Politicians are people, people motivated by power, people tempted by power.

But, as people, they aren't all the same, and so I urge folks not to view them all through the filter of cynicism.

Healthy skepticism? Sure.

I remember right around the time of the NH debate how the media and so-called "liberal" blogs portrayed anyone who questioned Obama as anti-hope, anti-change (see: Edwards slamming HRC during the debate as one of the attacking "forces of the status quo" for merely criticizing Obama's health care plan--while she had praised Edwards).*

This is why it was brilliant on McCain's part to not only slam Obama as nothing more than a vapid celebrity, which turns any visual and media positives into negatives, but also ridiculing the Messiah narrative, which helps undercut the "moral" shaming of Obama's critics so key to protecting His house of cards (e.g., Obama represents "turning the page," thus, those who oppose him are stuck in the past; Obama is the symbol of unity so those who oppose him are "divisive," etc.).

*Edwards: "Any time you speak out powerfully for change, the forces of status quo attack."

"Eat, drink and be merry, for tommorrow we die"

------------------------------------------------
“But hysteria is all the rage these days, I guess” - gqm

is the term that gets thrown around when people do not want to have their ideas questioned (after I mentioned to a religious friend that I was an atheist, he gave me as a gift a book called "Dictionary of Cynicism"... I tried to explain the difference between cynicism and skepticism, but to no avail).

is another version of "McCain sucks"... something not really disputed here (with some disagreement with Paul).

The position that several commenters and posters have stated is that Obama's candidacy can be examined by progressive standards irrespective of who his adversary is. Whether he faces MCain or whomever is irrelevant to the fact that he's alienated a strong segment of the Dem base or that he's made pretty stark shifts to the right.

And yet, the only retort we hear is "McCain is worse." which, again, is no retort at all.

Or that he has to do that in order to win... again, that argument does not hold water. The CW on this (and whether it's reasonable or not is a separate issue) is that you rally the base in the primary and you move to the center during the general and that's what Obama is doing... Not so, he divided the base and discarded a big chunk of it during the primary, and now has moved to the right (not the center).

I think it's a mistake and saying so does not make me cynical.

And cynicism is not to be conflated with skepticism or critique.