in fact there was disagreement on this from the country's inception. A constant tension between the Puritan ideal of government and schooling for the sake of knowing and serving God versus the Enlightenment principal of freedom from the tyranny of any particular religion or authority.

It always cracks me up when people say "The Founding Fathers thought..." or "The nation was founded as..." because the group that started this country was not never a monolith. Apparently the disagreement was quite intense.

But from the few clips I've caught:

Obama does indeed think during talking, a communication style I find charming and indicative of a thoughtful, restrained mind. One gets the sense he's taking each question seriously and giving the exact answer he thinks. One also feels assured that he will not impetuously threaten world leaders and then find himself in a corner he can't get out of (Think Bush Senior and Iraq. He had to go to war after making noises about it, to avoid the Wimp Factor label). This is the stuff of diplomacy. Thoughtful rather than impulsive. (But I get that in terms of realpolitik it may not come across well. Stupid people like sound bites.)

I was sort of surprised--but not necessarily unhappy--with his answer naming Michele Obama as one of the three most influential advisers to him. Shades of "Two for the Price of One" backlash that befell the Clintons for Bill's justifiable pride in his wife's insight came to mind. I sure hope we're done with all that. But MO is about the least popular principle involved in the current race (if we're counting the spouses as "principals") so again it's a bit of a surprise.

I agree with those who note the bias of Rick Warren. Although I think he made an effort (given that his candidate is probably JM), the nodding and "yes, yes" feel of his reception of the first answer by Obama and the contrast b/t his pressing Obama on some answers that he allowed JM to merely whiz by gave me that impression, although as I mentioned, I did not see the whole thing. But on the personal moral failing question, RW continued asking variations on that theme to BO in different phraseology even after BO answered, while McCain got away with a quick and simple "The failure of my first marriage" to a nodding and sympathetic RW.

I too have observed Rick Warren for a bit and find his motives inscrutable. What does he believe? What is he up to? Is he authentic? I don't know. He's not as easy to demonize as his predecessors nor is he as easily dismissed.

I've said it before: I think perhaps the largest reason BO isn't doing better is that he does not have a unified party behind him. This drives HRC supporters crazy, prompting defiant rhetoric about it being HIS job to gain unification and the sarcastic and unhelpful jibes along the line of "Yeah, it's all Hillary and her supporters' fault; sure just blame us for everything..."

It's kind of silly to ignore that much of the crap being lobbed by McCain, if not getting traction from HRC supporters, is at least not being rejected with the kind of outrage that it deserves.

has always been that BO should not use race in his campaign. I think he didn't at all until the dollar bill remark, which I think backfired. I agree with those who saw it as a subtle preemption or defense against potential racism.

By the way, that doesn't mean his comment was "racist." That characterization, its inherent indictment of Americans' complete lack of discernment in vocabulary--drives me crazy. That someone might be pointing out that others are or might be racist is not in itself racism. As someone--jeb perhaps?--pointed out, heralding one's pioneering status, whether race or sex, is not the same thing as racism or race-baiting. Hillary making references to her role modeling for little girls, for example, is neither sexist or sex-baiting.

Nevertheless, I always railed against her habit of referring to her pioneering status as the first woman president, and I never wanted BO to do it in terms of race. I just had a feeling that being "post-racial" was the way to go. Frankly, pretend you're the same as the others in that regard. Sounds awful, but that's what I always thought would work for him. Running as blacks never worked for Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. They got marginalized too quickly. I think that's happening to BO, not only bc of his single dollar bill comment but as a slow and gradual response to all that talk about racism in the primary. Not his doing, but the media's focus on "Did they or didn't they?" regarding the Clintons.

I am consistent in believing that all that hashing out did nothing to help BO but only hurt him.

(because they're black)

reminds me of that black doll study in 1954 where black girls said the black dolls were "bad" and "ugly."

The study was repeated very recently--just a year or two ago--with almost identical results.

There's something about this post that strikes me as, oh I don't know...divisive.

I certainly don't disagree with the sentiment or logic. Just... the tone, the reiteration of the recent leaked memos, the direct address...

It looks like you're hoping it's a letter-getter, Joe. I'm not biting.