I am an Obama supporter 100%, but after reading about Obama's lama problem, I can see how this juicy tidbit will fit into the Fox and Rove "Obama is a Muslim thug enemy of freedom, patriotism and Israel" theme and drive low-information voters out in droves to stop him.

The tidbit is a video of an Al Jazeera broadcast entitled: Gaza's Obama Campaign.

Rove will love this. For my part, I think it speaks to the positive hope that he inspires in people. Whether you like Obama or not, whether you think he's full of it or not, there's no denying the hope he inspires.

Exhibit B: ObamaWorks

Despite the increasingly horrific and nauseating criticism that Obama is getting from Rove et al. on Fox, and despite Obama's lama problem, I am going to try to have the same faith in Americans that Obama seems to have, and that Clinton does not have. I am going to hope they send him to the White House despite the Fox narrative.

But for the record, and for the third or fourth time, if Obama does not win the nomination, I will be voting for Clinton, and I am going to have faith that Americans of whatever party see that Clinton is easily a better candidate than McCain.

Democrats '08

If Clinton wants to discuss the Wright issue as it may reflect on Obama's character and judgment, as part of the battle for Democratic votes - fair enough. But when Clinton argues to superdelegates that Obama is unelectable because of what the Republicans will do to the Wright story, then I have a problem.

There is a fine line between being strategic and being a weak, fearful and defensive follower.

In the following scenarios, which are the Democrats - strategic or weak?

Scenario A:  The Democrats feel compelled to make a pass on the candidate that inspires them and that they feel connects most to Americans, because they fear that the Republicans might smear him and stir American xenophobic sentiment.

They effectively let the Republicans decide their nominee.

Scenario B: Having chosen Obama as the nominee, the Democrats feel compelled to pick a VP with national security credentials, as opposed to the one who would work best with Obama, who would be the best choice for president in a tragedy, and who would best argue in knowledge and experience the merits of the Democratic platform.

The Democrats would effectively let the Republicans choose their VP nominee.

More importantly:

The Democrats would let the Republicans dictate the issues of a general election campaign. 

The Republicans want to compete on the basis of national security credentials, so the Democrats  accept the inevitability of the Republicans being able to set the agenda, and try desperately to compose a defensive team (Webb, e.g.).

What's wrong with this picture? Where is the leadership, vision and courage to set a Democratic agenda, to control the general election narrative, and to put forth candidates that speak on that agenda eloquently, and have the experience to buttress that agenda?

John Edwards had the leadership, vision and courage in this respect when it came to health care. He determined what the primary battle would be about during his campaign and Clinton and Obama were playing catch-up and defense.

It is well past time that the Democrats lead and convince Americans why the issues of their choosing should decide the election, and why the candidates of their choosing representing those issues are better equipped to see the changes they espouse implemented.

It is also time that Democrats follow Obama in appealing to the better angels of our nature. The Republican strategy for winning is to appeal to xenophobia and fear and Clinton has accepted this same strategy to woo superdelegates. It is the politics of cynicism about the hearts and minds of Americans.

The politics of hope take courage. Leadership takes courage.

The Democrats seem doomed to consistently follow. The Democrats seem doomed to operate out of fear - fear of the ignorance and xenophobia of some Americans, fear of Fox news, fear of the Republican smear campaign.

If we select Clinton as our nominee, let it be because we believe she is best qualified to lead the party and the nation, and to demonstrate that leadership to America. Please let it not be because we fear what Republicans will do otherwise. If we choose the latter rationale, then we will continue to follow the Republican lead.