Obama In SF

A reader writes:

I went to hear Barack Obama speak tonight in San Francisco. The crowd was huge, the lines were long, and (reportedly) the Secret Service was slowing things down by searching everyone exhaustively at the door.  It was painfully obvious that I probably wasn’t going to be admitted in time to hear the speech. Then the police cleared the street next to the one I was waiting on, putting up “do not cross” tape.  Childishly, I thought “I may not get in to hear the speech, but at least I’ll see the motorcade”.  When the motorcade did come roaring down the street, it suddenly stopped.

Someone had told Senator Obama that huge lines of supporters had little or no hope of getting in to the main event. He left his motorcade, walked on foot down the street towards the crowd, and gave a ten minute impromptu speech for those waiting in line.

And it wasn’t fluff, either – he unequivocally promised to close Guantanamo and restore habeas corpus and the constitution. A small thing, maybe, but a major contrast with his main competitor’s unconcern with tipping her waitperson.

Another minor point – I have read in more than one place that older African-Americans are reluctant to vote for Obama because they believe that if nominated, he will be assassinated. I wish they could have seen the Secret Service as they accompanied Obama tonight. They were the most intimidating sight I ever saw. I had no doubt whatsoever that they were totally prepared to either die in the senator’s defense or shoot me on sight if I appeared to pose a threat. Nothing on earth would have induced me to provoke them.

The Evangelical Evolution

Christianism may be waning. Christianity cannot be trashed so easily. A reader writes:

I grew up in a typical evangelical household, and now attend Gordon College in Massachusetts, a non denominational evangelical college. As sort of a political news junkie, I read your blog regularly, and I frequently appreciate your analysis on the Christian Right, and their pull (albeit a but waning) on the political climate. Here at Gordon, I’ve met scores of students who grew up just like me, who were taught to exclude and condemn homosexuals, democrats, hippies, liberals, "secularists", etc. Gladly, I’ve found that most of my peers, while at school and as they grow in both spiritual and intellectual faculties, question the way they were brought up, the way they were taught to think. Many, like me, wonder why we were sold a "brand" of Christianity, complete with books, ideologies, and political parties.

I began to search for something deeper, and more meaningful, and found that the typical evangelical was not presenting his/her faith in a way that Jesus would be pleased with. The thing is, as Christians, were called to love, to love hippies, liberals, conservatives, homosexuals, and crack addicts as we love ourselves. Deriving from this framework of unconditional love, a new breed of political liberal evangelicals is certainly developing. Concern for God’s creation, social justice, and peace have been issues that "new" evangelicals have championed. Gay marriage, abortion, and hawkish war policies, seem to drift from Christ’s central message of unconditional love. Many evangelicals fear being "secular". But more of us believe that being "secular" in this sense is embracing consumerism and assuming that America is the greatest nation on earth. There is a change coming, and quietly, there are actually a sizeable number of Obama supporters here.

And They Die At Home As Well

Grim evidence that the toll of war is never restricted to the battlefield itself:

At least 6,256 US veterans took their lives in 2005, at an average of 17 a day, according to figures broadcast last night. Former servicemen are more than twice as likely than the rest of the population to commit suicide. Such statistics compare to the total of 3,863 American military deaths in Iraq since the invasion in 2003 – an average of 2.4 a day, according to the website ICasualties.org…

The suicide rate among Americans as a whole was 8.9 per 100,000, but the level among veterans was at least 18.7. That figure rose to a minimum of 22.9 among veterans aged 20 to 24 – almost four times the nonveteran average for people of the same age.

It’s Still 1968

Daniel Henninger pushes back against the argument of my Obama essay:

If it’s Hillary versus Rudy, McCain or even the placid Mitt Romney, we will be in those streets again. Besides, her candidacy comes with Jumpin’ Jack Flash himself, Bill Clinton. Would it be a good thing if the country’s politics said bye-bye baby to the children of 1968? Probably. But it won’t happen this time.

As Cartman would put it, why the fuck not? I’m as tired of it as Blue Crab Boulevard:

The saddest thing is that many of the idealists who formed their worldviews in the 1960s do not see that they have become more rigid in their outlook and even more authoritarian than the society they rebelled against in their youth… There is not a single hint that they see the irony in complaining vehemently over the reaction to an inappropriate display of anti-Bush sentiment by a bridge team while simultaneously screaming for the silencing of talk radio.

Steve Hayward suspects that

the Hillary nomination is inevitably going to open up another, but hopefully the last, chapter in the Hatfield-McCoy aspect of the baby boom saga.

But she can still be stopped! Tune in for Vegas debate bloggery later tonight.

The Therapeutic Left-Liberalism Of Michael Gerson

Is there anything even faintly conservative about Michael Gerson? Has there ever been? Here is a man who feels guilty if the government isn’t helping anyone who’s hurting, a man who supports expanding entitlement programs as his boss did (hence this), a man drenched with white liberal guilt, a man who sees the logic of freedom as somehow heartless, a man who wants politics fused with religious entities to provide a meaning he thinks people cannot find for themselves. Thank God there are still some conservatives who can see through this:

[Gerson] wants to reinvent the entire idea of conservative politics and what it should stand for. Gerson wants to transform conservatism into a vehicle for emotional and spiritual uplift. He writes that a necessary component of presidential politics is a "vision of justice and hope that includes the whole country," and warmly refers to his favorite left wing coffee shop as spreading "the brush fires of suburban radicalism." He worries that the conservative movement’s "emphasis on spending restraint and limited government … [is] hardly morally inspiring." Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, and William F. Buckley, just to name a few, almost certainly would have thought otherwise.

But what’s important to note is that it’s indicative of Gerson’s worrisome approach to governing. In his world, it’s not just about creating policy that works, but policy that makes him feel good. He doesn’t want government to get out of the way; he wants to use it to help him find meaning.

He should join the Clinton campaign. Pomocon James Poulos has some interesting reflections, as always, here. Knippenberg adds his two anti-anti-Gerson cents here.