By our more-charismatic candidate’s choice of “unity” as the theme, he makes two enormous unforced errors:

1. Pissing away the public’s proven — and oh so hard won — recognition that the Republican status-quo is debased
2. Accepting the frame (post-partisanship) that is Mr. Maverick’s home field

Further, Obama — just as Bill Clinton did — takes the coward’s way out in by failing to repudiate Reagan, who, as Obama seems to completely miss, was “transformative” by convincing people outside his natural base to head his way, rather than by being magnanimous toward the competing ideology.

The Man from Hope (not to be confused with Obama or Huckabee) had somewhat more of an excuse — the country wasn’t near as disaffected with Bush I as it is with Bush II. This is a sea-change year, or it would have been, if Obama hadn’t built a centrist breakwater than only Sam Waterston and Michael Bloomberg should love.

The prospect of the GOP winning by losing, as it did in 1992, which begat 1994, which begat Monicagate, which begat beerbuddy-beats-statesman, is vastly increased, IMHO, by Obama’s gratuitiously accommodationist rhetoric, sympathy for a devil that is — or nearly was — on its last hooves.

I don’t think criticizing her is, in itself, sexist, any more than criticizing Obama, per se, is racist.

Thanks, Captain Obvious. Nobody claimed such a thing. If you can’t disgtinguish attacking Clinton’s policies from attacking Clinton’s sex, you’ve got some more learning to do.

“Far, far better” from the point of view of satisfying a left-Dem, or “far, far better” from the point of view of winnning a general election against a war hero in the midst of, I’m sorry to say, a war?

Running against a war hero didn’t make a bit of difference in 2004.

And while the sockpuppeting is charming, you’re not Harry Shearer.

I think running on “competence” in a change year is far, far better than running on post-partisanship in a year when we finally have the chance to repudiate the Reagan Revolution.

Big fan, btw, and I appreciate that you’ve challenged Senator Obama to put his money where his mouth is.

That aside, I don’t grant a lot of respect to “negatives” ginned up by Gingrich and Starr, and I’ve lost respect for the many Obama supporters who have gleefully refueled those infernal fires, including Democratic Underground users who are convinced that Hillary used Vince Foster’s corpse to bring down the twin towers.

I started watching this campaign with low approval for Hillary myself, but she’s won me over with her resilience and her choice to tack left, as Obama has generally tacked right.

That there were longstanding prejudices against Hillary before she got to take her case to the public doesn’t impress me much. Bush, it seemed, felt that poor black people in New Orleans didn’t have a high-enough approval rating to warrant taking action before or after Katrina hit. That didn’t impress me much, either.