I admire that Obama seems to appreciate a few of the things that Ronald Reagan got right, and is willing to say so, and I don’t mean just the “morning in America” cosmetics, nor does Obama. But I hope even more, assuming he wins, that he’ll study a few of the things Jimmy Carter got wrong.

My main worry about Obama is idealistic Carteresque incompetence in foreign affairs, whereas I have no worries at all about McCain on that score. But since McCain’s aspiration seems to be to reincarnate Theodore Roosevelt for the 21st century, I’m likely to hit D in November.

My wife and mother had been in the Clinton camp, but they’ve gone undecided or Obama-leaning. I think they’ll both flip to Obama.

The vast majority of Americans? I think that overstates it by quite a bit. We have one of the highest standards of living in the world in this country. I don’t want to belittle the plight of thousands of Americans who don’t have enough to eat, don’t have adequate shelter or clothing, don’t have adequate access to medical care, etc., but in the numbers game it is something far less than the majority that are shouldering the cruelest burdens.

There are a couple of reasons why I really like Obama and will be voting for him in the primaries. 1. He won’t screw me on a Supreme Court nominee. This is always my number 1 concern in Presidential politics. 2. He’s a natural statesman. Our foreign policy desperately needs that right now. We will need a face to signal to the world that the madness of the Bush foreign policy is at an end and I think Obama is the best man for the job. 3. He’s the first major minority candidate who doesn’t stump on the issue of victimization. That’s huge. This is a guy who actually has a shot of getting middle america to listen to him on race issues, because he doesn’t start every conversation with “You guys screwed us big time and it’s time to pay up.” And as Ken pointed out, he’s willing to challenge his base to look in the mirror. 4. He’s a breath of fresh air. Of all the candidates, he’s been part of the machine the least. One dares to imagine that a new idea might actually have a chance of flourishing in his administration. I think most American’s are desperately fatigued by the state of our politics and it’s nice having a guy around who isn’t as shackled to the status quo as some of the other candidates.

I don’t know if Obama can beat Hillary. It will be tough. The party machine knows exactly what it will be getting in Hillary, which could end up with her running away with the nomination, but right now it looks like he has a chance. I’m excited about that, particularly since I think Obama will be the strongest candidate that the Democrats can field against the Republicans.

And Brian, you say about Obama much better than I ever could what I want to say about him. So I’ll just say: Obamarama! Wooooooooooo! (maybe!) *makes double fisted rock & roll signs, wags tongue*

As a nation, we seem to have come to the understanding that the President really should be a Super Legislator. We care about their policy positions. We demand 1000-page white papers on how they would solve any particular problem if given unlimited purse strings. But Presidents aren’t Super Legislators, and they shouldn’t be.

Legislator’s craft legislation on behalf of their constituents, that hopefully address the problems that they face. That isn’t the role of the Executive Branch, and I get mystified when that appears to be the criteria that some people use to select a candidate.

The role of the Executive is to get us all pointed in the right direction. Not the right ideological direction. That will get sorted out in Congress. The role of the Executive is to think big picture.

The most important angle that I think Obama is taking here – and the one that resonates most with me – is that WE are the ones that need to do the heavy lifting. WE have to solve the problems. Not the President. Not Congress. The People.

That’s why I am so completely unimpressed by Hillary’s command of policy details. I don’t care what her solution is. I’m cynical enough to know up front that it won’t work. Government isn’t our savior. Government should facilitate our ability to solve problems – not replace it.

Hillary Clinton is prepared to lead Democrats. Barack Obama is prepared to lead Americans. Maybe that’s not what you are interested in. I am.

Edwards could get away with his rhetoric solely because he is white. Not that it helped him. If Obama ran using Edwards’s rhetoric, his candidacy, and his electability, really would resemble Jesse Jackson’s.

You know, maybe it’s that word hope that bugs me so much. I just see it as another facet of the Horatio Alger myth that America is supposedly built on. It’s also patently untrue. For the vast majority of Americans, life is not happy. They are poor, they are hungry, they have no safety net. Hope is a false message. A direct change in policy and a ton of money are what’s needed, not the audacity of hope. What’s audacious about it is how thin it really is.

I did see that today Obama came up with what might be an effective counter to Empress Hillary’s “ready from Day One” rhetoric. The speech outlined a series of mistakes he thinks that she made (agreeing to the Iraq war, agreeing with Bush on Iran, etc.). It concludes with – “it’s not enough to be ready from Day One – you have to be right from Day One”. Touche.

I haven’t seen a single Obama policy that I would call “running to the middle”. Is “hope” something that is seen as “running to the middle” in your fruity leftist circles?