Some of those bozos giving this poor advice seem to have migrated over to the Obama campaign. Obama's announcement that he was running for President was made in Springfield, Illinois, home to Abraham Lincoln. Someone evidently thought that Obama's shocking lack of political experience could be ameliorated with a comparison to President Lincoln, who served a single term in the House of Representatives.

I guess that's suppose to assuage our concerns, but as usual the devil is in the details. Lincoln was very prominent in Illinois state politics and in Republican politics generally. Nevertheless, his lack of experience was a major concern both within the party and for the country generally. We have the leftist conceit that Bush is an accidental president, but Lincoln literally came to power by a series of serendipitous accidents. His primary win was a matter of being most people's inoffensive second choice in an extremely divisive political environment. His presidential win resembled Clinton's more that Bush, as the Democrats presented a southern and northern candidate. Early in his administration, he did not even have the confidence of his own cabinet, who to a man, considered themselves to have superior qualities and claim to the presidency.

Seward was the "rock star" and Lincoln the "nobody".

The speech itself was nauseatingly dishonest (...that's why we passed ethics reforms that the cynics said could never, ever be passed) and riddled with political cliches.

The irony is, while Obama evoked Lincoln, the salient feature of Lincoln's rhetoric and policy was an acknowledgment of the disagreements that existed in the country and a proposal for suitable compromise. Obama just pretends that the red states don't exist, that Republicans don't exist, that scientist who vigorous deny the political manipulation of climate change Goebbels, don't exist.

Its damn easy to unite a country where the opposition doesn't exist. The reality will require more statesmanlike instincts that Obama appears to possess.