Well, if I am to be pedantic, I would say that Hitleresque, does not mean Nazi. It means, 'like Hitler', and you could say that about any one who stood in front if a crowd of cheering adulents, like Hitler did. You might even say Charlie Chaplin was Hitleresque, that didn't make him a Nazi.

But... if I am to be honest, then the truth is, I've never understood KA's posts and I seldom pay them any notice. My silence with regards to KA is not acquiescence. I simply can't follow his arguments very well.

NT, Bam is a demagogue, and we would all do well to be suspicious of him. Even someone like you, who as a black man has been waiting for the day when a black man becomes president with bated breath for as long as you can remember, would do well not to fall into the samba line without careful evaluation....I will be reading Dreams of my Father soon, and am looking forward to learning a bit more about this B-2 stealth candidate.

Americans are notorious for turning against their "darlings", and the near cultic characteristics of OM are such that many Americans will be extremely skeptical. Inspiring your closest supporters into high levels of passion is considered a good thing in American politics, but inspiring tens of millions to the same levels scares a lot of people. The simple fact is that mass political rallies are not really as much of "an American thing", but we do have a cultural awareness of them. Unfortunately for Obama, most of the images that shape that awareness are not of the Orange Revolution and the Lebanese paroxysm against the Syrian puppets, but rather the images of Il Duce and Der Fuerher, of the massive protests of the Vietnam Era. These are not cultural references that speak of hope and uniting and positive change. In short, Obamamania as a mass political phenomena is swimming against the historical American cultural stream. Perhaps the river will shift, will get a boost by somehow connecting with the sense of Dr. King's appearances on the Mall, but such positive mass political rallies are outnumbered by the negatives. These are considerations completely apart from his message.

Only in America would a candidate who can draw crowds of over 10,000 people into basketball arenas be considered disturbing.

Only in America is "free will" mistaken for "mass hysteria" and "aptitude for eloquence" with "shrewd manipulation"

Only in America does a candidate who draws typically disinterested voters away from their video games and trash TV considered a "bad" thing.

Only in America do both professional pundits (who really ought to know better) and amateur analysts draw upon erroneous comparisons between a Black liberal and two dead Fascists to explain what they clearly do not understand.

Only in America are concerned and involved citizens who choose to stand out in the cold, drive hundreds of miles, show genuine emotion or (ohmigawd) actually consider voting for a non-Caucasian candidate considered "cultists," "delusional," "mindless," "obnoxious," and worse.

Only in America can you find so many snobby elitists demonstrate how much contempt and disdain they have for the masses of humanity.

Only in America will you see so many smart people making so many dumb analogies.

Only in America will you find people confusing an earnest longing for genuine variety instead of what is usually offered as a thing to be dismayed and despised.

Only in America is it preferable to say, "Those people just don't get it" than it is to say, "I just don't get it."

Only in America... Ya gotta love it or it would make you just cry.

"I'll do whatever he says to do," actress Halle Berry said to the Philadelphia Daily News. "I'll collect paper cups off the ground to make his pathway clear."

"... a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany ... and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama" - Barack Obama Lebanon, New Hampshire. January 7, 2008.

"What he did and what he promised to do are full of political instruction and also of warning. In his own State of Louisiana he showed how it is possible to destroy self-government while maintaining its ostensible and legal form. He made himself an unquestioned dictator…. In reality, Senator Long set up a Fascist government in Louisiana. It was disguised, but only thinly. There was no outward appearance of a revolution, no march of Black Shirts upon Baton Rouge, but the effectual result was to lodge all the power of the State in the hands of one man. If Fascism ever comes in the United States it will come in something like that way."

~ The New York Times, September 11, 1935


This is just one of the infinite number of paradoxes and contradictions surrounding a man who openly believed in using the machinery of state for economic intervention in pursuit of social and political ends, spending in the process money which he had to take from others, and yet has been hailed as a champion of the little man, enfranchiser of the poor and the disadvantaged, defender of those with anti-war views and of the Constitution, and sharp critic of the price-fixing contained in the New Deal and of monopolistic concentration in restraint of trade. The story of Huey Long still exerts a surprising fascination.

Only in America is it preferable to say, "Those people just don't get it" than it is to say, "I just don't get it."

Only in America... Ya gotta love it or it would make you just cry.

It would seem that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox hunting, bullfighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.

We didn't coin the phrase "slick talking hustler" for nothing;

Indeed this talk of "creepiness" is all partisan nonsense and I think most of us know it.

How exactly is it creepy that Americans are exciting about a political candidate?

It should be far more frightening when a candidate can't get an enthusiastic response, it's a sign that the nation is intellectually and politically moribund.

I think it's cute really.

JFK was an American hero.

Barack Obama is like Hitler.

So... when is the history book burning?

Only in America would a candidate who can draw crowds of over 10,000 people into basketball arenas be considered disturbing.

No modern political figure has had this cult of personality.

See now that's just not true.

Not one popular candidate in this election cycle has been propelled to the top on the basis of policy. Not one.

When the country is going in the wrong direction personality politics are typical, that's why Reagan followed Carter.

Charisma is a part of politics, we just keep forgetting because we are only exposed to the John Kerry's and John McCain's of the world.

Only in America can you find so many snobby elitists demonstrate how much contempt and disdain they have for the masses of humanity.

How exactly is it creepy that Americans are exciting about a political candidate?

However, Reagan ran on a platform of increasing our military strength, cutting taxes, and getting government out of the lives of the people. Now, how much he accomplished might be debateable, but he had a platform.

I don't recall reading stories of how people fainted at his rallies or how people scream out "I love you, Ronnie!!" or major movie stars saying that want to clean the floor in front of him so he has a clear path. I could be wrong, maybe those things happened. I was a bit young back then...

It will depend on how far the hysteria goes I guess. At the moment, it looks like so many other American political rallies, only now theres a touch of gospel some where in the mix. Personally I find gospel pretty creepy though, so yes, maybe its all in the eye of the beholder.

Only in America would a candidate who can draw crowds of over 10,000 people into basketball arenas be considered disturbing.

Only in America is "free will" mistaken for "mass hysteria" and "aptitude for eloquence" with "shrewd manipulation"

Only in America does a candidate who draws typically disinterested voters away from their video games and trash TV considered a "bad" thing.

Only in America do both professional pundits (who really ought to know better) and amateur analysts draw upon erroneous comparisons between a Black liberal and two dead Fascists to explain what they clearly do not understand.

Only in America are concerned and involved citizens who choose to stand out in the cold, drive hundreds of miles, show genuine emotion or (ohmigawd) actually consider voting for a non-Caucasian candidate considered "cultists," "delusional," "mindless," "obnoxious," and worse.

Only in America can you find so many snobby elitists demonstrate how much contempt and disdain they have for the masses of humanity.

Only in America will you see so many smart people making so many dumb analogies.

Only in America will you find people confusing an earnest longing for genuine variety instead of what is usually offered as a thing to be dismayed and despised.

Only in America is it preferable to say, "Those people just don't get it" than it is to say, "I just don't get it."

Only in America... Ya gotta love it or it would make you just cry.

George Orwell wrote:

Liberals are fascist, Also Reagan, Bush, Clinton, the GOP, the Dems and as Orwell noted cats, dogs, Burger King, etc.

All over the world supposed intellect used to demonize should be cause for concern because the attempts to use baited propaganda to spread hate and dissension precludes the use of rational thought or any attempts at wisdom at all.

We didn't coin the phrase "slick talking hustler" for nothing;

We also coined pseudo intellectual.

It's a shame Mr. Orwell had turned to strong drink before he wrote that piece you quote.

Let me put it this way: Any time a candidate for president too closely resembles a Southern revivial preacher in delivery and effect, then we should be nervous.

Mr Giuliani was the first to pay homage to Mr Reagan, whose widow Nancy sat in the front row beside Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. President Ahmadinejad of Iran had to be confronted just as Mr Reagan confronted the Soviet Union.

"He has to understand it's not an option. He cannot have nuclear weapons. And he has to look at an American president and he has to see Ronald Reagan.

Remember, they looked in Ronald Reagan's eyes, and in two minutes, they released the hostages."

It doesn't mean he IS a fascist; it doesn't mean there is anything necessarily wrong with the candidate.

They know that Obama, more than any other candidate represents change in the only way they can understand. He's new, it's that simple. Edwards was a VP nominee, Hillary has been in the White House, McCain is Methuselah's older brother. Barack Obama gave the Keynote speech in 2004, that's it. Nationally, people really don't know much about him. So they think he'll change things. I hope he will change things, I expect he will not.

People want leadership, Mr. President, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand.

Senator, there's a growing chorus of people who love you (and some who are infatuated but want to fall in love) waiting for you to take us and this campaign to the next level. We're getting anxious and a little concerned. ...

Short Prelude: Last summer and fall, I wrote a couple of HuffPo columns suggesting that if Gore and Hillary weren't willing to team up and run together as the two Democratic titans, then the idea of Barack Now seemed pretty darn good. Some college students on Facebook agreed with me, we had a few phone calls, and well, some pretty interesting stuff developed after that.

For the most part though, I have been watching the race develop from the sidelines. As a former DNC staffer who spent 3 years working to upend the last Bush presidency in 1992, I will freely admit that it's very difficult for me to take sides in a Democratic primary. I much prefer a role where I work quietly behind the scenes to "raise the bar" on what all of the candidates are saying and doing on the issues, and this cycle, I have been trying to play that role around the issue of energy and climate.

But now I think it's time to take a public stand, and lay out what I think it will take to win me over for good -- and maybe win over a few other voters too.

So here goes.

Dear Senator Obama:

I think I speak for a great many political pros -- and regular Joes -- in wondering when we will be seeing your next big, bold, audacious move. We're out here hoping, in droves.

So forgive me in advance for speaking bluntly, Senator, it's a personality trait of mine and not necessarily a good one. But the clock is ticking and sometimes politeness doesn't cut the mustard -- especially in presidential politics.

Yes, it's great that you are winning the money race with record numbers of small donors, but you won't have a truly great campaign until you deliver a message that does more than make the call for hope. In my experience, Americans are desperately seeking to embrace a signature idea that involves them directly in fixing their communities. Voters and non-voters alike want to know more about how they literally can roll up their sleeves and join in a new, Habitat-for-Humanity-style project of national renewal.

You seemed to hint at all that in your Springfield announcement speech, but so far you haven't told us what we can do other than wait for your election or write you a check. We're yearning for more.

Now I get that your campaign team is wisely trying to avoid the mistakes of Democratic campaigns past. No disagreement from me that we need to avoid debates over dry policy plans which fail to engage voters at the deep, emotional, gut level we need to tap.

My gut is that the answer lies in marrying a call to national service around energy efficiency and independence - getting young and old, union worker and apprentice, city and rural, black and brown and white, retrofitting a new America and busy creating the jobs and industries of tomorrow. This is hardly a new idea, but no one yet owns the idea in this campaign. To own it you need to bet big and go all in, Texas hold-em style.

People want the whole enchilada - new federal R&D and clean energy earmarks in every Congressional district, national service to weatherize the 13 million homes that remain eligible for federal assistance (many in inner cities), and I'll even bet Americans would reach into their pockets and buy freedom bonds to invest even more if they knew the jobs created would stay at home.

I don't really care what you call it. Call it Project Hope. A Green New Deal as Tom Friedman does. A green corps to rival FDR's civilian conservation corps in a new century. A new Apollo project. Renew America. Operation Iraqi Freedom. The What-Else-We-Need-To-Do-After- We-Buy-A-Prius-12-Step-Nutri-S ystem. Or honestly...I'll (even) Take Manhattan. As in Project. That's your marketing team's call.

But I won't take no for an answer, because mark my words, your failure to deliver a compelling and big idea will cost you the election.

So what's the hold-up to giving Americans what they've been craving for?

Could it be that the hurdle to moving forward lies in your own campaign's structure? With all due respect, I worry you may be repeating the fatal flaw that the Kerry campaign made in 2004 by creating silo-ed "policy groups" and treating the energy issue as a separate issue rather than as a centerpiece of a smart war on terror and winning economics.

Understand in your gut, as voters already do, that all of these issues are connected.

Otherwise you will be stuck, as you are right now, in wonky debates within your campaign apparatus and in the public sphere over whose CAFÉ standard is better in 2018 or whether an 80% or 90% carbon cut by 2050 is enough, or whether we can afford more federal spending, or if we should subsidize Detroit or any of the dinosaur industries who will never be the leaders until their competitors from the renewable side are given the level playing fields and the markets they need to compete.

Like I said, voters' eyes glaze over when they hear about this stuff.

Voters draw closer when you explain how we can create a new America - with our own hands, from downtown Detroit to the sprawl of Las Vegas.

What will it take to be unassailable to the serious policy crowd and the editorial writers? My recommended benchmark will be specific investment commitments -- basically an Iraq War's worth (say $400-500 billion) -- as well as caps and targets. We can nerd out on the details another time, but this isn't anywhere near the zone of political suicide - in fact, you can let others lead the call for carbon taxes and instead offer up a smart mix of federal investment, tax and subsidy shifts, loan guarantees and capital account budgeting to pay for the program, drive economic growth and satisfy both Bob Rubin budget hawks and Al Gore. Voters meanwhile will love it: they'll hear you say you want to invest billions in our communities and create millions of American jobs. Set and match.

Don't listen to me though. Dial up your old law school classmate Alan Jenkins in New York and see how his idea for "opportunity impact assessments" could free up new public investment for critically needed infrastructure projects, by making sure that we do all the math when it comes to life cycle cost analysis.

Or sit down with Van Jones of the Ella Baker Center, Anthony Thigpenn of SCOPE and Billy Parish and the whole campus challenge crew working on a serious Clean Energy Corps proposal right now.

Or meet with John O'Donnell and Vinod Khosla of Ausra.com to learn about concentrated solar technology and the emerging economic case for ending coal.

I'd advise you do this all quickly, and support a new surge for change and national service involving Americans of all ages (not just young people!!) -- before Hillary Clinton or anyone else steps into the breach. If she does dust off a green version of national service (in honor of the late, great Eli Segal), and commits to putting enough "putting people first" investment money into the pot, I'll bet a lot more folks will be voting for her, even inspired by her. Maybe even me.

Here's my hope. Elevate this campaign, challenge us, and remind America how audacious we all can be.

Do it and I believe you'll have the wind at your back. And millions more behind you.

QUOTE(nighttimer @ Mar 3 2008, 03:31 AM)

Only in America would a candidate who can draw crowds of over 10,000 people into basketball arenas be considered disturbing.

All over the world, demagoguery and mass audience manipulation should be cause for concern because the emotion of the moment precludes the wisdom of clear, dispassionate thought.

We didn't coin the phrase "slick talking hustler" for nothing; Obama and the Kingfish, Huey P. Long, could be two sides of the same coin--of course, one side of the coin is silver, and one side is copper....

Alexander Hamilton likened democracy to anarchy, and not without reason. There are some citizens who'd be best served (and who would best serve society) by staying umbilically attached to their PS2....

Speaking only for this amateur analyst, having majored in PoliSci and read, oh, maybe 1000 books on politics and political philosophy, I think I understand it. We have a group of folks who see their sugar daddy and they cannot wait to get their payout--you included....

Mr. Hamilton, ditto. And, not only did our Founding Fathers establish a republic, they greatly feared democracy. James Madison wrote in "Essay #10" of The Federalist Papers: "... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

Sooooo, a little elitism is not always a bad thing, and I am sure Harvard law Obama and Yale law HC have a wee bit of elitism in their ken, even if they hide it behind a good dose of the Kingfish's "populism".

I apologize for them, whoever they are.

As one of my Irish friends said to me, "America is like nowhere else. We are hoping for Obama to win, just to see what happens. What is taking place on your side of the pond couldn't happen anywhere else. No other country on earth would elect a black minority as president, or even have one get this far."

Only in America is it preferable to say, "Those people just don't get it" than it is to say, "I just don't get it."

Whatever....

Only in America... Ya gotta love it or it would make you just cry.

Fascists, if they ever take over, will do it wrapped in an American flag....and with a union card.... and with a good motive in their heart that tramples over limited government. Like universal health care, universal child care, universal retirement, surtax on all profits, tax on retirement accounts, green taxes on all of those "mean" polluters that give us jobs, etc.