Remember the Mickey & Bob skit about who was Oscar and who was Felix. Isn't this article along that tome Obama, McCain: By their offices ye shall know them

If you don't include those elections in which he hasn't removed his competitors through the court or divorce scandal removed themselves how many did he finish strong. Oh wait he has never had one of those. P.S. My error he did have one election that was contested That was the Illinois's 1st Congressional District primary race against Bobby Rush 60% Senator Obama 31%.

I think Jim Pinkerton is right. Obama simply doesn’t articulate the vision needed for America’s future. The US dollar is based upon NOTHING. The US debt is now so large that it will be virtually impossible for the next generation to pay the interest on the interest (let’s call it the meta interest) on the national debt. What is Obama’s vision: more jobs, and better healthcare. Nonsense. Jane Hamsher's prioritization of healthcare as the number one priority, in the absence of any real proposals for economic foundation, sounds so empty to me I can hear echoes. The countries holding our national debt (China being the number 1 holder) are not going to sit by and let their economies slide so Americans can have a cushy national healthcare system and still have a strong dollar that can afford to buy oil. It just isn’t going to happen. The only issue, the issue that trumps all other issues, is energy independence. Everything else is subordinate. Obama does not have an energy policy. John McCain, like it or not, does.

Let's call a spade a spade. Calling Obama an affirmative action candidate is racist. It is. It denigrates him for nothing other than the color of his skin.

Jim often seems like a reasonable person to me, but I wonder a lot about his feelings about rural people. Every argument he ever has re: electoral politics relies on a citified caricature of what rural life and people are like. "People in Pennsylvania who are unemployed and love guns" (or whatever) are like this, like that, la la la. From this foundation he extrapolates to every single prediction he ever makes. I don't know for sure, but I think he has never been to rural anywhere, except to come in for some politically-related purpose, pat the great unwashed on the head, and jet home to inform "the liberal media" about what "real Americans" are going to do. In this section, he opens with discussing Pennsylvania, says the rural whites won't vote for Obama, and then asks why Obama can't get 50% in "the polls." So I just checked Pollster, and Obama is 49.7% averaged in PA. What am I missing? Where are these real folk he's talking about? (I'm not saying the numbers are going to stay that way. I'm just wondering what the hell Jim Pinkerton is talking about.) I spent the first 20 years of my life in a small town of 3,000, not

Quoting DoctorMoney: Far be it for me to start out the comments on an overly partisan note, but does James actually buy his own line that "the Democrats are to the left of the American people"? It's nice and declarative, but I can't think of a single objective way that it's true (if you go by current polling, at least).

If anyone is to the left of the American people, it's Hobbits.

First, what do you mean by Hobbits? Is this referring to Norquist's "Leave Us Alone" coalition? Second, I think you're probably right that the elected politicians of the Democratic party are not publicly to the left of the American people in many, if any, ways, but that doesn't mean that their long-term agenda isn't leftist, nor that their non-elected officials (and their associated intelligentsia) aren't left of the US center. Surely the long-term goals of the Democratic party include gay marriage, keeping Roe v. Wade, universal government-sponsored health-care (either government provision of insurance, or government-mandated insurance, or even government supply of health-care in addition to insurance), and the appointment of judges who are left of the US center. And if this is true, then there's an important sense in which

"Obama does not have an energy policy. John McCain, like it or not, does." People who are obviously so ill-informed they couldn't tell you time of day should think twice about postiing long comments on the internet.

So, I'm ill informed? I should not be allowed to post comments? Nice. Ok. He has a policy. Can I assume you are aware of Obama's energy policy, such as it is? Perhaps you need a link: http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy But to save you time I'll make it easy for you. It's basically conservation and renewable energy research. If that's your idea of an energy policy, you're right. We don't need to have a conversation.

update: "this sums up the Democrats' problem. When you don't agree with them, you get called racist." And when you don't agree with Jim Pinkerton, you get called elitist.

...of course, Pinkerton says that Sen. Obama is seen as a beneficiary of affirmative action, which as he mentions is something Sen. Obama himself has discussed. Whether or not this is the same thing as "calling Obama an affirmative action candidate" I suppose is up to you, but the two don't sound the same to me.
Also, bringing up as a negative the fact that someone has benefited from affirmative action (assuming they in fact have) isn't denigrating that person "for the color of their skin," it's denigrating that person for being a beneficary of affirmative action. Denigrating someone for being a benificiary of affirmative action (or nepotism, etc) might, in your judgment, be wrong, but it's not inherently racist--which, as you say, denigrating someone for "nothing other than the color of [their] skin" clearly is.

update two: "What happens when you tell working bikers what to think, and the working bikers don't agree with you?" Hey, I don't disagree that John McCain might (might) have the Sturgis crowd on his side, but everyone always has to watch themselves, and it sounds to me like Jim is coming pretty close to telling working bikers what to think. Notice how he first conflates "Jim Pinkerton" with "working bikers" by equating their positions. As an aside, I was in a bar in Queens the other day, one I like to go to, and John McCain came on the TV. A big guy who could have been either a biker or a construction worker (i.e. Jim's working class hero personified) started yelling, "Fuck that guy! Fuck him! Fuck that guy! He's gonna have us in all kinds of more wars! Fuck him!" Yes, it was an Irish bar. My poll of one, just as invalid as Jim's.

Quoting Exeus99: ...of course, Pinkerton says that Sen. Obama is seen as a beneficiary of affirmative action, which as he mentions is something Sen. Obama himself has discussed. Whether or not this is the same thing as "calling Obama an affirmative action candidate" I suppose is up to you, but the two don't sound the same to me.
Also, bringing up as a negative the fact that someone has benefited from affirmative action (assuming they in fact have) isn't denigrating that person "for the color of their skin," it's denigrating that person for being a beneficiary of affirmative action. Denigrating someone for being a beneficiary of affirmative action (or nepotism, etc) might, in your judgment, be wrong, but it's not inherently racist--which, as you say, denigrating someone for "nothing other than the color of [their] skin" clearly is.

I tend to agree with you on this one. The implication is highly dependent on the context of the statement. If it means:"if it weren't for affirmative action, Senator O. would not be a candidate..." it would be indicating that the Senator doesn't have enough merit of his own. The statement could be made, on the other hand, to support the benefits of AA to our society

You also forgot to mention Senator Obama's Bill, for which I believe he is the only sponsor, to prevent the resurveying the OCS for what resources are there. The last survey, the ones that the left likes to opine so eloquently about in making their argument that there are not enough reserves to make the risk worth it, is from the 70s-80s.

Jane Hamsher does not seem to believe that people who think differently than she does deserve respect or to be counted. I think this makes her a typical knee-jerk left wing robot, and people who think like her are the reason that the Democrat Party is destined to lose again and again. I hope Nancy Pelosi gets trounced by Cindy Sheehan; I agree with nothing that Cindy Sheehan stands for, but at least Ms. Sheehan doesn't waste my auditory nerve's time by telling me that those who don't agree with her are the wrong kind of people to be counted as Americans. Jane Hamsher is an elitist, and Jim Pinkerton isn't. It really shows.

I think that Pinkerton, essentially a nice, civil guy, with a twinkle in his eye, and a real intellectual, had no respect for Hamsher. So if he went off a bit here and there, that was because she was no counterweight to him, full of cliches, ahistorical, unknowing, and unanalytical and unsubtle as she was. She was hopelessly outmatched and intellectually outclassed by Pinkerton, who had his hands full keeping his disdain for her to himself. I think Pinkerton's comment, if I heard it correctly, that Obama got to where he is by affirmative action, needs a great deal of unpacking. Too bad Hamsher does not know a garment bag from a back pack. Itzik Basman

Jim Pinkerton, I don't usually agree with you, but I love the way you say the word "wounds."

Jane needs to get out of her echo chamber at firedoglake.
How about the gerrymandered districts for the following reps?
Charlie Rangel, John Conyers, Barbara Lee, Sheila Jackson Lee, Stephanie Tubbs Jones Maxine Waters and formerly Cynthia Mckinney.

...of course, Pinkerton says that Sen. Obama is seen as a beneficiary of affirmative action, which as he mentions is something Sen. Obama himself has discussed. Whether or not this is the same thing as "calling Obama an affirmative action candidate" I suppose is up to you, but the two don't sound the same to me.

Hogwash on two counts. One: playing the race card but blaming it on an other, vague, group of racists is still playing the race card. You either believe Obama is the beneficiary or you don't, but scoring the political point and then pawning it off on rednecks is playing the race card. Two: wrong on the facts. Obama went to a private school in Hawai'i, where there is a white minority. When he applied to college, he didn't cite his race and there's no evidence that he has received anything as a result of AA. Which leaves Pinkerton looking like an old white man who suspects a young black man got where he is only because other, misguided old white men put him there. Defend that. I have no idea whether Pinkerton's racist or not, but I do know, having listened to quite

It appears that the dems are on the wrong side of the affirmative action issue. Every time it comes up for a vote like California and Washington it's voted down. I wonder how it would fair in a red state? Unfortunately, they are preaching to their choir on that one. John

Quoting basman: I think that Pinkerton, essentially a nice, civil guy, with a twinkle in his eye, and a real intellectual, had no respect for Hamsher. So if he went off a bit here and there, that was because she was no counterweight to him, full of cliches, ahistorical, unknowing, and unanalytical and unsubtle as she was. She was hopelessly outmatched and intellectually outclassed by Pinkerton, who had his hands full keeping his disdain for her to himself.

The extra rich irony is when the towering intellect that is Jane Hamsher criticizes John Edwards' mistress Rielle Hunter for being "a few bricks short of a load".

Quoting JackLifton: Jane Hamsher does not seem to believe that people who think differently than she does deserve respect or to be counted. I think this makes her a typical knee-jerk left wing robot, and people who think like her are the reason that the Democrat Party is destined to lose again and again.

I hope Nancy Pelosi gets trounced by Cindy Sheehan; I agree with nothing that Cindy Sheehan stands for, but at least Ms. Sheehan doesn't waste my auditory nerve's time by telling me that those who don't agree with her are the wrong kind of people to be counted as Americans.

Jane Hamsher is an elitist, and Jim Pinkerton isn't. It really shows.

I agree that Jane seemed to retreat into cliches and couldn't stand up on her feet to have a solid argument with Jim. But, are you using irony when you allocate lack of respect? And you also generalize that lack of respect to other Democrats? Considering that Republicans indulge in using bullying, mocking, and dismissive statements when they run out of intelligent arguments, it's surprising to me that you would protest the Democrats' lack of respect.
Democrats talk too

Gotta love Hamsher's comment here re: Paris Hilton, that "she's rich and spoiled and hasn't had to work too hard...she's in the John McCain mold." Sen. McCain "hasn't had to work too hard?" Classy. That's probably a line of attack the Obama campaign and supporters should avoid.

Quoting PaulL: Jane needs to get out of her echo chamber at firedoglake.
How about the gerrymandered districts for the following reps?
Charlie Rangel, John Conyers, Barbara Lee, Sheila Jackson Lee, Stephanie Tubbs Jones Maxine Waters and formerly Cynthia Mckinney.

I live in Maxine Water's district and she has done nothing to improve it. The parts that are economicaly viable are that way due to a myraid of factors including enterpreneurship. The less well off areas are sinking fast. She's good with the hyperbole but outside of that is an absolute zero. What we need is a Phil Burton type pol who was a real earth mover and got things done whether it was in his San Francisco Congressional district or for the coal miners in West Virginia. John

Quoting Exeus99: Gotta love Hamsher's comment here re: Paris Hilton, that "she's rich and spoiled and hasn't had to work too hard...she's in the John McCain mold."

Sen. McCain "hasn't had to work too hard?" Classy.

That's probably a line of attack the Obama campaign and supporters should avoid.

Yes, when was the last time Senator Obama was a POW? Also, Jane still has this Obama mania thing going on about how wonderful he is and the rest of it which reminds me of the earlier messianic image he had. Apparently, for some it's still in vogue. John

You could guess about the effect Edwards dropping out would have. Or you could look at the data. But of course Jim didn't even read the article, so maybe I'm asking too much.

I think Pinkerton won this one. Hamsher was talking oughts and it seemed Pinkerton was talking ises. This was going to be a close election from the get go and Russian aggression in Georgia helps McCain. It shouldn't. A rational person would probably think it was neocon world views that got us to this point and McCain is way more neocon than Bush. This isn't how it works in an election. This is obvious looking at Obama's comments. He could have said "This is a complex issue yada yada and explained the complexities." He's not that stupid. He knows where the electorate is at and so now he has to (for the time being) play in McCain's sandbox. With respect to energy independence: isn't that code for protectionism? There would be no need for energy independence in a non zero sum world of free trade. The only rationale I can see for "energy independence" is the notion that (i) oil really is the engine of modern civilization; and (ii) peak oil is a real fear--no idea if it is real but the fear is real. Without supply constraints, one would expect the market

Quoting Alworth: Hogwash on two counts. One: playing the race card but blaming it on an other, vague, group of racists is still playing the race card. You either believe Obama is the beneficiary or you don't, but scoring the political point and then pawning it off on rednecks is playing the race card. Two: wrong on the facts. Obama went to a private school in Hawai'i, where there is a white minority. When he applied to college, he didn't cite his race and there's no evidence that he has received anything as a result of AA. Which leaves Pinkerton looking like an old white man who suspects a young black man got where he is only beca