Weekend wonderment/post-weekday punditry.
William Schneider points out a problem with the so-called Republican revival:
Republican Party leaders may squelch the resolution before it can be brought to a vote in January. But the proposal does underscore a striking trend toward ideological conformity within the party. The conservative movement came to power with Reagan's successful presidential campaign in 1980, year one in the conservative calendar. Since then, the GOP has been turning more and more into an ideological movement. A movement's followers are expected to agree on everything (or at least 80 percent of everything). Otherwise, they're not part of the movement. Political parties in the United States are supposed to be coalitions. To be part of a coalition, you only have to agree on one thing: You're for the party's candidate. No further questions asked: "You support Barack Obama?" Fine, say Democrats. "You're one of us."
The best way to recruit Democratic voters is to run a Republican candidate.
Charlie Cook looks at focus groups:
Obama's backers exhibit a dogged intensity in their support of him personally. They fervently wish for him to succeed, but some worry that he has spread himself too thin. A year ago, these voters had tremendous -- and probably unrealistically high -- hopes for the new president. They now realize that he does not have a magic wand.
The Obama critics in the focus group begrudgingly concede his intelligence, knowledge, and rhetorical abilities, but they suggest that he is more sizzle than steak and that his inexperience is showing. More than a few of these voters exhibited a bit of an "I told you so" mentality.
But although divisions over Obama remain much the same as last year, the group was united in its disgust toward official Washington and Congress.
Gail Collins:
The Senate is going to be in session all weekend, debating the big health care bill and arguing about which direction the cost-curve is heading. This is a positive development on two counts. It keeps senators off the streets while providing much-needed employment in the chart-making sector of our economy.
Bob Herbert:
For me, the greatest national security crisis in the United States is the crisis in education. We are turning out new generations of Americans who are whizzes at video games and may be capable of tweeting 24 hours a day but are nowhere near ready to cope with the great challenges of the 21st century.
Suggesting an academic solution in the midst of populist anger is an interesting approach that will inevitably spark cries of elitism and "out of touch" by the Palinites.
Charles Blow: Black in the age of Obama. I won't summarize, just read.
Kathleen Parker:
Among the sample questions distributed to panelists in advance of Wednesday's event were: Who outside of politics today best represents the American character? Who is today's Joe DiMaggio?
Names mentioned in my own informal survey included Oprah, Brokaw, Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. What they have in common are characteristics that we value as "American" traits: self-made, personally responsible, entrepreneurial, honest, hardworking and generous. Throw in fair-minded, God-fearing (read: humble) and devoted to family, and you've got a pretty complete definition of the traditional American character.
I'm not sure pledging to greater unity will eradicate bigotry or partisanship any more than pledging allegiance to the flag improves national security. But a call to eliminate stereotypes is necessarily a call to bury identity politics.
That alone would be a giant step forward from pluribus to unum.