Physically sick.
I just don't see a way to be happy, or even philosophical, about this. I feel like I've been punched in the gut, and when I look to see who punched me, I wind up posting a blog on this site.
I don't feel like writing much. Just thought I'd share a little of my reaction to today's events, and how they've made me feel much less hopeful about our country's future. If there's a candidate out there who would like to rekindle my passion for positive direction in this country, they're more than welcome to try.
Please, Senator Obama, do not allow immunity for telecommunications companies to pass in the upcoming FISA vote. This is not just any issue. This is at the core of the corrective processes that will have to be addressed if we are to regain our footing as a society in America. We cannot allow what's happened to pass silently into the darkness. We owe it to ourselves and to future generations to be allowed to examine ourselves and our behavior.
The abuses that have occurred are, let's face it, the embodiment of the Big Brother Is Watching You mentality that we've been warned about for so long. We have to be vigilant against this mindset, because it strikes at the heart of freedom and dynamism in our culture. This isn't about being vindictive to misbehaving corporations, but about understanding who we are and why. This, Senator, is everything your campaign is about and more. You CANNOT yield in any way to these influences. If I could say it any more strongly, I would do so.
I am your strong supporter, and I believe in you and what you're doing. I don't think any of us is perfect, so I am trying to tell you what I believe with all of my heart would be a terrible mistake! You can stop this, sir. You can maintain our lifeline to the truths we will have to face. To give away our rights here under the law would be to pay what I believe is too dear a price.
Please, please sir, don't do it!
I just wanted to add my congratulations to Senator Obama, the next President of the United States. It has been so thrilling and inspiring to follow this campaign, and I think it's started something that is going to sweep through America this November. I'm excited about seeing all of us working together to build the best America we can make, and I believe everyone is going to want to pitch in. I could not ask for a better candidate than Senator Obama, and I hereby pledge to do everything in my power to help him win the Presidency, and to help America any way I can going forward. If we're really committed to doing the right thing, I don't think anything can stand in our way, and I really do think the sky is the limit.
I'm excited, but I don't mean to sound as if I'm carried away by expectations. Change takes time. But if we can turn this big Ship of State around and get it turned to the wind, I think we'll see some fruits of our labors, and take heart in our ability to face our struggle together.
This is incredible! Thanks to everyone who has worked so hard. Thanks to the Obama family. And thank you, America, for believing in what we can be!
Let's go change the world!!!
I've compiled a brief outline of the tactics discussed in the document on Rovian strategies I linked to in my blog post earlier today. I don't think this covers the whole playbook (where is the Politics of Fear, for instance), but it's still a handy overview, particularly of the rhetorical techniques employed in this vein. Enough introduction, here's the outline:
1. Take the offensive2. Attack your opponent's strengths3. Accuse your opponent of what he/she is going to accuse you of4. Go negative, then cry foul5. The "big lie"6. Appeal to moral values7. Sell the Bush persona a. Bush, the man of the people b. Bush the macho man c. Never apologize d. Stay the course e. Bush the dimwit8. Sell an adolescent worldview a. An uncomplicated world b. A world of immediate gratification c. A self-absorbed world9. Exploit the media a. Exploit its capabilities b. Denounce the media c. Control the mainstream media through intimidation d. Impose limits on "unscripted encounters" with the media e. Cultivate a network of influential media commentators and media outlets10. Create straw issues11. Employ surrogates12. Use emotional appeals13. Rely on expert testimonials14. Rhetorical devices a. Misrepesenting a person's position and presenting it in a form that people will reject b. Take your opponent's words out of context c. Three-card Monte (make a false statement, admit its falsehood, repeat false statement) d. Shift the burden of proof e. Shift the argument f. Personal testimonials g. Ignore/downplay the evidence h. Substitute fact for truth i. Evasive rhetoric j. Jokes k. Truistic ("truthy") answers l. Diversion m. Vague generalities n. Ignore the main point15. Use of language a. Newspeak b. Connotative words with meanings beyond the dictionary definitions c. Labels that define the opposition or a particular position in a negative way d. Euphemisms that minimize reaction to something negative e. Obfuscation that confuses or disguises meaning f. Code words
Here's the link again to the original document:
http://www.webster.edu/medialiteracy/journal/FINALKARLROVE.pdf
I haven't been as active here lately, but I've spent considerable time (too much, really) on Huffington Post supporting Obama in the intense political battles of their messaging boards. I don't have to tell you there's a lot of opposition out there. A lot of garbage gets tossed out on those boards, and it can be tough to deal with sometimes.
But Democratic leaders like Joe Andrew just want this election to start to make sense. We want to get serious about the problems we're facing in this country, and we're tired of all the games. To that end, I did a little Googling for the Karl Rove Playbook, to gather some insight into the minds of these people and better understand how they operate. What I found was this very interesting academic paper in the Media Literacy section of the web site for Webster University. The paper was written by Dr. Art Silverblatt, a professor of Communications and Journalism at Webster, along with Jane Squier Bruns, a long-time Washington media consultant, and Gina Jensen, a professor of Oral Communications, also at Webster.
The paper is titled "Deciphering Karl Rove's Playbook: Campaign Tactics and Response Strategies". I'm reading it now, and I'll write another blog posting when I'm finished, but I've scanned enough of it to see this is pretty useful information. We don't want to stoop to using the Rovian playbook, but I think knowledge of these tactics is very powerful, and will help us to quickly negate many of the underhanded verbal or tactical maneuvers that we've been seeing.
I hope you'll take a look at this, and let me know what you've found on this topic. I'm excited about the prospect of being able to quickly turn the tables on their sophomoric mind games, and I hope many of you add to this repository of counterweights to the legacy of Bush's Brain.
Half a lifetime ago, way back at the beginning of the campaign, I recall a brief segment at that time on Hardball, before I pretty much swore off watching it. My memory is pretty hazy about that segment. I don't recall who the participants were who were paired off to debate the issue, but the Obama surrogate was a reverend, if I recall, while the other side was taken by some now-anonymous pundit. The issue was something about sex education in school. Obama's position was being ridiculously distorted, and the pundit was terribly exercised about the whole thing. She ranted and raved, while the reverend sat silent and calm. Occasionally, he would be called upon, and all he ever really did was restate Obama's very sensible position, in calm and non-defensive terms. The pundit raved on, and eventually the winner of the debate became self-evident, and the quiet confidence of the reverend was all that was needed. The pundit had been allowed to simply dig herself in a hole. I started to smile as I realized that the Obama campaign would be something that Chris Mathews might not be able to understand, but I did, and I felt strangely moved. I didn't have any thrills up my leg, but nonetheless it made an impression.
Barack Obama has a lot to talk about with the people of Pennsylvania, and to those of North Carolina and Indiana, and a few more. He's got some time now to put forward a serious message, and he can say it in his own way while the other side just keeps on digging that hole. If we've decided that we can believe in the American people, now's the time to really put that faith into practice. Let's help Obama just get the message out, stay "on point", and not be distracted by lowbrow stunts and political ploys. We've come so far, and we've made such progress, and it's been the kind of campaign Obama has wanted to run. It ain't broke at all, so don't fix it. They've got a long time to rant on the other side, and, trust me, they're digging deeper into that hole every time they open their mouths.
If you haven't heard Keith Olbermann's Special Comment tonight, use this link to watch it now:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23601329#23601329
The integrity of this campaign is shining through, and good Americans, even those who have been friends with the Clintons as long as Keith Olbermann has, can't help but see it. We will have the defenders we need. Just play it straight.
I would have much preferred to just win this campaign on the issues. The trouble is, that's exactly what we were doing, and that's why we're ducking the kitchen sink now. We can't let it succeed, and we can't allow ourselves to become the very thing we're trying to put an end to in Washington. Senator Obama hasn't faltered, and I hope that none of you do either. We need hope, but hope is part of a three-point plan: faith, hope, and charity, and the greatest of these, as they say, is charity.
I'm writing this to myself as much as to you. I've become as angry as Olbermann in some of his classic Special Comments, although in the one above it seems not so much anger as pain. I need to do a little thinking about the three-point plan, and I hope you do as well.
Remember that terrible time a few months ago when a gunman wreaked havoc in an Amish village? Do you remember the lessons we learned about real Christian charity from those Amish? I'm trying to find a little of that in myself right now, even though I'd rather find a Hillary supporter and start punching it out. I think we need to find that charity right now even more than we need to win this election, because when it starts to matter more than the three-point plan, well, you see what sort of thing can happen.
There are 549 pledged delegates yet to be won in the remaining primaries, if you don't count Michigan and Florida. Currently, Obama has 1392 delegates and Clinton has 1236. If that's correct, then Obama needs only 197 more pledged delegates (35.8%) to Hillary's 352 (64.1%) to be permanently in the lead, and there's nothing Hillary can do to overtake him. Even in the worst-case scenario, that would occur in Kentucky on May 20, and it will probably happen much sooner. A permanent pledged delegate lead wouldn't be the whole story, of course, considering superdelegates, Florida/Michigan, and not to mention the whole atmosphere of corruption surrounding the process, but that will certainly be a milestone to look forward to.
If we include Florida and Michigan -- and, folks, I wish you'd been more worried about all this back in January -- then the total delegates would be 913, and the magic number climbs to 354 (38.7%) to Hillary's 559 (61.2%).
Any way you slice it, the numbers for Hillary are pretty overwhelming. You might even say it's pointless for her to continue under these conditions. Even if Michigan and Florida re-vote, and she maintains her superdelegate lead, she would have to average 60% wins the rest of the way, and that's not reasonable to expect. Barring the unexpected, we're going to have to put up with this for another couple of months, though, I'm afraid. But once the lead is permanent, and assuming Obama has been doing no worse than expected, that's going to be a pretty tough argument to counter. If Obama just holds his own in Pennsylvania, and does as well as I think he will in Mississippi, North Carolina and Indiana, at that point I just don't think Hillary has any argument to make given these numbers, even if you complicate things by holding do-overs. That's only about 8 weeks away, and that will make any marginal victory Hillary pulls off in Pennsylvania essentially meaningless within two weeks of that primary.
Whew! I'm tired. But I'm ready to make a prediction. Eight weeks from Tuesday, May 6, 2008, is officially the first day of the 2008 Presidential Campaign!
Yes we can!
Samantha Power has resigned due to the leak of her off-the-record comments to The Scotsman on Monday. I think that's a real shame, and I would be proud if the Obama campaign organization would refuse to accept it, and convince her to stay on. Ms. Power is a valuable asset, and I don't think we need to kowtow in any way to the demands of the Clinton camp.
Ms. Power's remarks were not, of course, the most "politically correct" things to say, by any means, but here's something else she said, to the graduating class of Santa Clara in 2006:
... if the shapers of US foreign policy looked out for the human consequences of their decisions, the world and the United States would be far better off. ... the trick is never to confuse means and ends. Cold-blooded reason is a tool that you can employ on behalf of what you believe in. But if you employ reason too soon, it can pre-empt feeling, and you can end up believing nothing at all. Lesson Number Two, then, is "Let reason be your tool, but let justice be your cause."
I can't condemn Ms. Power because she expressed her feeling. The truth is, I feel exactly the same way. She has apologized for the remarks, and the demands from the Clinton camp are, as usual, petty and self-serving. Why should we listen to them?
I will have my differences with Ms. Power, and Senator Obama for that matter, in the future. But I know a valuable asset when I see one, and I urge Senator Obama and Ms. Power to reconcile and continue working together in this campaign.
Don't let them win, folks! Don't let them win anywhere! The apology is sufficient, and Ms. Power is the same positive influence she was before. Would I be so passionate if she were less beautiful? Don't confuse me! Yes, I believe I would be, because you and I can make decisions based on principle, and I strongly believe that Senator Obama and Ms. Power are better when they work together.
A million donors! A million participants in this campaign!
Pfft!
That's nothing. I want to see one hundred million. What's a million, after all? Probably less than one percent of the total eligible voters in this election. What's the matter with the rest of you? You don't have twenty bucks to invest in your future? You want to spend the entire 21st century propping up our puppet government in Iraq? I want some real democracy, how about you?
The future isn't going to happen by itself, and it won't be what either you or I expect. We're on the brink of restoring our government to one that works for all of us, not just for Bush and his pals. We want and need your input. It can't be just what I want, because that won't work. It's got to be all of us, in this together. Join up. Give us your perspective. We're about to put someone in office who doesn't think it's all about him, or even all about his party. Before we were Democrats or Republicans, we were Americans, with American ideals, and that's what I want to be again.
I want to see twenty million more of you by April. Let's get going, people!
I hate all this money in politics! So why did I just pony up another 100 bucks to Obama's campaign? Because, for once in my life, money is speaking my language!
Senator Clinton is falling behind in the money race. Until we get the publicly funded elections we really deserve, we're looking at a moment in time when our little dribs and drabs are making the difference. I don't care how much Bill got out of Kazakhstan, most of their other contributors are maxed out, and we can make the difference with our little nest eggs!
The Clinton campaign is on the ropes financially. I've spent most of my life there, so welcome, Hillary! How d'ya like it down here? I'm putting my money to work with Senator Obama!
We can drown out special-interest politics now before they ever know what hit them. Donate, folks! Give a little extra, even if it hurts! This is our campaign, and Barack Obama will be our President, not Wall Street's, and not Lockheed Martin's! This is our time!
It hasn't happened overnight, and we've still got a long way to go, even long after our President is elected. But we can do something right now that really makes a difference. We can join together and show America and the world the power and unity of the average person, the middle class, the worker that lost his retirement, the family struggling without health care, the soldier who just got called for another tour in Iraq! We are one people!
Together, we are rich! And we are winning!
Obama/Edwards '08!!!
I know, I know, I'm terrible. Before you switch off yet another Hillary hater, you should know that I've written a lot of blog posts, both here and at http://zenhodgepodge.blogspot.com, and I haven't gone in for a bunch of Hillary bashing.
But I had a nightmare, and I need to talk about it.
I dreamed that Hillary won the nomination, and a lot of liberals like me, people of good conscience, knew that we had to support her. We know that a Democrat has to win in November because that will probably make it a much less violent world. Compared to 100 more years in Iraq, and "more wars, my friends", I can suck up a lot of pride and vote for near anyone.
The trouble is, I'm honest. I don't lie well. If I were better at it, maybe I'd be a different person, but I'm not. I don't think I'll ever be quite cut out to be a full-fledged Hillary cheerleader, because I don't think she really "gets" what I'm really about.
I'm about upgrading the way we think about talking to and working with the world. I'm about, as Aristotle once put it, "a community of equals, aiming at the best life possible." And I'm just not sure she really gets all that.
So hey, I'd have to work up the enthusiasm, not "let the perfect be the enemy of the good", as they like to say. I just like the feeling I have now. I don't want to think it will go away. America is charged right now with the possible, and it's not a false hope.
You undecideds out there, you need to figure out what you want. I have to tell you, though, there is a difference. I don't want to be negative, and I'll try to be positive no matter what. I just think I do a better job when I have more to work with.
I just think sometimes I need to be inspired.
It's time for the big Super Tuesday primaries and caucuses all over America. I can feel the momentum is with Obama, but this contest is still wide open. Everyone, you have to stay with this: vote if it's your time to vote, speak to your friends in the voting states, keep getting the word out. There's only a few more hours!
The Audacity of Hope is that it's infectious. Once we allow ourselves to feel it, there's no telling what could happen. I know that great hope can end in great disappointment, but it's better to have loved and lost, as they say. I'm going to keep hoping no matter what happens, and right now I've got plenty extra to go around.
Hope is bigger than Barack Obama. Hope is even bigger than Oprah. Hope is bigger than our selfish, private dreams, because what we're hoping for is to join together.
We're hoping finally to give real peace a chance, like we've been singing for so long.
We're hoping to lift each other up instead of waiting for what trickles down.
We're hoping for a chance to keep raising our voices, long after the votes, and finally be listened to and heard.
We're hoping to be a part of, not just an election, but a world.
We're hoping to be the people we've all been waiting for.
I hope we all win!
I just wrote an eloquent tribute to John Edwards, followed by a call to aggressively recruit him to be immediately announced as Obama's running mate, but the whole web site blew up when I tried to publish it. Drat!!! I think you need more servers, Senator Obama. I'm one of the good folks who brought you Windows Vista, so I can help, if you need me to.
Anyway, I'm not going to type the whole thing over again, especially since this could all disappear again when I click Publish, so I'll just say it straight out.
John Edwards' struggles are our struggles. Let's recruit him to join with us, and convince him to be Senator Obama's running mate. Together, they could definitely be the knockout punch both on Super Tuesday and in November.
I have some nerve, asking for more. Unfortunately, that's the problem with the times we live in.
I'm thrilled by reports that Senator Kennedy will endorse Barack Obama tomorrow, and I hate to ask, but there's something important going on in the Senate tomorrow afternoon, and if Senator Obama and Senator Kennedy stand tomorrow with Senator Dodd and others to oppose the FISA bill, what a real-world example of change in America that would be!
I know everything is happening in a whirlwind, but in the meantime the Bush Administration is still trying to do as much damage as possible. I urge Senator Obama and Senator Kennedy to take a strong stand tomorrow against the many destructive aspects of the upcoming FISA legislation that includes immunity for telecommunication companies that have invaded the privacy of Americans. This is a tremendous opportunity to serve notice that change begins right here and now!
There is so much to do, and so little time. I'm so proud to support this campaign that has brought new inspiration to so many Americans. I hate to ask for more, but do we really have a choice?
I have two questions: the first, I would like to see asked of Senator Clinton, and the second, I would like to have answered by Senator Obama.
My question for Senator Clinton pertains to her comments in the Nevada debate regarding redeployment of troops out of Iraq. She noted that some troops would be required to protect the Embassy, a sentiment shared by the other candidates that evening, but she also said that troops would be required to protect our "strategic interests." Strategic interests, what does that mean? If George Bush had said that, how might we have responded? The phrase is incredibly general, and begs further explanation. So, Senator Obama, in the upcoming South Carolina debate on Monday, please ask Senator Clinton to describe exactly how many troops and what missions might be required to protect our "strategic interests."
My question for Senator Obama is very brief: Senator, you don't honestly think I voted for Ronald Reagan, do you?
Over this past year, I've become rather cynical and hard to please when it comes to politics, not because I'm contrary, but because people die and people suffer, and we haven't done enough to help them. Tonight, some of my cynicism is in at least a temporary retreat.
I'm proud to be a supporter of Barack Obama. I think we have a long way to go, and I think the fierce urgency of now still means we need to think about those people who suffer needlessly right now, not just in 2009 and after. But we're all growing and changing, and that includes Barack Obama. I believe I saw him grow still more in his caucus acceptance speech tonight in Iowa.
America means so much to us, and it means so much to the world. It's too much to take in, and I wonder that Senator Obama must feel a sense of things that could even overwhelm him if he doesn't remain focused. So far, his focus seems pretty good.
I cannot give myself unreservedly to the political process while laws are still allowed to be broken, and people are still allowed to be tortured, no matter who they are. I am not ready to say we've broken our ties to the corrupt values that have threatened to diminish our sense of honor and country, but we've made a start. I believe Senator Obama has a great chance to be the best thing that's happened to our country since George Washington himself, and I'm not exaggerating. There's a chance that we can make this a momentous time, and it will be even better if we focus on justice and cooperation, and not on power and revenge. I believe Senator Obama can be the man to lead us to a new vision of America. We need to remember that the old vision is still very much with us for those to whom that perspective has given advantage.
I've heard inspiring words, and I've seen an impressive victory. I don't prefer cynicism, but we all have to admit that what we need is action. There are many who wait for America to put its mighty power to best use, and there are some who may not be around to see it. The urgency of now is at its most fierce for them.
I'm back, at least for the moment.
After months of enthusiastic support for the Obama campaign, I dropped out of sight here about three weeks ago, after the confirmation of Michael Mukasey as Attorney General. I knew that Obama had opposed Mukasey, but when I saw that the vote was 53-40, and that all the presidential candidates from the Senate had skipped the vote, I realized that any one of those missing Senators could have been the 41st opposing vote, which might have been sufficient to block the nomination altogether.
For me, Michael Mukasey is a symbol of what's terribly wrong right now in America, and I haven't forgiven any of the presidential candidates for missing a golden opportunity to stand up and fight for real justice. But I've been supporting Obama for a long time, and I'm trying to shake off the shock of a torture-supporting AG long enough to give the Obama campaign a chance to defend itself. So here it is:
Can someone from the Obama campaign offer a legitimate defense for the decision to offer only token resistance to Michael Mukasey? Unacceptable responses: (1) Obama was stuck on the campaign trail; (2) Mukasey is "old news". This is still a very important and very relevant question. I believe that many of the concerns I have are shared by other thoughtful citizens, so I reject the notion that my concerns here represent an isolated, marginal opinion. I submit that this is a very important and as yet completely unadressed concern that needs to be answered.
I've watched the news and press releases in vain for some response on this. America seems anxious to "move on" from the Mukasey nomination, but if you'll notice, Mr. Mukasey is currently in the Attorney General's office, and currently shaping the policy of the Department of Justice. We're still living with the results of this decision, and I still need an answer.
This is very important to me, folks. Be warned that I have a highly functional bs meter, but please, can someone explain to me why Obama did not actively oppose the most morally bereft political appointment of our generation?
Thanks in advance for your response.
We've witnessed quite a spectacle in Congress the last few days. Judge Michael Mukasey could not define waterboarding in terms of torture, nor could he define the limits of the law with respect to the President, yet somehow those issues were not deemed to be sufficient to deny him the post of Attorney General. I've been essentially in a state of numbness since Schumer and Feinstein declared their support, but I have some feeling in my fingers again, and they seem to be pounding on the keyboard.
It's too late to prevent Mr. Mukasey from being the law enforcement leader of our nation, however sadly ironic that may be, but it's never too late to say that enough is enough. I'm calling on Barack Obama to be much stronger than he has been in the face of these outrages. A few paragraphs of a press release was obviously insufficient to prevent the institutionalization of torture within our justice system, and that's not something I'm going to forget. There needs to be a change.
I want to nag at Senator Obama's -- and everyone's -- conscience for what we've allowed to occur here. This is no small matter, and I vow to get this message to Senator Obama himself. I have believed strongly in this campaign, but the confirmation of Judge Mukasey was a fundamental event that the term "national disgrace" doesn't even begin to describe. We, and Senator Obama, have allowed something to occur that we should not have done. It's a signal to all of us that we're just not doing enough.
Senator Obama, I call on you to recognize the abject failure of a system that has allowed this to occur. I call on you to stand very firm now, and say "this far and no farther." It's very clear that if we focus entirely on the nomination, we lose it, because we forgot to be mindful of our problems in the here and now.
There's much more I want to say. I want to think of the most effective way to say it. I'll be back.
In the latest polls as reported by CNN today, polling for the Democratic nominee shows Hillary Clinton's steadily climbing lead has finally slowed, and is actually decreasing. What had been a lead of 30 percentage points has fallen to just 19. Another month like that, and Obama might be the next "inevitable" winner!
I would prefer just to focus on Barack Obama's message of hope for the future, and just have faith in the political system and Americans to pick the best candidate, but we know that isn't the way it always works. I've never been a fan of "situational ethics", either, so if ethics are important to me anywhere, they must be equally important to me as I try to help my candidate win the Democratic nomination. With that in mind, I offer a link to an article published in The Nation magazine a few months ago called Hillary, Inc, not because it stoops to any sort of character assassination or "politics of personal destruction", which I would abhor, but very legitimate concerns about the leading candidate. This article by noted contributor Ari Berman, elicited much discussion when it was published in late May of this year, and stands today as one of the most thoughtful expressions of the concerns we all share regarding the woman who may be passed the torch of the Democratic Party, and the United States of America.
If you're here, you probably already know who the best candidate is. But let's face it, we still don't have a clear majority. We're simply not going to get there without being very clear about why our candidate isn't just good, but better. We can't just describe; we have to compare and contrast.
Let's be nice, and let's be fair. I hope the best person wins. But let's be committed to making sure no one casts an "automatic" vote for the "favorite". There is so much at stake, and Americans are desperate to know if the deck is stacked. We have a responsibility to ask all the questions, and get all the answers we need in times like these.
I have written several blog entries on this site when I thought I might have a perspective worth sharing regarding Barack Obama and his pursuit of the Democratic nomination. I have tried to maintain a sense of the tone and spirit of this campaign, because I believe in it, and I want to share with you the hope and promise that is symbolized by this campaign. But this entry is for me. It is offered with the standard disclaimer, that the views of personal bloggers do not necessarily represent the views and policies of the Barack Obama Presidential Campaign.
Today I am angry. I don't feel like trying quite so hard to be "politically correct" in this entry. I maintain a much less "correct" blog at blogger.com, and for once, I would like to merge my two blogging personas, and request that you read my posting today at http://zenhodgepodge.blogspot.com. I discuss the confirmation hearings for Attorney General, among other things. And I discuss torture.
I'm not sure yet when I will stop being angry. I suspect we may want to consider whether anger, too, has a part in this campaign. One of my primary reasons for supporting Barack Obama is that he seems to have the will to rise above anger, and I know how important that truly is. But beneath our civility as we attend to the practical, reasonable attitudes we must maintain, we need to touch base once in a while with the raw essentials. I think we need to remind ourselves just how important all this is.
