What's the Difference, Anyway?

I began spending September 11 in New York City in 2003. In 2002, I was an hour upstate, and in 2001 I was in California.

As I type (with hands now in good working order), sirens go screeching by in waves of three and four at a time. There's nothing unusual about this. A ship horn just sounded. Environmental noise in all five boroughs is a constant.

Since 2001, though, and particularly since a funhouse/madhouse experience I had during the blackout of 2003, sirens here generate more acid in my stomach than I'd like. I don't live in fear, I live in Brooklyn.

But I really have to tell you that living here is quite different from living anywhere else in the United States when it comes to the issue of terrorism. That brings me back to John Edwards, and his speech last Friday.

He clearly chose to deliver a policy address about counterterrorism in New York City, which I think was a great choice. He didn't schedule the appearance for today, which would have been exploitative; he also didn't jump up and down about the link. He, and his team, just made a basic connection between message and location.

I promised more in-depth thoughts about differences between the John Edwards campaign and that of Barack Obama prompted by my experience on Friday. Had I been able to type a day ago, I probably would have shared detailed notes about event logistics. It's a day later and that makes a difference.

I'm not trying to be maudlin, but this doesn't have only to do with the memory of a terrorist attack. I spent a couple hours today working on a painting for a five-year-old girl recently diagnosed with brain cancer. She's the daughter of good family friends who live in Japan, and it's daunting to know the struggle that they face looking ahead at 2008.

These are the things that we, as human beings, inevitably struggle with in our personal lives. We are sometimes completely consumed by private moments of gravity that we can't seem to escape. For politics to matter, for politics to command our attention when immediate suffering has a greater claim on it, we must be inspired to believe that our actions are meaningful.

Overall, my experience at the Edwards event left me with one big question to answer: When it comes to 2008 Democratic presidential candidates, what's the difference?

The speech delivered by John Edwards could have been delivered by anyone in the field, including Barack Obama. A new international treaty organization to establish a more stable and widespread counterterrorism regime. Sure, that's one idea. Tightening up nonproliferation controls and setting a better example through our own nuclear policy. Barack's certainly on the same page. Who wouldn't be?

More funding for foreign language study tied to recruitment for human intelligence work or diplomacy. Great. A new volunteer corps. Not bad. A few statements on Iraq sounded a little half-baked, but who's going to spend time on detailed plans for the executive branch to take action a year from now on a constantly shifting landscape? Do your Iraq work in the Senate, esteemed Senators.

Same, same, and same. This is why I end up back at issues like event logistics. No one, including Barack Obama, is saying or doing anything much that makes this campaign truly different. Instead, all the candidates seem to be throwing darts at the Internet, hoping inadvertently to score Victory 2.0.

There is the potential out there for a nationwide change that doesn't have to wait for November 2008, or January 2009. I want more from my candidate, and I'm going to keep asking for it. It's time for Barack Obama to truly empower his supporters to start making change happen now. Playing it safe is a good way to escort Hillary to the podium, and give the White House to Fred Thompson.

***

The tally after this event:

"Edwards did it better"

1. Better organization. Edwards held a free event, took reservations, and got everyone in. There is no reason for Barack Obama's organization not to get this right every time. It doesn't have to be perfect -- long waits and spillover rooms are par for the course -- but if Edwards can work out reserved admission, Obama can, too.

2. Good location choice. As I said above, Edwards gave a major policy speech outside of Iowa/Washington. Barack, why are you dragging Zbigniew Brzezinski to Iowa to talk about Iraq?


"What Barack brings"

1. A Room the Colors of Who We Are as a People. Don't get me wrong, Edwards had hundreds of people in his audience, and a New York-based university community has some inherent diversity. It was, however, a much more homogeneous group than I've ever seen at an Obama event. That's part of what originally excited me about Barack Obama's candidacy. I think his story and his identity can help remind different-looking people of shared interests and values. Looking around that room, I was vividly reminded of what a difference he can make in bringing people together.

2. Expectations and Energy. John Edwards received enthusiastic applause, and his speech drew support on cue, but there was no sense in that room that history was being made. It's natural that the attendees at a policy speech will be more reserved than a fundraiser. That said, I believe the expectations of people coming to hear Barack Obama start a great deal higher. His presence becomes a catalyst that releases the power of people's latent aspirations for a better world. This intangible and elusive quality, tied both to the charismatic leader phenomenon and his modern celebrity status, is a powerful force. This is not only what can win an election, this is really what can create a better country. Barack makes people believe in themselves, and people do the rest. That's the simple promise of his candidacy. I'm hoping to see it fulfilled.