Barack Obama's promises of "national unity" are well-intentioned, but naive and misguided

Being "united" as a country is overrated. Some things are more important than being united, like moving the nation forward to a better place and taking on entrenched, powerful interests that are blocking progressive change.

We favor ending the war in Iraq, repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, legal marriage rights for gay Americans and national health care. Those policies are the right thing to do for the country, but they might very well be "divisive". There are powerful people in powerful places, backed by a good number of ordinary people, who fiercely oppose these things, and would fight us every step of the way on these issues, root and branch. Should we back off of these commitments because they are divisive? Should we try to paper over our differences with the other side because we want to protect the idea of "unity"? Do we want to give a "seat at the table" to the Christian fundamentalists, health insurance companies, the neo-cons at the AEI and the Club for Growth, so that we can achieve some muckedy-muck, mealy-mouthed compromise that does nothing to really help anyone, all in the name of "unity"?

Sometimes if you want to do what is right for America, you have to forge ahead, and cut some people loose. I'm confident that most conservatives also feel the same way. They don't much care about offending liberals and others who disagree with them.

Lincoln and FDR all polarized and divided the country, but they changed America for the better, and they didn't worry too much about those with whom they disagreed, except as it concerned formulating a strategy to defeat them.

mouth platitudes. Watching Hillary today on C-Span, I saw someone eager to take on the swift boaters.

you're certain she doesn't mean it?

You seem to be attacking a straw man. If you are going to attack someone who won't speak up against the war in Iraq....well, HELLO....Obama spoke about this years ago.

Obama says that if this nation is to move FORWARD it has to go beyond the divisive stuff that Bush has fomented and also precededed Bush.

I have not selected a candidate...but I think Obama is speaking of an ideal that is certainly a worthy goal. Is it naive? Perhaps. But you know what is even more naive? Keeping on doing things the same way and expecting different results...eg...what the divisive politicians have been doing for years without much in the way of results. It is not enough to say "our" candidate is ok to be divisive, but the other side is not ok to be divisive.

I really don't think we can get substantive change without finding some way to end the divisive bickering and looking to what is best for the good of the country.

We do need to end the war in iraq. We do need to work substantively towards affordable health care for all. We need to work for saving our planet. We need to help our economy, but we also need to help ensure that our economy does not leave anyone behind. The list has just begun....but I am tired of posturing, and preaching to the choir. Sure most of us on DU agree about the need for these things. But we have to face the fact that we need to get things done, or they won't change. Fact is, we have tried the divisive rhetoric before, and all it has gotten us is different brands of the same old same old.

I don't think Obama is saying we need to capitulate to the right. After all, if he wins and if we get a big majority in Congress, it will be the other side who will be doing the capitulating. Obama is, however, speaking some lofty rhetoric that can inspire the people to get behind his programs, and I think he is saying he is going to make this a government that listens to all of its citizens.

Pardon me....ain't that what a leader is supposed to do?

We'll get 8 more years of partisan screaming and yelling and nothing changing.

Congratulations Democrats.

a black or a woman president. You don't have to worry about Hillary.

If all Democrats shared your view, we would discriminate against women and blacks in hiring our nominee....and we would have the total pure bs hypocrisy to try to blame it on the racism and sexism of the others when it would be US who discriminated on the basis of race or sex ourselves.

There was a time when many Americans did not think that ending segregation or even guaranteeing voting rights would be something the American people would support.

Well, we have to do what is right. Nominate a candidate on the basis of his or her character....and leave the speculation about race and sex to others.

If not now...WHEN?

If all Democrats shared my views we would have a woman president right now. Impeachment would be long past!

you live in pick him over Barack or Hillary? If so, then that america you live in is fucking hopeless.

The weather's pretty good and we make some mean BBQ.

is not solving the fundamental problems we face. The government that starts to resolve those problems will meet with tremendous resistance. That is why we need a president who genuinely cares about the American people and will inspire us to participate in finding the solutions. I started to list the myriad of problems we face, but the list was too long.

I think that's what he's talking about. There has to be some good leadership first.

Nobody is fool enough to believe we're going to unite with right-wing crazies and other nutbags.

while completely ignoring the wishes of half its citizens is naive and misguided.

Obama's concept of unity doesn't mean caving in to the Right. It's about getting right-leaning Americans to see how a progressive agenda can be an expression of their values. Until this happens, every two years we're going to be extremely vulnerable to having a Congress getting elected which will turn back the clock on any progress which has been made. Much to the disappointment of those with "V for Vendetta" instant gratification poltical fantasies, this is not something that's going to happen overnight.

Another component of Obama's unity messgae is that our nation's political dialogue needs to be a more mature, reasoned discussion. Remember when Jon Stewart got on Crossfire and told the hosts they were hurting America with their inane bickering? That's part of what Obama is getting at.