I've seen a lot of diaries attacking Obama's message of unity and I don't get it. Ignoring the fact that the "I'm a fighter" rhetoric of Edwards appears to be only connecting with the base the whole argument seems to be ignoring history.
Lot's of people deride Obama for his unity message but a few decades ago people were terrified of the "we have to get in a fight" message being shouted by Malcolm X and the Black Panthers (among others).
Arguably those groups and their message were necessary and valuable (just like Edwards' message is necessary and valuable) but they were just a piece of the puzzle and weren't the most effective agents of change.
Really they simply served as a reminder of how things might get should the more reasonable alternative get ignored.
No. The most effective agent of change, the one the brought the most people to the table (both regular folks and the powerful) was the message of unity and peace. The message of working together to change our circumstances. That message was spread most notably by Martin Luther King, Jr. (though he was not the sole bearer of the message).
People are ignoring history if they think a minority is going to more effective at changing things by making threats than by making peace.
Obama would be labled "scary black man" immediately.
It's so obviously unrealistic and clearly ineffective that I almost think it's intentional. A way to bring him down now.
But perhaps people are simply confused rather than conniving.