But I do take umbrage at the charge that I’m being disingenuous here. I may disagree forcefully, especially when I feel “evidence” is presented which I feel in no way backs up what it is supposed to back up. But my intent is not to be some kind of troll. I’ll admit the Obama media love fest thing gets on my nerves, and some of my quick comments on here are the equivilent of me rolling my eyes at the silliness of that phenomena. Blog comment areas often get used for that sort of thing. I didn’t come around here in order to piss you off. (really.) Look, I dont comment on The Moderate Voice anymore because it became so uncivil and looked more and more like Little Green Footballs or The Daily Kos. I dont think I have been disrespectful to you or any of the other folks commenting here.

Its true I think you are wrong on a couple of matters:

1) that there is anything substantive in Clinton and Obama’s records that indicate there is a farthings difference between them.

2) that when it comes to substance and track record, there is little that recommends Obama as a moderate or as someone who will act in a bipartisan manner…especially when compared to John McCain’s substance and track record.

I think all of this implies a larger question of you as someone who runs a site called Donkelphant:

Is moderateness (or reasonableness) a matter mostly of style or substance?

Lets say you have two theoretical candidates A and B (and really, dont think of one as Obama and the other as McCain)

Let’s say candidate A is a U.S. Senator who holds positions that are ideologically pure, but is generally an affable fellow who tries to get along with his political opponents while NOT compromising with them because he is committed to his principles. He often complains about the growing incivility of Washington, but he would never change the legislation he wants if he could ever avoid it. It that means ramming an agenda via partisan lines, so be it. “That’s political reality,” he often says “It’s nothing personal.” He famously invites everyone over to his house for a BBQ every spring.

Let’s say candidate B is a US Senator who isn’t an ideologue at all, but instead she most often attempts to pull support from the center of both parties to meet legislative goals, even if that means differing from the bulk of her own party. Let’s also say she is often combative, castigating the ideological wings of both sides as being detriments to the well being of the country. When called on this her favorite response is “Hell, I don’t care what those jerks think.” She famously never makes in to Senator A’s BBQ, because she holds a grudge over a parlimentary maneuver that stopped a vote on legislation she felt was vital for the well being of the country. “Goddammit,” she stated, “This country should come before anyone’s ideology.”

To my mind it is a no brainer which of these two would be a more moderate candidate if substance is valued more highly than style, and vice versa. To my mind it should not matter if Candidate A is an Arch conservative or a high-minded liberal, or if candidate B is nominally a member of the Democratic or Republican party…I think B would be preferable to my own sensibilities as a middle-of-the-road guy.

Now, I dont think my hypothetical Senators are perfect analogs for our present choices, but I know who I think has a clear edge in substance given these choices.

Listen, most of what you post over here is disingenuous, so I don’t appreciate it because you’re not adding anything to the conversation. And I like how you pretend to ask a question and then say something like, “Isn’t that picture needlessly messianic? Saints be praised!” Just FYI, if you ask a question and then throw in snark, don’t be surprised if I ignore the question.

And sorry if I hurt your feelings.

Go away.

I guess there are principles and then there is money (and hence power), and Obama has let his preference be known.

Thank goodness he is offering change.

(And c’mon…isn’t that picture needlessly messianic? Is it supposed to be parody? I guess its Obama coming from behind a curtain – pay no heed tot he man behind the curtain – but it also looks like he is illuminated from a “light from above”. Saints be praised!)