Barak Obama gave a typically amazing speech, handicapped only by the obligatory pro-joe stuff. You could just feel the energy in the room decrease every time he had to praise Joe. He must have hated to do it. A great orator hates to ruin a good address. One of the best cheers for Barak came when he attacked the War and the lies that led to it - I just wish I had been close enough to see Joe's expression.

Lieberman, with his all his faults, wouldn't have had secret energy policy meetings or had enron write the damned policy. He wouldn't have declared total war on the environment or shot somebody in the face and tried to cover it up.

To delude yourself by hanging on to the past and any little crumb they throw us is to delay any real improvement or change.

All potential national progressive choices within the Dem party will end up like Dean or Wellstone.

CHICAGO Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) will be chief speaker at the Associated Press luncheon at the Fairmont Hotel Monday afternoon following the AP annual meeting there. In his talk, according to a text obtained by AP today, he will accuse the Bush administration of a "stubborn refusal" to attack the causes of climate change, and say that tougher fuel standards, stricter curbs on oil imports and more investment in cleaner energy are essential to avert global catastrophe.

but has our political discourse lowered itself to the point that "its not as bad as Bush?" is considered a real choice?

This is not a serious effort. Saying that America is addicted to oil without following a real plan for energy independence is like admitting alcoholism and then skipping out on the 12-step program. It's not enough to identify the challenge - we have to meet it. [emphasis mine]

And we are going to have to get better educated - how given the corporate media?

The people are ready

the point is that the polls show that the people already know. They dont need more education they need a means of exercising that knowledge.

And you are going off to take on the corps who own the politicians and news media and actually expect to get anywhere

But by then will we have any means of effecting that change?

Clearly Obama gets it, clearly Lieberman gets it,

Lieberman is no conservative-he's just a liberal who doesn't hate his country.

for Nader really showed 'em, didn't it?

Maybe one day the South American revolt against corporations, the world bank, the IMF will spread up here. The American ideals that we were brain washed about in scholl are not reality. Corporate power is the reality. It has always been in the US except for the hiccup after the 29 crash.

that the Dems didn't learn anything from what Nader did, but instead, proceeded to further alienate the alienated.

I'd like you to address the bed sharing with the corporate machine of which the Democratic Party is thoroughly guilty

I'd like you to address the "me-too" God stuff so popular with all Democrats, from Obama to Hillary to Leiberman to Salazar to good ole what's-his-name who just won that "big race in Virginia."

Corporate power is the reality. It has always been in the US except for the hiccup after the 29 crash.

Sometimes all ya get is the choice between bad and worse. Take 2004, for example.

Again, you let the perfect be the enemy of the good,

After all, I live in Texas, where a Dem vote is the equivalent of urinating into a hurricane anyway.

Maybe Hilary understands that.

You do realize that you're continuing to uphold as an ideal a pure panderer don't you?

I often notice that the interlocutors rarely address one another's points but instead throw distinct points past one another.

It made it that much harder for dems to pursue a progressive tract.

THis is a problem with America not the Democrats.

People go to Church. We don't want to alienate them. We want to respect their right to do that.

Slickness, political savvy, whatever you want to call it: how's about for purposes of substantive discourse we drop it as something to emulate altogether.

Play the politician by changing the massess.

And as soon as you sight a prominent Democratic politician actually in the business of doing that, striving to change public consciousness, please let me know.

Trying to impact the mass consciousness in a positive way is one thing. Trying to convince the masses that you are 'just like them,' not out of touch like the other guy, why that there's another thang.

the politician, being of a socipath personality type, only cares about him or herself and will do whatever it takes to get elected.

As things get worse for the average person, then change will be possible. Public financing of campaigns would be part of the answer. Not going to happen.

Didn't you learn anything when you read 1984.

Another book you should try and read is Fromm's book "Escape from Freedom".

I don't put that much emphasis on the act of voting. Democracy is a 365 day a year effort. I want better candidates, but there is no panacea anywhere on the near horizon.

Vonnegut principle: be kind whenever possible