A Tip for Obama — Actually, Six of Them

Michael Moore, the documentary filmmaker who gave us such satirical gems as "Roger & Me," "Bowling for Columbine," "Fahrenheit 9/11" and "Sicko," is about to publish a book called "Mike's Election Guide."

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the TV cameras spot him at the Democratic National Convention in Denver next week.

As the Democrats prepare to gather, they might be wise to read Moore's article on Rolling Stone's website.

And not just because it would be a convenient icebreaker if a prominent Democrat happens to bump into Moore and needs something to keep the conversation going.

Moore's article is summed up pretty well in the headline: How the Democrats Can Blow It ... In Six Easy Steps.

The subhead is even more explicit — A blueprint for losing the most winnable presidential election in American history.

Is that blunt enough for you?

If not, then listen to this.

These are the six steps for Barack Obama to lose the election to John McCain. Read the article for more details (and for Moore's defense of his positions):

1. Keep saying nice things about McCain. I'll concede that Moore makes a pretty good point with this one. He says that, by saying enough nice things about McCain, Obama will make the race "Barack Obama vs. War Hero."
   
   And, in Sgt. York Nation, War Hero will win every time.


2. Pick a running mate who is a conservative white guy or a general or a Republican. Obama, like Lincoln, is from Illinois, but reaching outside the party for a running mate is taking the Lincoln emulation to an extreme. So I would rule out Chuck Hagel (not that he's getting a lot of press these days).
   
   Besides, if Obama is elected, he won't have to wait long for a legitimate opportunity to visit his home state to pay homage to Lincoln. Honest Abe's 200th birthday is coming up on February 12.
   
   If by "general" Moore is referring to Wesley Clark, then, again, I agree. Leave him off the ticket. He hasn't turned out to be a great campaigner, he can't deliver his home state of Arkansas or any other Southern state, and he doesn't appear to be interested in the job, anyway.
   
   As for "conservative white guy," though, I do think the ticket would benefit from someone who is more moderate than Obama, whose voting record in the Senate is probably too liberal for many Americans. I don't think it would be wise to pick Sam Nunn — he'll be 70 in September and he hasn't run for political office in 18 years. But there are others out there who would fit the bill.


3. Keep writing speeches for Obama that make him sound like a hawk. This one I'm not so sure about.
   
   Moore might not like it, but Obama has been doing the politically prudent thing. It's been a long accepted truism of politics — in both parties — that you run to the extreme to win your nomination, then you run to the center to win the election.
   
   The voters in the general election are more moderate than the audiences McCain and Obama appealed to in the primaries. A nominee forgets that (or overlooks it) at his own peril.


4. Forget that this was a historic year for women. If Obama's running mate isn't a woman (and, as I said, I don't think it should be), then he needs to be gracious to Hillary Clinton and her dedicated supporters. It is important to them that the historic significance of Clinton's campaign is acknowledged and remembered.
   
   As it should be.
   
   Clinton is in her 60s and may never have another chance to be the nominee. But someday a woman will win the nomination for president in one of the two parties, and she will do so in part because Hillary blazed the trail for her.
   
   And even though there are a lot of female voters who want to see Clinton on the ticket, I think it's wise to stay away from asking a woman to be Obama's running mate. I believe a black and a woman on the same ticket is asking the voters to accept too much change at once.
   
   Apparently, Moore doesn't think so. On his website, you can find an open letter to Caroline Kennedy, who is heading up Obama's vice presidential search team. Moore says Kennedy should "pull a Cheney" and select herself — the same thing Dick Cheney did as head of George W. Bush's vice presidential search team in 2000.
   
   Somehow, though, Moore works Obama's wife into this point — I'm not sure what it is that she's done that is so historic (except for the fact that she's married to the next Democratic presidential nominee), but Moore uses it as an opportunity to talk about the "Michelle problem" that emerged when she said this was the first time she's been proud of her country.
   
   "Michelle Obama has been one of the most refreshing things about this election year," Moore writes.
   
   I know quite a few voters who would have a lot to say about Mrs. Obama. I don't think "refreshing" is a word any of them would use.


5. Show up to a gunfight with a peashooter. Moore warns the Democrats against complacency, which may be their greatest enemy right now.
   
   My advice would be to respond to any and all charges immediately. If you let too much time pass between a charge and a response, you risk being swift-boated like John Kerry.
   
   And don't do something stupid (like Michael Dukakis riding around in that tank in 1988).
   
   Bill Clinton set the example to follow with his response team in 1992 — another can't-miss year for Democrats.


6. Denounce me! For some voters, that may be the best advice of all.
   
   At some point during the campaign, Obama will be asked a question about something that Moore said that will be "taken out of context," Moore writes. "[Obama] better denounce me, or they will tear him to shreds."
   
   Maybe so. There's a lot of anger aimed at Moore. His documentaries have stepped on a lot of toes.
   
   And taking aim at him is a popular sport in conservative circles. In a speech at the 2004 Republican National Convention, McCain called him "a disingenuous filmmaker," a remark that earned an ovation from the delegates.
   
   Still, Moore is right when he says there are millions of people who feel the same about the issues as he does. "And many of them are the kind of crazy voters who have no problem voting for a Nader just to prove a point," he writes.

Well.

As it typically is with his films, there is some real truth in what Moore says.

And there's a certain amount of hyperbole, too.

Read it and judge for yourself.

A Tough Question

As I mentioned yesterday, an old friend of the family has died.

This morning, after being unsuccessful in my attempt to call the home last night, my call went through and I reached the son of our friend, who is a couple of years older than I am.

I identified myself.

He was the only one there, he told me. His mother and his sister were out. Neither of us had mentioned his father's death, although he knew that was the reason for my call.

Then he asked me, "When does it stop hurting?"

The question caught me by surprise. I had to stop and think before I could answer.

This man remembers what our family went through when my mother died in a flash flood 13 years ago. He was there through all of it. So he knows I can speak from experience.

I wanted to give him some practical advice. I know he and the rest of his family are in pain right now.

And I know some of my readers have been through this kind of thing themselves. And others are going through it right now.

One of the things I took from the experience of losing my mother was that a lot of people spoke to me about closure, as if the death of a loved one was something you could come to terms with and then put behind you forever.

It's not that simple. At least, it wasn't that simple for me.

Now, I'll grant you, everyone has a different relationship with their parents. Not everyone is as fortunate as I was.

For some people, it may be possible to achieve closure, if their relationship with their mother and/or father left something to be desired.

But, in my case, I reached the conclusion that there really was no such thing as closure.

It's been more than 13 years now, and it still hurts, from time to time.

It hurts on the anniversary of my mother's death. It hurts on her birthday. It hurts on Christmas. And sometimes it hurts for seemingly no reason at all — except that something sparked a memory.

But it isn't the constant, aching kind of hurt that it was in the beginning.

It does get better over time. Without a doubt, the first year is the toughest. In that first year, you must go through all the milestones — the first birthday without that parent, the first Christmas without that parent, etc. It gets easier after that.

But, to answer my friend's question, I really don't believe the pain ever completely goes away. I believe you adjust and learn to live with the new reality.

I also learned that everyone has his or her own way of dealing with grief. The best thing anyone can do is let a grieving person grieve.

A good friend of mine lost his mother a few years ago. He told me in an e-mail that his significant other felt compelled to be around him more to help him deal with his grief. But she didn't understand, he told me, that he wanted to be left alone at times, to listen to his music and think about happy times with his mother.

Have you lost a parent?

What are your thoughts on closure?