First of all, 'Pat', Marilyn's piece on Obama was exactly that, Marilyn's piece. Not a 'CAWI Editorial', that's your invention.

I'd guess, judging from reponses as it was being passed around the listserv before it was posted, that maybe a third of CAWI loved it, a third indifferent, and another third critical, liking other candidates--Edwards, Richardson, Kucinich, the Greens--or none at all.

My preference would be Richardson, Gravel Kucinich, or the Greens. The labor people in our ranks tend to go for Edwards.

But MK does speak for an important trend within CAWI, which is why I posted it under her by-line. We post things of varying views within our ranks, maybe not the ones you'd like, but that's another matter.

The fact that there are few open supporters of these folks among the ranks of your sector of the antiwar movement reflects both its strength and its weakness. It may be more advanced politically, but it's also more isolated from the broader reaches of the antiwar majority we are trying to reach.

And if you think Obama is the main enemy, how would you respond to a number of South Side mass organizations, thinking of joining your ranks, that you ought, as a matter of form, offer him an invitation, as their Senator, even if he wasn't likely to accept?

You might not think he's sufficiently against the war--I know I don't--but they do. Would you do polemics with them on how they had to become more radical? And put that hurdle in their path, when they've been dubious about dealing with you anyway? I know a few of you might, but I wouldn't. We're trying to build and coalition of the left and the center, not just a coalition of the left. And this is as good of an example as any as to what it means on the ground here in Illinois.

In other words, if you think this is main about butt-kissing of liberal politicians, you've missed the point entirely. It's about building wider mass alliances than we ever have before, which we have to do, if we're serious about ending this war anytime soon.