A Test For Obama

The Obama camp is facing a fairly serious test right now: can they keep from going too negative in the face of all the unfair negative attacks by the Clinton campaign?

Now, it's been bothering me that the Obama camp has been less good on this score than I'd like. There've been some questionable campaign fliers (e.g. the new "Harry and Louise"-style ones), and in general they've thrown a few elbows of their own. But their indiscretions pale in comparison to those of the Clinton camp...so it'd be a little weird to make too much of Obama's indiscretions. So, can Obama remain relatively positive in the face of this?

We don't know yet.

It's important to recognize, though, that this isn't the crucial test. Obama has already passed the crucial test--that is, he started out positive. Whether or not you can remain non-viciously-negative in the fact of viciously negative attacks by your opponents isn't the "real" test of your mettle, it's an extraordinary test of it. I'm o.k. with people who won't start the dirty fighting, but who will respond in kind when it starts. We rightly have special admiration, however, for those who'll never descend to that level. It'd be truly inspiring if Obama just came out and said something like "look, here are the unfair and vicious attacks by my opponent...and here are the facts...; but I'm not going to respond in kind." But, in the face of the kind of lunacy we're seeing from the Clinton campaign (something they basically warned us was going to happen ahead of time, and even themselves named the "kitchen sink" strategy), I'm not going to blame him if he strikes back--within reason.

One footnote, though: those questionable fliers and so forth: it really is important that, if you're going to take the high road, you do it pretty much all the way. Even a few indiscretions are--aside from being wrong--going to give your opponents ammunition for the claim that you're just like them.

Anyway, here's hoping for the best.