I can agree with this to some extent. However, the one thing to remember is that Obama is a quick learner. The real main issue with Obama is that his heart is in the right place. That is the bedrock foundation upon which his character rests. I'd much rather have that base, because everything else can be improved upon from there. I reference his debate performances. Initially he struggled. However, over time there was great improvement. I would actually say he won the latter three debates prior to being ambushed in PA at the ABC debate.

Some politicians/lawyers glibly have all the answers, but their foundation is shaky. Obama is that rare breed of renegade politician who demonstrates profound character. That is a cardinal virtue, compared to zippy one-liners.

And as I indicated, I am confident that those will come.

Finally, to wrap things up, I have to say I thought he gave the absolute BEST response to that PA ambush-debate by simply dusting dirt off his shoulders.

That was a demonstration of priceless brilliance, charm and wit.

I agree Obama generally seems to be a quick learner, and he seems to be a very skilled politician. It's just that the past few weeks have been worrisome. The Reverend Wright issue stuck around a long time, and it just seems there must have been some way for Obama to deal with it faster and more effectively. Same with this Hamas garbage, which is just more Republican smear tactics to try to associate Obama with radical muslim terrorists - can't this smear be dealt with, effectively, within one 24 hour news cycle, the way the Clintons learned how to deal with smears? Even the "bitter" comment could have been spun, quickly, it seems to me, to neutralize some of the damage.

I love Obama's careful, intellectual, thoughtful analysis of issues. It is such a pleasure to hear, for a (big) change, from a major politician. But there is a time for such analysis, and a time for rapid, terse, effective response to ugly Rovian smears. The man's got to do some fighting!

The same qualities which don't serve him well as a campaigner are what lead him to make good long term decisions.

I want to add that this theme resonates much like the situation in which the loser in the race attacks the front runner for not being able to "Close the Deal," yet every one seems to avoid asking her the question: "Senator Clinton, why is it that YOU can't close the deal?"

He is not being effective? Then I can't wait for the moment when he becomes effective. Looking forward to it. ;-)

Keep in mind, though, that he's currently fending off attacks from two sides. I think once Hillary's out of it, we're going to see a very different campaign emerge.

Obama spoke for thirty-seven minutes about Wright, and it did not quell the doubts. In fact it raised more. He later readdressed the issue more forcefully and more directly, disassociating himself from Wright, and that didn't work either because he was contradicting his earlier speech, plus his association with Wright is to strong to be disavowed. He said so himself in his first speech. So he's only left with trying to disassociate himself from some of what Wright believes, and that isn't satisfactory.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that any concerns about Obama's attitudes on the subject of race were planted by his enemies, and can be quelled by a quick, firm response from Obama. You may not believe it, but he himself has created many of those concerns.

Unfortunately for Obama and the Democrats there are certain to be more revelations that will cast doubt on who exactly Obama is. If he plays the race game in trying to silence those doubts he risks alienating more voters. He dare not, as too many of his supporters do, paint as racists those people who have legitimate doubts about him. He is going to have to find a way to respect people's views and address them. It's going to be very tricky. I hope he succeeds, because we can't have McCain. But I'm very worried, and not just because of the racial aspect. His candidacy has a number of vulnerabilities.

I appreciate Obama's willingness to give a full answer to serious questions. It shows that he assumes Americans are ready to be treated like reasonable, intelligent, responsible citizens.

What I think he needs to get better at is deciphering the difference between substantive questions and the kinds of questions that are designed to create controversy, and to be able to quickly reframe a potentially controversial question into a more substantive question - with minimal words.

I would also like to see Obama (and his surrogates) directly challenge questions that start with false premises even before attempting to answer them.

For example, today Wolf Blitzer replayed the part of his interview with Mitt Romney where Romney makes the (false) statement that Obama "hasn't done anything" - "no significant legislation..."

Why did Obama allow that false premise to go unchallenged? It makes it seem like Obama is conceding the point.

Right off the bat, Obama should have challenged Romney's statement as untrue: "First of all, Wolf, I *have* authored and co-sponsored substantive bipartisan legislation both at the state and federal level, so Romney's assertion to the contrary is, on its face, patently false."

Then I think the quip Obama did respond with is an effective parry (paraphrasing): "I remember Mitt said the same thing about John McCain during a Republican primary debate, and look at were we are today."

Obama's lack of experience is clearly going to be a repeating theme of the McCain strategy, and Obama HAS to come out strongly and smack it down now, before it gets so entrenched in the public's perception of him. Hopefully it's not too late.

In fact, Obama has gotten some impressive legislation passed for having served in a Republican-controlled state and federal government.

For example, in Illinois he was credited with
- a landmark state death penalty law, passed UNANINMOUSLY by the Republican-controlled state government
- substantive state ethics reform law
- expanding access to healthcare for the working poor
- setting up community-based health centers in underserved neighborhoods
- expanding the earned income tax credit for thousands of families

And on the federal level:
- the "toughest ethics reform legislation in the U.S. Senate since Watergate"
- The Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act to stop the Bush administration from awarding no-bid contracts for post-Katrina reconstruction projects & to improve oversight of federal spending after Hurricane Katrina
- The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat Reduction Act, legislation to detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction throughout the world

He has also sponsored other meaningful legislation still in progress:
- the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act, which supports divestment of state pension funds from Iran's oil and gas industry
- the Comprehensive Nuclear Threat Reduction Plan co-sponsored with Sen. Hagel (passed as part of the omnibus appropriations bill

He was also the first senator to speak out on avian flu, spearheading an effort to spend $25 million to prevent a pandemic

And he introduced a bill that would help underwrite health-care costs for automakers that produce fuel-efficient cars.

So, it is FACTUALLY INCORRECT to say that Obama hasn't done anything of legislative substance while he's served as an Illinois state representative or Senator in Congress.

The Senator does speak senatorially--at least not as badly as Senator Kerry.