The problem with calling him arrogant is simply a definition problem, maybe flippant is what is being meant? He is pretty funny when he is. : )

I, myself, love his somewhat dry sense of humor.

But I was talking with one of my older sisters tonight, who isn't quite sold yet on Obama, and she too made the comment that perhaps Obama is acting somewhat arrogant.

I felt my back go up straighter when she said it, and was about to expound on the Clinton campaign, when I remembered that my sister dislikes Clinton immensely.

So then I put myself in my sister's shoes, and found that, in a way, perhaps there's something there.

Now that we know, after all, that Obama is winning this thing, perhaps it wouldn't hurt if he was to take a higher road than the one he's already been taking, and simply let Hillary's campaign talking points roll off his shoulders for the next three months. He has to, at some point, start addressing McCain only, right?

So maybe he, and WE, should start letting it roll off our shoulders, in a nice way. Keep it nice, let Hillary roll her dice -- we all know it won't get her anywhere, but let's at least look good while we win this.

Let's not get too smug. I've been guilty of it, many a time, and sometimes it's come back to bite me right in the ass. Better to stay focused, and humble.

Just my 2 cents, for what they're worth these days. ;-)

well, since you directed this screed at me in the other thread, among others, please let me reply:

i am not saying obama is arrogant generally, he is a charming, smart dude, my wife saw him on the view, loved him, she is ok with obama, i am not sure yet, but its not racism and please let me explain

i have voted democrat for every presidental nominee since i gained the franchise in 1976..and while i realize the democrats have warts, just like any group, i do so for the reason jefferson saw it as the party of democracy, do not get sidetracked by his own life, just consider jeffersons principles of citizens in action

i believe the people in florida and michigan deserve a right to be heard, it is not the fault of white black hispanic, asian or any other person in those states that politicians and so called party leaders seem intent on screwing up their franchise

if i lived in one of those states i would flip the bird at the party that just blew me and my vote off in a dang competitive race

i find the obama arrogance in calling for hillary to drop out, do the math, when only by ignoring the people in two major states to just be ignored or split up evenly, perhaps even more insulting in my opinion

if you want to go off on a black thing, go ahead, dude, i grew up as a boy in the 1950s..in rural, i mean, rural, south carolina..i know more about what racism is than do a lot of you, i avoid it like the plague, do not like being lumped into that group

more of this new politics i guess, maybe i just need to go to an obama rally to be inspired, but in the meantime the arrogance i cited was in re the two states aforementioned i am tiring of typing

I have to agree. The charges of "arrogance" are so subjective, that they tell more about the attitudes of the accuser than anything.

One man's arrogance is another confidence.

In Obama's case, clearly some people believe minorities should be second class and not act like they are better than whites. Some also think that minorities are not as smart, which is why the "empty suit" nonsense.

But I don't care. If his opponents want to "misunderestimate" him as a lightweight, be my guest.

They can join Hillary in the dustbin of people who underestimated him.

Two points. There is a certain not terribly bright element that sees intelligence -- and the clear exercise of it -- as very threatening. They take it as an affront to their own patterns of thought and to them this presumed insult = arrogance. As a teacher, I've seen this play out time and time again in the classroom. Students gravitate away and actually dislike other students who are clearly more gifted, and I'm not talking toadies here, or pets or showoffs. Just really bright kids... However, in addition to the workings of America's unfortunately widespread anti-intellectualism, is simple racism. To these people, Obama is an uppity you know what. To them a black man presuming he can be president is the height or arrogance.

(If this shows up twice, I apologize. The first time I started on this post, it tried to send itself.)

Why do I think Obama's arrogant?

When he says that his subcommittee on Afghanistan hasn't met because his chairmanship coincides with the beginning of his presidential campaign and he expects people to believe it, that's arrogance.

When he can't show up for a vote on Kyl-Liebeerman and says it's because he too busy campaigning, even though his rivals in the Senate were able to return for the vote, and expects people to believe it, that's arrogance.

When he says words matter, then decides those found in his pastor's sermons and publications don't really matter all that much, and he expects people to believe it, that's arrogance.

When he takes credit for getting legislation passed when said legislation never made it out of committee and he expects people to believe it, that's arrogance.

When he is lavishly praised by his chief rival at a Democratic debate and the best response he can come up with is a churlish "you're a nice lady" line, that's arrogance.

When, to imply what a leader he's been in the Senate, he touts his co-sponsorship of a bill knowing full well that said bill had ten or fifteen co-sponsors, that's arrogance.

When he assumes that he's not the "best" person to bring the country together, but rather the "only" person who can do so, that's arrogance.

And the funny thing is, none of these reasons have anything to do with youth, inexperience, or racism.

Of course, what the heck do I know. I've criticized Obama and must therefore be a racist.

I think arrogant is being the inferior candidate, and having no chance of beating McCain in the general, and having no chance of winning the primary, yet acting like you are better than everyone else and refuse to withdraw because your ego and personal ambition is getting in the way. That is the definition of arrogance.

Obama is "arrogant" to the Hillary people because he refuses to kiss her ass. Look, I have been there with my wife's friends. They are all successful, intelligent, attarctive and seemingly confident women. But they are used to people kissing their asses because . . . well, they are used to being the most successful, intelligent, attarctive and seemingly confident person in the room.

And along comes Obama. He has no contacts, no entrenched Washington team. And he is kicking there ass . . . and not doing it dirty . . . "Mr. Popular" indeed! He is not kissing the collective flabby asses of the Clintonistas and they can't stand that!

Here, this explains it better than I can:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vCZ731KCbhk&feature=related

Arrogance, Fairness toward Hilary, and Perception

The Obama "arrogance" narrative has to be viewed in terms of Clinton's struggle to keep the race alive. Any casual remark that suggest the least bit of self-regard - perhaps even something as trivial as saying "I'm no dummy" in New York yesterday and expecting Bloomberg to buy him a better meal than the breakfast Obama bought Bloomberg - can feed this narrative.

Any whiff of Obama arrogance reinforces Hilary's successful effort to convince many of her followers that Obama is an upstart cheating her out of a nomination that is rightfully hers. The suggestion is that Obama is responsible for an unfair process that excludes her legitimate landslide victories in Florida and Michigan,relies too much on undemocratic practices such as caucuses, unwisely counts votes and delegates from solid Republican states, asks delegates not to make judgments of conscience about which candidate is really best for the party and simply to go mindlessly along with voter preferences, etc. Forget the merit of the claims. Hilary has set things up so that if Obama does win the nomination, her followers will consider his victory illegitimate, and they will stay home or vote McCain in the general election. Intentionally or not, Hilary's praise for McCain has made him more palatable to her followers and increased the chance of defections. Her remarks about supporters of either Democrat coming together to back the winner, when spoken at a Hilary rally, are directed at Obama supporters--they're wild about the idea of Obama supporters backing Hilary, hence the cheers.

Obama must do everything possible to counter the impression of unfairness, of having the arrogance to claim victory, or the nomination he is winning will be worthless. That's why it is damaging for any prominent Obama supporter (such as Sen. Leahy) to call for Hilary to acknowledge defeat and withdraw, and why it was a mistake for the Obama campaign not to fight hard to hold new primaries in Florida and Michigan. Such things support the narrative about Obama's "arrogance"--acting as though he has the thing won when Clinton still has a mathematical chance, and when she has real supporters in Florida and Michigan who already cast real votes and want them counted.

The Clinton campaign has not only painted her as a victim of an unfair electoral process, but has also convinced some of her followers that Obama is winning through the use of dirty "Ken Starr" tactics. Consider all those nasty things the Obama campaign is doing to her: asking for release of her tax returns for the prurient reading of Ken Starrs everywhere; suggesting the public has a right to know who contributed huge sums to the Clinton library, a noble historical resource for future generations; insinuating that she ever supported NAFTA when all along, her top priority was preserving union jobs in states with lots of electoral votes; claiming any Clinton surrogate tried to marginalize Obama as a Jesse-Jackson- style black candidate with no hope in the general election; and, of course, playing "the race card" against Hilary when she really has worked so long and hard for racial equality.

Every Democrat feels deep sympathy for Hilary because she has long been a genuine victim of systematic persecution by the rightwing attack machine. Every Democrat also knows, and women of Hilary's age know it most acutely, that women do have fewer economic and political opportunities than men. These unpleasant truths make it easier to convince many of Hilary's followers that she, a woman of remarkable merit and accomplishment who has spent 30 years doggedly climbing the ladder of political responsibility, is being persecuted again. It seems unfair to many women of her generation that any man would dare vault past her to the top rung of the ladder she has climbed one arduous step at a time for all these years. Grievances like these, it seems to me, help fuel passionate attacks by Hilary's supporters on Obama supporters on sites like this. When Obama supporters dismiss some of these outbursts as *stupid*, it adds more fuel to the anti-Obama fire, especially if the Obama supporter is male. While aspersions of stupidity are technically gender-neutral, in the context of this campaign they deepen the gender division so painfully evident in the Democratic Party. The Clinton campaign's leading role in awakening intra-party divisions between races and genders doesn't make them less real.

Under the circumstances, Obama should bypass no opportunity to convince Hilary's followers that she is getting fair treatment. He and his followers should *not* ask her to withdraw. They *should* have worked hard to bring about new Florida and Michigan primaries, even though Florida and Michigan broke rules that weren't of Obama's making and Hilary, like Obama, pledged to abide by them. In Texas, the Obama campaign should make every effort to avoid delegate gains out of proportion to actual voting in the caucuses, even if Obama's supporters are more enthusiastic and show up in greater numbers.

However, even if Obama does all this, it may not be enough to salvage this election. In truth, Hilary *has* lost, *has* been treated fairly, and *should*, for the good of the party and the country, withdraw. Neutral parties should and no doubt are telling her this in private. She should have the decency and good sense to do the right thing voluntarily, despite her profound disappointment, assuring her followers that she was treated fairly and that Obama won without bending a single rule, that the voters have spoken, she respects their judgment, and her followers must work hard to put Obama in the White House. Otherwise, the stab-in-the-back theory will contribute to Obama's defeat in the fall.

Hilary should also recognize that if she does make off with the nomination by transforming Obama into a reviled and unelectable heap of broken dreams during the rest of her regrettable campaign, *she* will lose the general election. After witnessing her campaign in action, many Obama supporters would as soon vote for Karl Rove as put Hilary, Mark Penn, Howard Wolfson, James Carville and the rest of that bunch in the White House and on our television screens for the next four years. No matter what Hilary's differences with McCain on the issues, there will be long-term consequences from having both major parties in the hands of Rove-style operators who regard voter participation in elections as an unfortunate vestigial complication in the lives of people who understand how to use power and get things done. For people who responded to Obama's message of hope and his goal of building new and broader popular coalitions to break the partisan deadlock, backing a candidate with tactics as divisive as Hilary's would be to abandon all hope in the American political system.

Hilary created both of the large Democratic factions that, in my opinion, really may defect this fall--the Obama supporters disgusted by her methods and the Hilary supporters convinced she has been cheated out of what is rightfully hers. Only she can take the actions necessary to heal the divisions she created. While we hold our breath about that, Obama and his campaign and prominent supporters must also avoid any action that appears designed to shut the race down prematurely. Otherwise, even if their so-called "arrogance" is mostly imaginary, its consequences may prove fatal to Democratic hopes.

Wow, your post really gave me a highschool flashback. There was this girl who absolutely hated me and I had no idea why, didn't know her beyond sharing a couple of classes, hardly spoke to her as I had my own close friends, too busy doing my own thing anyway. Just noticed that she would snap whenever I happened to cross her path, but I thought she was probably a bit weird and shrugged it off. Years later, found out that from some other acquaintances she perceived I was "arrogant", had slighted her in my body language in unseen ways, cutting her off on the way to class in the stairwell, etc. it was nuts beyond belief.

Imagine all that hatred welling up and consuming her through those couple of years in highschool.

Grow up! I'm sure she did, but what about you?