WAde – Cut and pasting one of your (unsolicited) resposes to O’s race speech (you had a few – none nego). Just wondering – no irony! – do you recall another Amerian pol who has offered a speech that was more intellectually stimulating to you? I’d argue that O’s acceptance speech and his recent address on patriotism were also pretty worthy. The one on volunteerism wasn’t bad either. I think O has often reached for a pretty high level of discoure over the past few months – Certainly higher that what I’ve come to expect from American pols. (Compare O to someone like Romney who consciously tried to seem dumber on the stump than he is.) I’m not expecting you to support O given his politics – he certainly does believe in a more activist government than you do and he’s going to aim to get out of Iraq quicker than McCain. But I’m wondering why you think it’s mad for someone with my politics to support him! Seems pretty obvious that he’s the most imaginative pol of our time. Consider that WaPo guy’s Ignatius’s response to O’s Patriotism speech – Iggy(as I mentioned) has been pretty good on Iraq, yet he sees what I see in Obama. And what you saw in March – “I’m impressed with his mettle,” you wrote then. And here’s Iggy today – “Obama doesn’t try to please everyone in these situations. [Thus the critique of the Betrayus ad - no comment on that Wade?] When he decides he’s in trouble (and that sometimes takes him awhile), he goes to the heart of the matter — into territory that a more cautious and traditional politician would avoid.” Given my biases toward writerly types, I’m certainly going to OVERESTIMATE the importance of O’s expressions. But am I mad to believe in his intellectual “mettle?” Were you and/or Iggy? O’s mind matters. It’s wrong to think a book – or a speech – can’t be as important as a Bill. (And, as it happens O has been responsible for a good book AND a good bill.) TR wasn’t wrong re the presidency being a bully pulpit. I’m not one of those folks who thought Bush was/is dumb. And he gave some speeches that mattered bigtime. That post-911 address on America’s traditions of religous freedom/tolerance was important. But the prospect of having a Pres with a mind as alive as O’s is pretty thrilling. Matters more to me than, say, his lack of biz experience. Truth is, I’d take his three years as an organizer over a thousand executive decisions. That’s just me of course, but if you want a live enactment of your first principle -”There’s no I in team…but for all efforts there are four different and distinct letters forming the word in team.” – Read Obama’s chapters on organzing in Altgeld project. But if your time is tight, just focus on the campaign Obama has overseen. The brilliance of that pretty much obviates the notion the guy can’t run t’ings. (If you read this month’s extensive account of that organization’s origins, you may be struck by O’s first line to staffers – “I want to run this like a business.”) A final note – Re Michelle – aren’t you getting a little overwrought there. She might be the “First Lady” – and so…It’s not as if this is two-for-one deal (like the Clintons). She’s the mother of O’s children – a Sister who represents a certain sort of possibility/respectability to a lot of beat-down folks. And, as First Lady she will…advise families to avoid foods with additives and get plenty of exercise…Getting exercised over her presence is more dim than mad. But it IS crazy.

BTW – I hear you re your wondering why I’m still Clubbing. May back off a bit now – There’s magic in repetition but…You mentioned below you’d be “montioring conservative dialog” re O. I ‘d urge you trust your first gut responses to what O says as you did in March. My pop once noted that intellectuals/academics often come up with “intelligent” excuses not to be moved. Didn’t believe in being a “fan” of any pol either. Hope you and me both can find our owm middle ground this campaign season…

HERE’S that old post of yours…

Having listened to Mr. Obama’s speech, and (noting the differences of political philosophy I have with his chosen party) That while I remain steadfastly unconvinced of his readiness to be President, I am impressed with “O”‘s mettle.

Please note, the speech may have been initiated by conversations about his minister an his church, but the speech is about much much more. Mr. Obama may very well have enabled us to initiate the kinds of discussion necessary to move past the failed experimentations of racial politics and get on with being Americans.

It is a very dangerous position that “O” has started to carve out, because it is in many areas a direct challenge to the basic philosophy on with the Democrat party is currently campaigning. That is a hopeful sign, IMO. Getting past the Political Correctness and getting over the fear of Hate speech is necessary to even have the conversation. Invoking his Grandmothers statements and his ministers too, is required to shed the fetters that thought PC puts upon the nation.

I don’t know if Obama is for real, but this speech was a start. I do not yet trust his zeal, nor his zealots, but I am willing to watch as they present proof of their beliefs. I do not trust that a man whose home was paid for by “Saddam’s Bag Man” is presidential timber, but he may be someone who can help us determine the measure of government intervention in private lives, and the level of self determination required and expected of all citizens.

The speech itself is a maze of recognizing conflicting themes and conflicting passions and conflicting motivations. It is a plea to renew real debate, and recognize the flaw in us all. I will be watching the Dem response to the challenge. And monitoring Conservative dialog as well.