Kos writes about Lawrence Lessig's endorsement of Senator Barack Obama and I think both Kos' reaction and Lessig's endorsement are troubling in that they ask next to nothing of Obama while being too willing to embrace the false Media narrative regarding Hillary Clinton. Lessig writes:

But the part that gets me the most about Senator Clinton is the eager embrace of spinelessness. I don't get this in Democrats generally. I never have, but I especially don't get it after two defeats to the likes of George Bush (ok, one defeat, but let's put that aside for the moment). Our party seems constitutionally wedded to the idea that you wage a campaign with tiny speech. Say as little as possible. Be as uncontroversial as you can. Embrace the chameleon as the mascot.

Kos reacts:

Yeah, that pretty much sums up the problem with Hillary.

Assume that is true. Is anyone pretending it does not describe Barack Obama? To endorse an endorsement of Obama that, in its core argument, is an attack on failings that Obama possesses is ludicrous.

If people want more from Hillary's challengers, and by extension, more from Hillary, they simply can not let the Hillary challengers off the hook. Here both Lessig (who as a longtime friend of Obama's is not someone I am really looking to for an objective view of the candidates) and Kos (whom I expect better from), give Obama a free ride. We get the candidates we settle for. Here Kos and Lessig have settled for an Obama who has demonstrated the very flaws they condemn. It makes no sense.