If the Democrats wouldn't nominate the exciting, progressive candidate for President in the past, this time the exciting, progressive candidate simply became a centrist as soon as the primaries were over.

The general election has begun, and right away we have ads by black Republicans criticizing Obama for being "elitist" and a member of a "racist" party, and McCain duking it out with General Wesley Clark over the latter's inadequate reverence for McCain's military record.

Add to that Obama's disappointing dive on a whole raft of issues last week, and you can't help but wonder, are we doomed to repeat the same election script from four years ago?

This election seems hopeful to progressives because it is historic--with the first African American candidate, and one who evokes a powerful, positive emotional response, especially from young people. Unlike 2000 and 2004, the "insurgent" candidate in the primaries, the one who stirred up the most enthusiastic grassroots support, instead of tanking and making way for the staid, establishment nominee, finally prevailed.

But then we got last week and Obama's dreadful positions on two Supreme Court decisions (pro-death-penalty, anti-gun-control), wiretapping (pro-spying on all our outgoing international calls), and campaign finance (never mind public financing, he's flush with private dollars).

If the Democrats wouldn't nominate the exciting, progressive candidate for President in the past, this time the exciting, progressive candidate simply became a centrist as soon as the primaries were over.

Oh, well.

It won't stop the Republicans from attacking him as if he were the reincarnation of Eugene V. Debs.

Which brings up the next phase of the Presidential election season: Swift Boating. If Karl Rove were running the Obama campaign he would have scripted a much sharper critique than the mild and sensible observation by Wes Clark that being shot down in a fighter plane doesn't make you an expert in national security. The McCain campaign seems to be winning the war of words on this one, putting Clark and the Obama campaign on the defensive and seizing the opportunity to take umbrage over and over again, reminding voters that McCain is a War Hero, i.e., any criticism or even less-than-fawning mention of his military service by Democrats constitutes near-treason. McCain is expert at turning nearly any conversation, no matter how unlikely, to his time as a P.O.W. in Vietnam (see his attack on Alan Keyes during a 2000 Republican Presidential debate on the abortion issue, "I've seen killing . . . ")

Rove would have gone much further, not just dismissing McCain's favorite credential but making it into a liability--suggesting, for example that being a P.O.W. left him mentally unstable. Oh, yeah, the Bush campaign did do that back in 2000. You can bet the Obama campaign won't be playing the "illegitimate black child" card on McCain, as Bush supporters did in South Carolina. But if the quick apologies for Clark's comments are any measure, they will be nervous about appearing to question McCain's military-conferred sainthood as well.

They shouldn't be. The Black Republican T.V. ads show how far the other side is willing to go. A strong response to attacks is crucial, the 2004 election shows. That's why, unlike John Kerry, Obama has set up a web site to "fight the smears" and is quick to react to mud-slinging.

But equally important is having the courage of your convictions.