"If Obama’s handlers decide to put him in a tank to shore up his national security credibility, I just hope they have a helmet that can at least cover his ears."

It is about this time, every four years, when the chattering class besieged by boredom, caught between the nothingness of a post primary season and pre-convention coverage searches for relevant political stories.

Chief among such stories is the Nixonian axiom that to win the primary Democrats must run to the left and Republicans to the right, but once the primary season is over the candidate who reaches the middle first usually wins the general election in November.

This commonly held belief also opens candidates up to charges of flip-flopping.  The challenge for the candidate is to make these changes appear pragmatic rather than pandering.

This phenomenon is hardly surprising, in fact it is expected. But the speed at which Barack Obama has sought to reach the amorphous mainstream finish line might necessitate testing by the United States Olympic Committee for the use of banned substances.

Since becoming his party’s presumptive nominee, Obama has jettisoned his liberal bona fides in lieu of a more conservative outlook. The problem for Obama, engaging in this predictable, but paradoxical, aspect of American politics, could undercut the rationale for his candidacy.

From the war on terror to the death penalty, Obama has recently appeared more like the facsimile of Democratic presidential candidates who were primed for victory in July, but went down to defeat in November.

Two recent Supreme Court rulings had Obama siding with Justice Antonin Scalia—hardly a stalwart for liberal orthodoxy. Like his strict constructionist counterpart, Obama now believes that the Second Amendment meant the right to a handgun. He also agrees with Scalia, and against the court majority, that Louisiana should have the right to execute rapists.

Obama sided with the Bush Administration and the telecom industry, and I would argue against the Constitution, as he supported the industry being granted immunity against prosecution resulting from any collusion with the administration in wiretapping American citizens.

Obama has also endorsed the president’s faith based initiative program that many critics believe blurs the line between church and state.

Even on less substantive matters Obama is racing to the mainstream. His hand can be easily seen placed over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance and the playing of the Star Spangled Banner. The metal flag pin that he once shunned can be now seen adorning his lapel at every public event.

But the justifiable criticisms of Obama must also be tempered with the reality of American politics. The vaunted race to the middle is the paradoxical perquisite for the general election season. 

The latest L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll that has only 13 percent believing the country is on the right track clearly indicates Americans was change.  What remains unclear is whether Americans have the palate for the discomfort that is usually associated with change. 

There is a startling irony that with 78 percent of the American people wanting a change of direction, Obama still feels compelled fit into the traditional political paradigm.  As Obama seeks to acquiesce into the mainstream, it represents a free will choice between both parties. 

From Obama’s perspective, he wants to win. The perks that come with the job—the company house, car, and plane—make any short-term concessions on his part acceptable.  This may prove to be a winning formula, but it is not emblematic of the change he originally advertised.

Too many Americans still want a president who is like them—someone they can have a beer with.  Both may get what they want, but the change each desires may ultimately be the sacrificial lamb in the process. 

An Obama campaign without the mantra of change looks like another presidential candidate short on experience, which came to Washington promising to be a uniter, not a divider.

The other problem for Obama, his concessions to the mainstream make him look like other recent Democratic nominees who focused more on not losing than winning—namely Kerry and Dukakis.  And we know how their elections turned out.

If Obama’s handlers decide to put him in a tank to shore up his national security credibility, I just hope they have a helmet that can at least cover his ears.