I just posted this challenge on the barackobama.com web site, in two disability policy groups.

I have been visiting two barackobama.com blogs on disability issues for a couple of months now, and while I'm glad they are available to us, it seems like they aren't being used as effectively as they could. I feel that those of us familiar with disability issues who support Barack Obama's candidacy owe it to him to provide him with useful advice. If we could agree to get behind one specific disability policy initiative and rally support around it, we could have real affect on Sen. Obama's disability platform, and more importantly, perhaps point out a unique, "outside the box" idea he could champion and thereby in one more way distinguish his disability policies from the ordinary "by the numbers" disability policy approach one typically hears from candidates of either party. If Senator Obama were to adopt an idea promoted by our community, it might be only a sentence in his stump speech, but it would be an earthquake and a milestone for our people, and when he's President, it could make a real change, for a change, in our lives.

Too often, "bipartisanship" has meant either, "Stop arguing and vote my way!", or some kind of split-the-difference, horsetrading compromise which, though civil, can produce policy just as bad as results from hard Right or hard Left "bickering". That's why, when Barack Obama first started running for President, I was excited but skeptical. Would Obama's "change" end up being merely a slightly retooled "Third Way" centrism? It might be, but it doesn't have to be. I think that Obama can reclaim and more sharply define "bipartisanship" as he runs for the Presidency, and in policy as President. I think that to have any real meaning, "bipartisanship" should not try to gloss over policy and philosophical differences, but rather introduce code of conduct by our elected officials of all parties and political philosophies. What would it include? I believe that a meaningful bipartisanship requires developing a broad consensus on a handful of principles on: 1. policy, and 2. the conduct of public discourse.

I think that the most important thing Sen. Clinton, and maybe Bill Clinton, could say tomorrow, if she's really going to bow out, is that nothing they've been complaining about ... sexism against Hillary and the supposed unfairness of the Michigan and Florida situation ... have been the direct fault of Obama or his campaign. They can basically stand by their previous statements while making it clear that they have no problem working with Obama, because they don't blame him for the media stupidity, over-zealous supporters, or the Michigan / Florida thing. It would not be at all inconsistent for them to say that Obama himself has run an honorable and respectful campaign.

For several days, I put off reading this article at the Huffington Post, Why Do We Stick With Her?. In the heat of the endgame, I couldn't imagine an answer to that question that wouldn't give me a headache. When I finally read it this morning, I did, indeed, get a bit of a headache, but it was worth it.

This is the second of a two (maybe three, maybe four) part diary on "sleeper issues" that could be important and useful to the Democratic nominee in he General Election. My first diary on this subject  is here:

Sleeper Issues I

I've added a few more potential sleeper issues to this poll, based on peoples' comments and suggestions from the first one. If more ideas come in, I'll consider another round.

Bogus character issues aside, the General Election dialog will be dominated by two broadly defined issues: the economy and national security. Specifically, we will hear about: gas prices, jobs, trade policy, health insurance, the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, the "War on Terror", and the nature of US diplomacy. On these issues, we naturally believe the Democratic nominee will have the upper hand. In fact, hard evidence abounds indicating that this is so. Still, bogus character issues are definitely not "aside", and this year we can throw in some other, similar factors: racism, ageism (in both directions), and possibly the resentment of Clinton supporters. So, for that reason, and because better policy is better policy, I think our candidate should take at least some time to articulate innovative approaches to some "sleeper issues". What should they be?