I'm a fairly un-reconstructed hippie who believes in love and peace and all that apparently old-fashioned stuff.  I'm not naive, but, at the least, I think that, we need to play fairly.  And so on this site I've been defending Obama (and defending Clinton too), and on other sites I've been defending Clinton.  (I wrote to Josh Marshall and complained about his claim that Clinton wanted that MSNBC guy fired.  I explained what I thought was the whole context and a reasonable inference.  He wrote back, was pretty nice about it, but basically said he disagreed on the interpretation.  I still think he's very wrong on that issue, but he kept my respect with his answer to me)

My son recently had to do a report on MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech.  And so we found it on YouTube and watched it.  In that speech MLK talks about  how that even though blacks are getting physically and mentally brutalized, they shouldn't  stoop to that level and lose the moral authority of their argument.

I see an analogy to what's going on here.  Both Obama and Clinton are fighting the good fight, and, for the most part, they are taking the high road (despite what must be enormous pressures to the contrary).  If we want the other to not engage in dirty politics, then we have to be above it, too.

And so I wish the supporters would do the same.  I know, I know, it's hard when we're so passionate about it.  But, hey, we can look at it as practice -- being masters of our own passions is a good things.

Criticism is fine if it's fair and relevant, imho.  Want to criticize Obama for missing a vote, that's fine.  Want to say he's got no substance, and that's just plain untrue and unfair.  

So, yeah, when I see stuff unbalanced and unfair, I have the urge to try to step in and balance it.

It's very comforting to know that a few people here have noticed that I have tried my best to be fair.  I was getting the feeling that I was completely useless here.

Every little bit helps.  Think globally and act locally, ya know!  Let's all raise the level of our discourse.

I hear what you're saying about Obama's unity message, and, if I may elaborate a different take on it (not that I think you'll agree, but perhaps you'll better understand where some of his supporters are coming from):

I think that people are overstating what his "unity" message means.  He doesn't mean, at all, to compromise with people that are just unalterably opposed to his ideals (e.g., rabid anti-abortionists).  Clearly, no compromise can be made with them.  Period.  Furthermore, of course he's not naive enough to think that the RW Noise Machine is not going to do their best to rake him over the coals.

But I think (and I hope) that his message will appeal to some decent percentage of people that this hyperpartisanship has got to stop.  Look, we all know that the Dems will not control 60 votes in the Senate, and that, if the hyperpartisanship doesn't stop then a minority of 45-or-whatever GOP Senators can stop everything that any Dems want to do: health care and everything else.

So how do we get past that?  In part, we get past it by getting our own citizens who vote to demand something better.  In part, we keep talking about getting people to focus on the bigger picture (health care for Americans) rather than scoring political points.

Will it magically make everything good?  Of course not.  But changing our attitudes about this stuff requires a leader who will challenge us to change our attitudes.  When JFK said "ask not ...", he was challenging American citizens, and those citizens responded.  Some of the "best and brightest" saw public service as a high ideal -- and it brought us everything from Peace Corps volunteers (spreading good, and goodwill about America, across the world), to the Great Society (which, despite some overreach, did reduce poverty in America quite significantly).  But it took a leader to inspire us to do that.  With words.

Will Obama be able to inspire at least some folks to change their ways?  I don't know, but, to many, it's worth a shot.  It's worth a shot because it's an empowering message.  It's a positive message.  And, Obama's right that the last American leader to have a powerful positive message was Reagan.  The left (and I am a proud member of the left) complains too much, while the right is proud about this and proud about that, and etc.

Will it work?  I don't know.  But to many, it's worth a shot.  To paraphrase that slogan: "perhaps we can" <g>  The hyperpartisanship (and, yes, I'll place almost all the blame on the GOP for it) has got to stop.  It's killing us.  Obama's right in that all the good candidates have 10-point plans.  The question is: will the plans die in Washington?