You know, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea for folks to understand what "Hope" really is -- or at least how our President sees it when he offers it to us.

And the place to go for that is - don't start hissing! -- Rev. Jeremiah Wright. There was reason, good reason, for Obama to respect him and associate with him all those years, and maybe now that the campaigns are over (and Obama is being demonized for other reasons ... sigh) folks can take a calm look at why -- in particular why he gave his second book a phrase taken from one of Rev. Wright's sermons, The Audacity of Hope.

Here's the sermon -- it's not too long and it won't take too much time to read it through and think about what is being said:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/for-the-record.html

(If that doesn't create a link and someone can make it do so, great appreciation.)

One paragraph:
"And Paul said something about that, too. No visible sign? He says, 'Hope is what saves us, for we are saved by hope. But hope that is seen is not hope. For what a man sees, why does he have hope for it? But if we hope for that which we see not (no visible sign), then do we with patience wait for it.'"

That's what Obama understands hope to be -- and what he's offered us: hope for things unseen and unpromised, and the promise that he will be patient and keep trying even when the reward isn't clearly within reach or seems quite impossible.

If you don't have the patience for an effort like that, or don't believe in anything that you can't see tangible evidence of -- that's fine. We each get to make that decision. But don't scoff at our President's offer of hope.

He is acting on hope, working very hard to bring about that unseen, unguaranteed but hoped-for resolution to many difficult problems, including health care. And there is no way he's going to succeed on all of them within the time he's going to be given, even if it's 8 years. And it may be that health care is one of the areas in which we don't get all that we hope for. So does that mean he -- and the many others who are fighting for that goal -- should quit the effort?

I'm very glad that those in the civil rights movement didn't quit, that they didn't stop even when it was painfully obvious and in fact almost guaranteed that what they hoped for would not occur in their lifetime. Why shouldn't people in the "health rights" movement be as (dare I say it?) filled with hope?

Thanks exNC, I guess it's like bike riding. If you are riding in the bike lane and look over your left shoulder to check traffic, it's really hard not to drift left into that traffic that you are checking!

We tend to go towards where we are looking.

Shorter NCSteve.


You've been bitching about people hyping each other up in the comments since June. If people had listened to you then we wouldn't be where we are now.

Changing peoples minds and beliefs and views is the most difficult thing in the world to do. Just remember how long it took before most people would accept the fact that the earth was NOT the center of the galaxy. Even with total and insurmountable proof from many, many sources...most people would not accept it.

The same goes for the belief that the private sector is the be all end all for everything and that everything should be for profit. Even though there is more and more proof that this is NOT the case and unrestrained capitalism just does not work.

Because the most uncomfortable thing for people to admit is that what they believe is just flat out wrong. Their petty egos simply will not allow it.

C

What we are all witnessing in this debate, The Capitilist will deny it though and there lackey politicians will assure the Capitilist agenda will prevail.
We the People are seeing first hand what Eugene Debs said would happen.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Eugene_V._Debs#Statement_to_the_Court_Upon_Being_Convicted_of_Violating_the_Sedition_Act_.28September_18.2C_1918.29
“The capitalist class is represented by the Republican, Democratic, Populist and Prohibition parties, all of which stand for private ownership of the means of production, and the triumph of any one of which will mean continued wage-slavery to the working class……The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to spoils and not to principles…….Deny it as may the cunning capitalists who are clear-sighted enough to perceive it, or ignore it as may the torpid workers who are too blind and unthinking to see it, the struggle in which we are engaged today is a class struggle, and

as the toiling millions come to see and understand it and rally to the political standard of their class,

they will drive all capitalist parties of whatever name into the same party,

and the class struggle will then be so clearly revealed that the hosts of labor will find their true place in the conflict and strike the united and decisive blow that will destroy slavery and achieve their full and final emancipation”

The Obama administration is controlling the pressure relief valve, letting the steam of the people cool off, and the power will still be maintained, by the Capitalists; because the torpid working class is to blind to see the struggle going on.

Notice we started off with single payer, and the Capitialists rejected that, then as the summer allowed the agitated working class to come to a simmer. Now we’ll get watered down healthcare.

The Democrats appearing to champion the working class; but instead their role is to pacify the working class.
Convincing you that they’re not like their evil counterparts the Republicans. But both serve the same master.

“The tired whine of "But the Republicans are worse" will fall flat….”
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader

In spite of how crazily the senate is going about this I think house democrats may carry the day before this is done. They have made it quite clear they want no part of a final bill that doesn't have the public option. The house seems to understand that without the public option costs just won't come down. The senate is arguably more worried about campaign dollars and holding power than about healthcare reform.

Once upon a time I would have thought the senate would be more inclined to holding to constitutional integrity and all that. Got that wrong by a country mile. Maybe they were once but not any more.

I'm wondering if any fellow denizens would disagree that Obama believes something like: "Look, I'm going to do everything I can while I am in office and after I leave and I hope all of you will do the same. We didn't get into the situations we are facing overnight and we're not going to get out of them overnight."

In any difficult endeavor, doubt, or at least anxiety, about whether success will be achieved seems pretty much endemic to the human condition. The question isn't whether it is present, but how individuals choose to deal with it.

Skyler seems to know what the deal on Capital Hill is.

C