I think this
article in this week's Chicago Reader (pdf file) is pertinent to Senator Obama's post, and the responses that it's garnered.
First off, it's true that the sources that are used to make Obama look like he doesn't want to hurt anyone's feelings have a vested interest in the outcome of the dispute, so we can take that with a grain of salt. However, I can't say that I didn't think of this article after reading Obama's diary today, and how it's consistent with the article's portrayal of Obama as someone who prefers to mediate, rather than take a side. I like the quote from an ex-Alderman:
"[Former Hyde Park alderman] Leon Despres says there are two parts to an elected official's job. Ninety percent is housekeeping and ten percent is leadership. Every now and then you have to take a stand."
Further discussion on the flip...
I think most of the people who have a critique of Senator Obama's diary feel this way. If Obama wants to help lead the Democratic Party out of the wilderness, he will need to take a stand. That doesn't require belittling all opposition, or refusing to brook any disagreement, but it does require saying
clearly what the Democratic Party stands for. It's not even that hard. The phrase "With Liberty and Justice For All" works pretty well for starters. You could unpack that to explain all sorts of things that Democrats support, and every time someone sees a Democrat on CNN or wherever, they'll hear us explain how "With Liberty and Justice For All", our core belief, led us to support this particular position.
I should point out that I'm fine with Obama's mediator approach as a Senator or a Presidential Candidate (make no mistake, that's what Obama's shooting for. It's rare for a Senator to have such a clear path when they've just started their legislative record, so he has an opportunity to have far fewer controversial votes than most other Senators running for President), just not as a party leader.
Since I believe what Senator Obama was saying was heartfelt and genuine, and not an attempt to play to the electorate (which is a very silly thought, I realize. Daily Kos isn't that important...yet :-)), I think we should thank him for his advice and, except for the advice on speaking civilly, ignore it.
Senator Obama may have stepped out from Central Casting, but this isn't "The West Wing", where earnest policymakers exist on both sides of the aisle. There are no Senator Vilsacks here. Or, at least, those that may have existed are allowed to walk off the reservation only so far, before the Bush/Cheney/Delay mafia yank on their leashes.
(Apologies to those of you now envisioning Alan Alda in a dog collar. You didn't think of it until I mentioned it just now? Oh. Um...sorry...again)
I dearly hope that we can return to some semblance of a two-party system, where both parties have the people's best interests at heart (or at least have them tucked into one of the four chambers. I'm partial to the left ventricle myself). But in order for that to happen, the Republican's need to be taught the lesson that they squirmed away from after Watergate: Crime doesn't pay. And the only way for that to happen is to use Congressional subpoena power as soon as we get it. Now, that's something I know Obama won't approve of, but that's how we get to a Legislature that can actually legislate, rather than rubber-stamp corruption.