Dana Blankenhorn

The Class War

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 20 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

 

Look carefully at the chart above. It represents the biggest scandal of the last two decades.

Bigger than Iraq.  Bigger than Abu Ghraib. Bigger than the housing bubble.

It is nothing less than class war, the slow extermination of the uneducated by the educated.

These government statistics, compiled by government researchers, show trends in premature death rates from 8 causes -- everything from diabetes and heart attack to cancer and accidents. That's the rate per 100,000 people in 8 subgroups, college educated on the right, high school educated on the left.

I have already heard the excuses. The poor deserve their fate. They choose to get fat and die young. Most causes of death before 65 are preventable, and if you don't take care of yourself it's your own fault.

Bunk.

Not only are the rates higher for those without education, but those with just high school they rise steadily, for both races and both sexes. Does anyone doubt that those trends have accelerated in this decade? Does anyone think that the less educated are becoming more shiftless with time?

I would love to see a similar regression done for, say, Canada or England. Perhaps the comparison to Europe is unfair, given that college here is an option which can be purchased while there entry into it is won through competition.

But the conclusion is inescapable. We have two main classes of people in the U.S., those with education and those without. For the last 16 years those with are learning to live longer, those without are dieing younger.

This explains a lot about our politics:

Hope Rising

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 19 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

In most of the items marked Crisis of 2008 I have emphasized the difficulties in the time we're living with, the problems, the dangers.

But it is also vital, sometimes, to look at the opportunities, and to see the hope rising all around us.

I'm fortunate to find such things often in my work. Sometimes I bring them to you. Here are two just from this week:

• Simple breakthroughs in things like capacitors that can improve the efficiency of electric motors by as much as 300%.
• Breakthroughs in telemedicine which Microsoft is quickly taking advantage of.

Science and engineering are using the benefits of Moore's Law to create progress at a Moore's Law rate. That is breakthroughs are coming faster-and-faster, fast enough (perhaps) to halt the present processes destroying human life on this planet, and even turn them around.

If, that is, they can be brought into the world rapidly enough. The society which brings them to the market most rapidly will have the greatest share in the resulting prosperity.

What we need to make this happen is a process revolution. I am talking about accelerating both economic and political processes. We need to change business' processes so companies make more money solving problems than  causing them, as they have in this decade. And we need to change the way political change occurs at a fundamental level.

A generation ago Republicans talked about making government run more like a business. Now we need businesses to start taking their societal responsibilities seriously.

You do that by changing incentives.

• Right now electric utilities have more incentives to build power plants than to build efficiency into our electrical grid. We can change that.
• Right now drug companies have more incentives to create "me-too" drugs with patent protection than to produce generics we know work. We can change that.
• Right now energy producers have more incentives to withhold product from the market than to produce it. We can change that.
• Right now companies have more incentives to create monopolies than to open new markets. We can change that.
• Right now companies have more incentives to create paper than to see loans are repaid. We can change that.
  

When Al Gore talks about trading carbon credits, this is really what he's talking about, creating an incentive to emit less carbon by simply putting a price on it.

None of these changes are terribly difficult. Most are just a matter of will. And when we put the power of the market to work on the world's problems, pointing to those problems as opportunities with profits going to those who create solutions, positive change can happen quickly.

But that's not all.

The Oil Standard

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 18 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

I have long been intrigued by what stands for value. (Picture from The Zoo.)

Throughout the 19th century, gold was the standard of value.

The 1896 Crisis, the Cross of Gold speech, these were outgrowths of the 1895 gold loan by J.P. Morgan to the U.S. government in exchange for bonds, which Morgan then sold at the "usurious" interest rate of 4%. With gold as the standard of value, the value of other commodities (like wheat) withered. Farmers suffered, bankers gained. The farmers' uprising was called Populism, and it made Democrats dominant in the farm belt for decades.

Today we have a new standard of value. Oil. And the impact is much the same. For wheat read dollars, for farmers read Americans, and for J.P. Morgan read the Saudi sheikhs, Hugo Chavez and Vladimir Putin.

What makes a "strong" store of value is the fact that its supply is limited, that it doesn't inflate. It's stable. It's sound.

The U.S. dollar is no longer sound. It's being tossed out by Helicopter Ben the way farmers a century ago tossed wheat on the market, and the result is very predictable. The age of the "dollar standard" is over, and while the world seeks a new safe haven, oil will do nicely.

There can be only one response.

Principles and Ideology

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 17 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

What is most frustrating to me, as I read responses to my blog posts here and elsewhere, is how often I come up against raw, naked ideology.

Ideology is a soul stealer. Ideology blinds us to reality, substituting an artificial construct. Ideology, regardless of where its -ism comes from, is simply impractical.

One big reason why we have generational change is that the principles which first motivate important changes morph, over time, into ideology. This happens at all times, to all types of principle. The kind, simple words of Jesus have been transformed over the centuries into a host of warring ideologies. The same is true for Mohammad.

The same is true, in our time, for Adam Smith, for George Mason, for John Locke, even for Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, all the  great men who are credited with defining what is today modern conservatism.

I have been quite taken with the interviews surrounding the book Pure Goldwater, co-written by Barry Goldwater Jr. (who supported Ron Paul) and former Nixon counsel John W. Dean (who now seems to be a Democrat). Dean revealed that, while Goldwater Sr. was seen as a right-wing extremist in 1964 he was, by the end of his life, considered to be something of a libertarian, out of step with his own party. He even befriended the Clintons!

Goldwater was a man of principle. What he saw in his lifetime was those principles morph into an ideology, an absolutism as troubling as what he had fought in the 1950s.

Community Server

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 16 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

My health is good. We're happy. But there are days when I do wish I were 30 years younger, full of piss-and-vinegar.

Days like today.

Because if I were 28 again, and just starting out, this is the kind of business plan I would dearly love to implement. It's what I dreamed of when I first put "Have Modem, Will Travel" on my business cards over 25 years ago. (The picture is from that time. That's my old Kaypro II on the right. The kitten, LoMeow, lived to the age of 18.)

I call it the Community Server, and it's designed to activate rural communities and the back-end of the Internet revolution, the people who right now are either off-line or turned off by what they see online.

Let's start with some facts. Many types of demand can be aggregated and delivered at low cost. Not just diapers and TVs, as Wal-Mart did. Not just electricity as co-ops have for years. But telecommunications as well.

I've described over the years how cheaply WiFi can be delivered, and how copper wires can be transformed by going all-digital. But now that you've got people an on-ramp, where are they going?

To a directory, first of all. City directories and phone directories. Get the data and put it online.

Build a database of it, with each listing a virtual page. The front-end can be Elgg, it can be Marc Canter's PeopleAggregator, it can be Drupal, or (here's a good idea) it can be WordPress.

Take your time selecting the platform, because it's an important choice. You want to be able to add the capabilities of sites like FaceBook, YouTube, and MySpace, as your users demand them. Few users will demand many of these new features right off -- most will be happy with a blog -- but when they're ready you need to be ready. And your platform choice will determine that readiness. You're looking for an open source platform with an active community and a real business behind it.

Your community server could be hosted in your service area, but it doesn't have to be. If you've already aggregated Internet connectivity it might be fun to host it yourself. Otherwise leave it to the pros, and get near a major Internet Exchange.  In time you'll be the cloud. For now get next to one.

So far I haven't really told you much. Anyone can do this. Many people do and wind up with empty servers. I've done it myself.

What's the secret sauce?

Tribes of the GOP

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 15 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

Back in 1968 it was easy to identify the Democratic tribes splitting off from the party by the way they dressed and the way they looked.

White, black, brown, male, female, young, old -- each tribe had its own look and its own outlook.

It's tougher now. About the only black Republicans are on TV. Republicans are generally Euro-Americans, aged 30 and higher. They blend in. It's only when they start talking that you detect the tribal differences.

Anthropologists had two ways to discern the tribal identity of Nixon-era Republicans, by where they sat and by what they obsessed over. 

Where they were definitions include:

• Wall Street Republicans -- Urban only if they had an apartment in New York itself (maybe Philly), otherwise strictly suburban or exurban. Their first concern is money, getting it, keeping it, getting more of it, keeping other people from getting any.
• Church Street Republicans -- Usually found in megachurches or in front of their TV sets. Densest populations in the South and Southwest, but found in every state. Their first concern is morality, usually others, and using the power of the state to force that morality into a mold their preacher approves of.
• Easy Street Republicans -- Mostly found in Florida, Arizona, and California, these are Wall Street Republicans who made their pile. Often found in motor homes, on golf courses, or on condo balconies.
• Talk Show Republicans -- Often found in pick-up trucks on on job sites. They like them some Rush Limbaugh. Used to call themselves Reagan Democrats. Archie Bunker's real kids. The kind of people other Republicans like to rob.
• Professional Republicans -- Mostly found in Washington and its suburbs, or on TV.  Professional greasemen (and women),  sucking either at the government teat or those of other Republicans, mainly the Wall Street variety. Rush Limbaugh himself.
  

Dust

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 14 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

On sunny Sunday mornings, while the rest of Atlanta is in bed, at church, or huddling over brunch, I ride my bike downtown and visit Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (right).

It's quiet then. Just a few Japanese tourists wander by. If it's sunny, if I've been riding a few hours, I will sit by the reflecting pool and talk to him.

I don't expect him to talk back. He's dust. His tomb is a symbol for the life he lived, and the work he did. I was pleased when I snapped this picture, because it shows his wife Coretta is now with him. She lived nearly as long without him as he'd spent time on this Earth (38 years against 39) but they're together now in heaven, and in memory.

The AntiThesis Must Fall

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 13 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

When you look at American politics from the perspective of generations, one of the most startling things you learn is how each generation's Anti-Thesis, the myths, values and assumptions which fought the previous era, must fall as the era falls.

Easy to say, hard to put into practice, but voters manage it. They do it by building a new Thesis within the rising party, then battling the old Anti-Thesis within their own party  until it's dead.

Here's how it has run, in every generational crisis, from the last crisis in the 1960s backward through the Civil War:

• 40 years ago, this meant the Eisenhower Republicans. The party faction which Dwight D. Eisenhower brought to power was moderate in tone, wanting only to lean against the assumptions of the New Deal and make them work better. By the 1960s this meant Nelson Rockefeller (right), who became a hated figure within the new New York Conservative Party starting in 1960. While Rockefeller ended up (briefly) as Gerald Ford's Vice President, he had lost his relevance by that time. Today moderate Republicanism is just about dead.
• 36 years before that, this meant Wilson Democrats, represented best by Wilson's own son-in-law, William McAdoo. Woodrow Wilson crafted a marriage of convenience between business-oriented Democrats in the northeast and the remnants of failed Bryan populism. Roosevelt's nomination was fueled by his opposition to the former and his alliance with the latter. It was McAdoo (right), who had tried for the nomination twice before, whom Roosevelt most needed to outmaneuver in order to win himself.
  
• 36 years before that, this meant the Mugwumps. The Mugwumps -- a made-up word implying Big Chiefs -- were reform-minded Democrats who allied with urban machines to elect Grover Cleveland starting in 1884. Cleveland's endorsement of bonds backed by private gold in 1895, meant to stave off U.S. bankruptcy at a time when tariffs were the main source of revenue, collapsed his coalition. Mark Twain (right) is credited with coining the term Mugwump, and represented this early progressive impulse. Theodore Roosevelt inherited the Mugwumps in his Progressive Republican coalition. 
• 36 years before that, this meant the Whigs. The party of Henry Clay (right) believed in "civic improvements" like canals and railroads, meaning they sought a more activist government than the Jacksonians. They were wiped out by the creation of the Republican Party starting in 1854, which had different priorities, namely slavery and industry.

Notice however that Nixon came out of the Eisenhower Anti-Thesis, that Franklin Roosevelt had been a cabinet member under Wilson, that Theodore Roosevelt had been a young Mugwump, and that Lincoln had run in the 1840s as a Whig. This is what fueled my November, 2007 Clue  and my identification of her as Hillary M. Nixon.

What Lasts

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 12 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

The death of my friend Russell Shaw was one of those events which happens to everyone, the kind of event which forces you to re-assess your own life and path.

Sudden death can come to any of us, at any time, in any way. As we age, heart attacks become quite popular.

I still remember my trip to Japan, almost 20 years ago now, for the Electronic Networking Association. We were given a banquet in Sendai, copious amounts of sake, which caused me to pass out. When I awoke I learned that one of our party had stayed with the festivities, agreeing to join his hosts for a Japanese-style bath, many degrees hotter than an American hot tub. And there, his heart stopped. He was pretty old, I thought later, 53.

I'm 53 now. And Russell was 60.

It's Not That They're Clueless

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 11 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

My blog friend Oliver Willis calls those in charge of our financial house clueless.

That's an easy mistake to make.

In fact, it's in the nature of our economic system that you go right up to the line of legality in order to maximize profit. Anyone who doesn't do that is an economic loser, either in the short run or the long run.

You want to go right up to the line, peer down over the edge, and maybe move your toes back a bit. That's what your lawyers are there for, to move your toes back a bit.

This is fine so long as the law is reasonable. If the law is reasonable and cops are on the beat, walking right up to the line of legality and staring down into the canyon is both legitimate and good business. It's what makes markets efficient.

The problem in this case is the law was made unreasonable, and the cops chose to look the other way.

All the problems Bear Stearns caused were through the creation of new, "unregulated" markets. An unregulated market is a market that's looking for scandal. Because there is no reasonable line you can walk right up to, it's easy as heck to become Wile  E. Coyote in such a market -- everything is fine so long as you don't look down.

The defaults on sub-prime mortgages last year were when we started to look down.

The Virtuous Cycle of a War Against Oil

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 10 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

Right now the U.S. economy, and the U.S. in general, is in a vicious cycle. (Picture from DC Fred  .)

Wealth is decreasing, so sales are slowing. Sales are slowing, so the economy is tanking. The economy is tanking, so the dollar is tanking. The dollar is tanking, so we're importing inflation. Prices are rising so we can't cut interest rates. High interest rates causes wealth to decrease...lather, rinse, repeat.

What if we could replace this vicious cycle with a virtuous one, as we had in the 1990s?

We can, but it can't be the same. Back then we were building the Internet. That's built. We could improve it, add lanes, add competition, and that would be a very good thing indeed, but it won't provide the kind of virtuous cycle we got back in the day. Sorry.

But we can get that virtuous cycle if we commit to a War Against Oil.

What does a War Against Oil mean? It means a total commitment, on the order of a real war (not the kind we've been fighting in Iraq) to eliminating the use of hydrocarbons in our lives. That's the clearly defined victory, and (as the current President likes to remind us) nothing less than victory will do.

How do we do it?

Dirty F'ing Haties

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 9 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

One of the smartest things I have written at this blog came from my daughter, Robin. In a 2006 post I compared right-wing bloggers and talk show hosts to hippies from the 1960s.

No, she said. They're haties.

She's right, but the historical comparison remains apt, and I've made it many times. The haties are in the same historical role that hippies were 40 years ago.

The key to understanding the political changes of that time was its rejection of the hippies, then all those who enabled them. It was these people Spiro Agnew was describing in his speeches about liberal elites -- he was extending the public distaste for hippies to those who found anything redeemable in them.

The historical rejection of the hippies is a key to understanding the Nixon Thesis of Conflict, the political assumptions which have dominated America since that time, and which still dominate our media discourse.

The next step, after dismissing the hippies, was to defang them, and in this their supposed supporters in the media were highly complicit.

You can see it proceed throughout the 1970s. First they were turned into cartoons -- Scooby Doo. Then they were turned into suburbanites -- the Partridge Family. By the end of the decade they were merely a laughable stance -- Mork & Mindy. And they were an historical artifact, forgotten, crushed under history's wheel.

This process is just beginning for the haties of today. I would like to urge you to join in.

End of the New Nixon

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 8 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

One of the most annoying aspects of modern political coverage is this emphasis on process, tactics, and what looks like minutiae.

TeeVee talking heads keep telling us this is inevitable, as though their habits were a force of nature, like entropy. The point is made most forcefully by Chris Matthews, whose book "Life's a Campaign" paints everything as artificial.

But this is not inevitable. This is not entropy. This had a beginning and it has an ending.

The ending is the major political story of 2008.

The beginning was The New Nixon. The idea was that Richard Nixon, twice-defeated, had become tanned, rested, ready, mature, a new man. Everyone on the press bus knew this was bull, but Nixon's handlers, especially H.R. Haldeman (right), kept pushing the line, and eventually Nixon won. Tactics and image, it seemed, had triumphed over reality.

Ever since then political coverage has become all about artifice. More and more is written about less and less. Insiders care nothing for what a candidate really is, or really believes. They care only about the tactics, about how they will be portrayed, and how this portrayal can shift based entirely on how marketing people manipulate the media. They are, in other words, covering their own eternal bamboozlement, pretending that the lies of spokespeople are the only truth, and that reality has no substance beyond the never-ending ability to spin it.

We have lived a generation now with this bedrock political assumption. It is drilled into our politics as no policy is. And it's time for it to stop, if a new era is going to actually take shape.

Here's how we start.

The Right War Against the Right Enemy

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 7 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

The most frustrating aspect of this whole decade is how we've gone to war against the wrong enemy, using the wrong means. (Cartoon from the Toronto Globe & Mail.)

Advocates of our present course go on-and-on about radical Islam, about evil-doers, about how we must confront them militarily, over there, so we won't have to do so over here.

There is so much wrong with that sentence it's hard to see where to begin. But let's try.

First, the enemy. It's not Islam, radical or otherwise. Islam is a means to an end. If we did not need oil we would care a lot less about the Middle East, and it's very likely Islam could start caring less about us.

It's a lot more like the South in the Civil War. Why are you fighting us, the Union man asked. Because you're over here, the Confederate replied. Slavery was the economic model behind the talk of state's rights. In the same way, oil is the economic model behind all this talk of Jihad, and a clash of  civilizations.

Oil should be our enemy. Reduce our need for oil and everything else gets easy.

Second, the means. We have been using military means exclusively. And our military rides on a sea of oil.

Whether we're "winning" or not, we're losing because of the means we're employing.

Revenge, Reform and Justice

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 6 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

The countdown to the end of the Bush era has begun.

We think.

But as we gaze over the immense crimes of this time, and seek justice for the damage to our world, our people, and our finances, the demand for revenge and justice is getting in the way of reform.

I share the thirst for revenge.

If no one pays for all this, if no one is held legally responsible for Iraq and Katrina and torture and the massive thefts which may add up to trillions of dollars we don't even have, then the whole country becomes like the Reagan labor secretary Raymond Donovan (right), plaintively wailing (after being found innocent of corruption) "where do I go to get my good name back?"

Fact is, with countries, it's not so easy. The guilt for this era will never wash off our hands. Not entirely. No matter our politics, the crimes of George W. Bush, his henchmen, and his followers, done in our name, are our crimes as well.

How to Really Succeed in Business

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 5 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

As a door prize for covering a software conference this week, Rick Chapman of SoftLetter gave me a copy of his book.

In Search of Stupidity was, for me, a ton of fun. It tells the history of the PC business, that part of the business I lived through and covered. Sort of a memoir of my time. And it's well-written -- funny, breezy, and conversational. While most business books are dry tomes filled with charts and buzzwords, Rick's book is a bedtime chuckle filled with stories and anecdotes.

His theme is that you can succeed in business if you just avoid being stupid. Most companies fail due to easily foreseen, really stupid mistakes, he writes, and he cites endless examples, many of which I personally covered or lived through.

In a way it's much like this newsletter.  Since launching A-Clue.Com in 1997 I focused on finding those who had a Clue, who seemed to know what was coming, and those whom I deemed Clueless.  Smart and stupid, clued-in and clueless. It's pretty similar.

But there's more to it than that.

Hershey Bars for Rich Kids in Harbour Green

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 4 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

This is my Alex Baldwin story.

Not Alec. Alex. The father.

When I knew him, I was a toffee-nosed rat-faced git of 15, and he was running the summer camp program for the Massapequa Schools. The rest of the year he was a gym teacher at McKenna Jr. High.

We were coming back from some camp trip on a yellow school bus. (I think we'd harassed the gays on Fire Island or something.) We were full of brio (or our own youthful bullshit) and talking up doing a fundraiser. We had lots of ideas to raise money -- car washes, product sales, babysitting.

Mr. Baldwin brought up the question of what we were raising the money for. "Are you going to give Hershey Bars to all the rich kids in Harbour Green?" he asked. He wanted us to think of those less fortunate, rather than other privileged people, who he assumed could get their own Hershey Bars.

I thought this hysterical at the time, and I still get a chuckle out of it. But these days the joke's on us.

The Answer to All Fears

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 3 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

I'm going to sound a little like George W. Bush here.

But there is a one size fits all solution to all our basic problems.

That solution is The War Against Oil. (Image from Bikecommutertips.)

To fight a War Against Oil means to make this your main priority, and to subordinate all other policies to it. It doesn't just mean throwing a few subsidies to well-connected ethanol growers. It means making certain the market will accept any alternative energy coming in at a decent price, and tilting your market with taxes so that it favors cleaner sources over dirty ones. It means highlighting solutions in all public appearances, and making it the centerpiece of your rhetoric.

Unlike Bush's one size fits all solution (tax cuts for rich frat boys) The War Against Oil actually works.

• The War Against Oil is foreign policy, because it makes us more energy independent and reduces the power of our oil-exporting adversaries.
• The War Against Oil is terror policy, because the new forms of energy can be dispersed, as you will see.
• The War Against Oil is environmental policy, because clean energy means reducing the use of hydrocarbons.
• The War Against Oil is technology policy, creating new jobs through new research.
• The War Against Oil is education policy, since the required knowledge cuts across so many disciplines.
• Perhaps most important, the War Against Oil is economic policy.

The War Against Oil is the issue on which to center our new political Thesis, that of the Internet, and that finding is justified by the history our chattering classes are now so intent upon.

The Difference Among Democrats

Think of this as Volume 11, Number 2 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.

---

The difference among Democrats is subtle -- perhaps too subtle for TV to catch.

But it's there.

I've compared Hillary Clinton to Richard Nixon before, the key to that comparison being her role in the AntiThesis to Nixon's Thesis, which still governs America in 2008, and the ruthlessness which many Democrats, as a result, see as her strength. I've also talked about Barack Obama's comparison to Reagan and my love for John Edwards.

Edwards' star is fading fast, unfortunately. His populism is drawing people like me, those accused of wealth and guilty of education, but failing among its target audience, those with lower-middle incomes. Democrats in that group are going to Clinton, while Huckabee does well if they're Republican. Edwards is left with the "limousine liberals," those who know history. I have compared him here to FDR and to those of lower income that's all FDR is -- history.

What the media does -- and it wants to do this at an accelerating pace regardless of who it hurts -- is winnow down the field quickly. It does this with the early primaries. Single digits in Iowa and you're out. And after New Hampshire they want a two-man game in each party. Thus Fred Thompson and Giuliani have been dismissed, with Romney given the task of "Michigan-or-bust." And on the Democratic side, Edwards is considered gone.

We're left with Obama and Clinton, and the real issue, which is similar to what Republicans faced early in the last generation when the battle was between Reagan and Gerald Ford.

That is a choice between the new values and the old interest groups.