Nice bait and switch, Davidson but it won't wash. You still have yet to answer Scahill and Klein's central criticism. Or make a case for just exactly how you intend to "pressure" the Obama campaign around ending the war sooner than later -- and with what, now that you've signed on the dotted line. Real politics, indeed. Do you actually believe David Axelrod or Obama's eager Wall Street donors give a rat's ass? Why should they, knowing you'll work to GOTV no matter what the candidate's position is - or how much you disagree with the specifics. And Hillary can count on the same, in the unlikely event that she wins the nominaton. The applicable "real politics" term here is "in the tank".

Ironically, Obama's latest foreign policy declaration embracing the 'centerism" of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr. occurred almost immediately after your latest pet project's launch. But then, he had made already clear his views about the utility of 'Tom Hayden Democrats" in shaping his campaign. Ballast, like Rev. Wright, to be dropped overboard at the first sign of choppy weather.

I think that Carl just fell for Obama's Colgate smile and contagious charisma... just like a naive and sexually inexperienced teenager.

Pitiful, 'Marty.' You still don't get it.

Answering Scahill and Klein? What's to answer? We agree with their critique of Obama on Iraq. Hayden's written a better one. The difference is they are going to pressure Obama by writing a few articles, and waiting, while we're going to do it by writing even more articles and, much more important, pulling together thousands of people across the country, outside the official Obama campaign, in P4O, putting out an independent line from the campaign?

And you're going to pressure everyone by disrupting church services, and the like, as the path forward? Spare me.

You miss the even more important point: how will YOU grow YOUR strength among those taking up the campaign, so you'll have something to consolidate once it's over and the official apparatus is shut down?

You haven't a clue; you don't even want to be there.

Wall Street donors? What a joke. Here's a campaign that's distinguished itself with raising more money from more small donors than anything like it in history, and they're invisible to you. And what campaign that can win in 2008 doesn't have donor from Wall Street? Blinded by the 'left cul-de-sac' once again.

We've already made Obama's centrism explicit in our call, and the need to counter it, which is what we're doing, but within a common effort to defeat McCain.

Speaking of which, if you want to put it in those terms, who are your antiGOTV efforts helping most, Obama or McCain? As I said, go make your case to Rev. Wright and his flock. Tell them they're supporting warmongers and spread a little fake blood on the floor there. It seems if anyone is open to your fears about being tossed under the tires, they would. But somehow I think they're very clear on what to do, while you're trapped inside a mobile with the Memphis blues again, the illusions of the 'left bloc' variety.

What even funnier is how self-righteous you are about it, how 'lofty' and 'pure.' LOL, indeed.

We know David Axerod well, and he is what he is. But you have to hand it to him for taking a Black South Sider and getting him thisclose to the presidency, whatever you want to say about his other projects. Who wouldda thunk it two years ago? Not me, and certainly not anyone on this site.

No, Marty, I've seen this movie before. Answer one point, and you'll find another to harp on, all the way, in glorious self-justification, protecting your purity and the glorious self-isolation of the left bloc, all decked out in body paint and masked costumes, a left bloc that can only look in amazement and bewilderment as their generation, Black and white, is making history in the electoral arena 22,000 out at Penn State yesterday, cheering Obama calls to end the war, white kids backing a Black man for president in turf where that hardly comes naturally, and all you have to offer is standing with the GOP guys, telling everyone not to drink the Kool-Aid.

As I said at the beginning, Pitiful

"white kids backing a Black man"

I just noticed that you always write Black with a capital "B" and white with a small "w".

Yes, Black gets capitalized because its refers to a nationality--as in African-American nation, Black nation, and back in the 6th Comintern/Marcus Garvey days, Negro nation. Also as in Mexican-American.

The term 'white,' on the other hand, refers to skin color, and not very accurately at that. It's not even a race, but a social control construct put together between 1640 and 1690 to make English bondservants think they had more in common with their masters than African bondservants, after Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia. So it's lower case.

But if I use Anglo-American, Euro-American, Latin-American, or just American, then the upper case, obviously, is proper.

WEB DuBois and others waged a long struggle to get the New York Times to capitalize 'Negro,' and eventually won. When Black supplanted Negro in the 1960s, in many situations, the struggle had to be waged anew.

So yes, sometimes there's a story behind 'devilish details.'

Gotta love it, Carl, how in post after post on another thread you said you supported the Holy Name 6, but here you just trash them. You've been hanging around your Democratic friends too long, as you've picked up their talent for talking out of both sides of your mouth.