Prometheus 6

Because the change that we need isn't a "change in tone." It's a change in focus and direction...and if they insist on pushing foolish tax breaks and pulling race cards, crushing the Republican Party may well be necessary.

So what is his plan? He may have let it slip in a recent interview, when he explained that a big reason he should be the Democratic nominee is that he could carry his party to a sweeping congressional victory that would provide a "mandate for change." "I mean, if we have a 50-plus-one election, we cannot get a serious health-care bill done. We can't have a serious agenda on climate change," he said.

That doesn't sound like a man who wants to work with Republicans toward a bipartisan era. It sounds like a man who wants to crush his opponents at the polls, and then bulldoze his agenda through an enfeebled opposition.

Change Agent?
Barack Obama and the burden of liberalism.
BY KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
Friday, December 28, 2007 12:01 a.m.

"If you want conventional Washington thinking, I'm not your man. If you want rigid ideology, I'm not your man. If you think that fundamental change can wait, I'm definitely not your man. But if you want to bring this country together . . . then I offer a different choice in this race and a different vision for our future."

Ask an Obama supporter what they love about the presidential contender, and some version of this pitch is what you'll hear. Mr. Obama can "heal divisions," can "win hearts and minds." He's going to change the way crummy old Washington does business, get past this red-versus-blue thing, and get on with being president of one truly United States of America.

If the Democratic race has been about anything, it's been about promises of "change." Mr. Obama has made it his signature issue, tapping into a national unease with the status quo, and riding it to within striking distance of Hillary Clinton. What the charismatic young Illinois senator has not yet had to do is explain what shape this change will assume, or how he intends to bring it about. And lucky for him, because it's far from clear Mr. Obama is anything but same old, same old.

Mrs. Clinton has also been laboring for "change," though she's kept the focus on Republicans. Her strategy has been to minimize divisions among the Democrats, presenting herself as their natural leader. She's also had an eye to the general election prize, where she hopes talk of George W. Bush's failings will hold appeal for independents, and some Republicans, unhappy with the eight years of GOP rule.

But it's been Mr. Obama's more sweeping message that has captured public attention. He's seen Mrs. Clinton's bet (to change which party runs the White House) and raised her (by promising to change the entire political calculus). That goes down well not only with anti-Bush partisans, but paradoxically with voters who complain about too much "partisanship" in Washington. As a bonus, it allows Mr. Obama to hit Mrs. Clinton where it hurts, namely voter fear that she'd be a return to 1990s battles.