had reason to expect a person running for president to come out in the lead on an issue like this. But it's just the opposite and we all know it.

The reason we should be excited about Obama has nothing to do with him reflecting the kind of platform that will really make a difference. If you are going to be excited about getting Obama elected it should just be because you think he is a guy who could sit down at a table with you and really understand (and, ultimately, agree with you on telecom amnisty) your points...and he is a guy who would be influenced by a powerfully growing minority who is organizing at an alarming rate and demanding that our leaders not undermine the constitution.

Obama is only hopeful to the extent that we shape him into the kind of leader we want. He is only hopeful the extent that he can be shaped (slowly but surely) by the people. At this point his silence is simply a reminder that we have lots of work to do.

We have tons of people to admire who already are fighting for the real causes. As a person running for president of this country, Obama simply won't be that kind of person. We can admire (maybe) that he represents a potential for change, but such change is predicated on our organization and commitment, not his. His job is to “fit in” and our job is to change him. Even if we fail to change him, our work can and will change the culture in which our presidential options are generated.

Glenn, I know it sounds like I’m making that silly argument that Obama is doing what is right by remaining silent. Nope. I understand your criticism of those who think his faults are always really part of a larger political strategy towards peace and justice.

I’m just underlining that there is no reason to expect more out of Obama than him being a relatively decent option from within the range our current general-election-pool can offer. That range is always only a function of the activty of the most energetic Americans.

I understand why people are angry at Obama, but it still needs to be pointed out that the anger is misplaced and counter-productive when carried within false and unreasonable presumptions. In that case it tends to create real problems on the ground (in terms of organzing and conversing in manners that make actual changes)

I don’t see any reason to expect Obama to be speaking out against this awful bill. But I can imagine a climate in which he would be one of the first mainstreamers to speak out against it. Your work is a strong example of how this climate is coming about. It would be amazing to have an American president who might be somewhat ready to be shaped by an inspired and active civil society. But I still might write in your name in November...

But you don't expect his starry-eyed supporters to have a passionate interest in this topic, do you? I don't think Obama's silence will show any "true colors" to anybody other than those of us who never expected him to make this sort of fight.

You say you are sad. By what? I admit it is a rhetorical question. Unless, of course, Obama really has made you sad on this issue. I guess it really is just a question of what we expect.

From what i can tell, Obama's starry-eyed supporters are a much smaller number than the common discourse implies. But they are like that small (proportionally) number of Beatles' fans who actually passed-out upon the site of those guys...Those fans became the "picture" of a Beatle's fan.

I’m having trouble getting through on the phone. Is anybody else?

I think this sort of phone call is massively important, especially in the passionate context of no blame yet relentless insistence.

Yea, everbody talks about Glenn as if he is a decent guy, but you make so many strong points that prove that Glenn isn't helping our country.

After reading your post, I can now so clearly see that we- as a nation- are in big trouble if people like Glenn participate to the best of their abilities. Paul, how do we make Glenn stop? Or...is there a way to make Glenn smarter and better (both morally and intellectually)?

Thanks so much for explaining how harmful Glenn is being to this country. I'm sure people will get mad at you for proving Glenn is useless, but I'd like to see them try to refute all those points you made. Paul, you must be so worried that people appreciate the work Glenn does. You've definately made me worried!

Do you have a blog, Paul, where you fix important things? Thanks.