The one thing, the main thing, the central point, that Nat Hentoff is obviously too obtuse to get, is that Barack Obama doing all things that George Bush and Dick Cheney deserve to be in prison for doing is a good thing, because he's a "Democrat".

If he was a Republican, it would be a bad thing.

Not one of the aspiring Republican candidates for the presidency next year has said a word about this. And Obama cherishes their silence.

-- Obama bans war criminals, except our own, Nat Hentoff

If you are dealing with a room full of people though and attempting to get any single task completed you never start that process by going from one person to the next and asking them what they want and how they want to do this when you ARE THE LEADER AND THE MOST POWERFUL?  That's like sitting at Sonic with six children trying to figure out what everyone wants to drink...don't they have like a 100 combinations or something?  And your daughter that worked there in high school will not quit talking about what it tastes like if you mix watermelon and sour apple in a diet sprite while the guy on the speaker just wants to know what the heck to bring because everything isn't about you and your creative children.

I kept the fundraiser on for a while, because I wanted to hear the script and the objection responses.

The script tries to play to people's nostalgia for '08.  Lots of use "grass roots" and suggestions that what we did before we can do again.  "We need you."  "Your help is essential."  And so on.  A very emotional plea and probably effective with a number of people.

The objection responses, however, were pretty crappy.  Essentially all the stuff we've heard from Carney et al.  And that BTD has been ridiculing.  The first level was about the difficult task he was given.  Then it went to "these things take time".  Then to blaming the Republican congress.  Then an interesting one (I wrote it down):  "Only under a Democratic administration would the kind of debates you are referring to even be possible."  And finally some scare tactics about a Republican in the White House.

You'll probably never know that you've successfully persuaded your adversary, since it's a gradual change that happens offstage and is rarely acknowledged

Many of us here have noted that some of the O diehard supporters of 2008 have become very vocally disillusioned.  It didn't happen during any of the discussions.  It is an admission made later.  

So regular attempts at persuasion are necessary even if it seems futile.  Even if it is futile, because some one else may hear and begin to think.

He's gotten this far by beating on his base, so (a) why not continue, (b) he can't stop now because they'll turn on him, (c) he had and has no other claim to being on top, other than having established his dominance.

a large swath of the electorate has no commitment to a particular belief

as a rationalization against the idea that we may be out of the mainstream's thinking on an issue.