Most of the good comments have already been made. Overall, she seems totally unfamiliar with the most rudimentary facts. Start with her observation:

“He's painstakingly untying the moral knot that is Afghanistan, struggling to reach across the aisle on health-care reform, and hoping to be the comeback kid next month in Copenhagen.”

What moral knot? He supported that war when he sought our votes. Now that public opinion is turning, the knot he is trying to untie is a political one – how does he meet his obligations and please the far left base. He has done nothing to reach across the aisle on health-care reform. Where have you been? What does it mean to say he is “hoping to be the comeback kid next month in Copenhagen”? Empty prose, meaningless drivel. There isn't a single fact that gives content to that empty speculation.

If that is not enough try this “Obama may be green and plodding, but he doesn't talk down to the American people.” This administration has the most systematic program for marginalizing those who oppose one or more of its polices of the last 50 years. One example, his scornful name calling “Tea Baggers” on national television says it all. It seems endemic. Just yesterday Clinton uttered the same words with an equally dismissive and scornful. Look it up. There is no more condescending label to put on any person. An invidious sexual reference. Pure contempt!

“Doesn’t talk down”? His behavior is an embarrassment to all civilized people.

Where have you been?

Stop drinking and start reading.

You almost brought me to tears. Besides I adore our new president Obama.

regardless of Ms Martin's actual age, this reads as if written by a teen age beauty queen and is the reason we shouldn't have elected anyone who needs this much on the job training
good column for Teen Vogue

There is something original here. Got my vote.

Excellent!

Courtney, You just made me cry. I'm voting for you.

I cannot completely say why I do not like this column. One thing is its high school/ beauty queen approach on instead of judging a person, judge yourself. While the idea is good, it comes off as empty. It could be that there is a lack of concrete examples, or a story that supports her personal analysis. She has not done enough to be a good citizen, but what has she done to earn the C-? What interferred with her doing something? Mark John Hunter - Alpena.

When I re-read your column today, I realized that I had somewhat underrated it yesterday. This was very well done, and raises a good question with a number of applications. In the end, I voted for Kevin Huffman, but do not be discouraged! Keep up the good work!

This is not the writing of a "pundit" but reads like the self-indulgent ramblings of a navel gazer.While your writing style offers some nice moments, in the end content is what a reader looks for, especially in one who is meant to shape opinion. I suspect those still feeling the glee of Nov 2008 were singing along with your text but those of us seeking content were left cold.I think it is time for the "yes we can" generation to become the "yes we do".

Several disjointed comments here...

First of all, I really like Courtney's writing style. She has the power to move people with her words. I'm not really sure what the parameters for pundit should be (this is light years away, for instance, from Dr. Richter's fact-laced, solutions-oriented columns), but I am sure I would enjoy reading a novel written by Ms. Martin (do you have one coming out?).

On a related point, Ms. Martin's writing is so good that it's not surprising that she's already writing for another major publication. Is that a regular gig, and if so I wonder - as the other poster brought up - whether indeed she should be allowed in the competition.

A corollary question to that is, "do these have to be 'regular people' applying for the pundit gig?". If so, is it proper to have Dr. Richter, a Nobel-prize winning physicist, in the same grab bag as people jumping into the arena of prominence from a regular walk of life? I'd like to see the Post give Richter a regular "Science & Technology in Public Policy" column, AND choose one pundit from the other 9 contestants. I suspect they wouldn't have to pay him any more than they promised the winner of this contest, since like the rest of them he obviously was going to be happy with this entre' into the punditry venue anyway (plus there is that nice Nobel Prize money to live off of). Surely space, at least online where space is infinite, should not be an issue, so two new ones can be fit in.

Lastly, I'm finding some of the comments of the Obama-bashers - even the polite ones (I'm glad to see such individuals exist!) - quite bizarre. Far from Ms. Martin's being intoxicated by a tingle-up-her-leg, you actually have here an Obama voter who is openly admitting to you, in politically vulnerable honesty (pretty rare these days, eh?) that Obama has shown himself to be "green" during this first year (though in his defense I have to point out that he's had approximately three times as much to deal with as most new presidents). Why can't you return that honesty with some honesty of your own?

That's what she asking for here from you - us - and herself. And she continues with some unflattering candor about what she *hasn't* done for her country since election day. And that's the invitation here -- to harken back to JFK's famous words, and take them personally. That's all. There's actually very little politics (of the partisan kind, at least) in this column.

Well written in terms of style, but vapid in terms of content.

As the man sang in Gigi: "I'm so glad I'm not young anymore."

Translated: Courtney's already too old to be so blindly sycophantic to an already failed president.

Courtney:

You have a wonderfully evocative style that is simultaneously your strength as a writer and your weakness as an op-ed columnist.

Take for example, your first paragraph where you wonderfully depict a rich tapestry of sights, sounds, and images. While these descriptions have the emotive impact of an excellent feature story, they lack the substantive content of an incisive opinion piece.

In fairness, the remainder of your piece does address the question of civic engagement. In doing so, however, it does not cover any new intellectual ground. In fact, it is nothing more than a pleasing restatement of tired, but true, shibboleths.

Your only somewhat original argument is the risible suggestion that the American people are somehow at fault for Obama's failure as a president. While it is refreshing for you, as an Obama apologist, to divert our attention from Bush, surely you must understand the extreme overstatement implicit in your view.

Moreover, there is the considerable irony that Obama has demonized the civic involvement of those who have robustly challenged his policies. Indeed, those who have opposed Obama have been far more involved and energized than those who support him. And the community support Obama received from organizations like Acorn has been seriously questioned, if not repudiated.

The challenge for you is to match your elegant style with cogent and original analysis. If you do, you may indeed become America's Next Great Pundit.

To the degree that one's original engagement with the Obama campaign was driven by intellectual factors, then this column doesn't do much for one. But a lot of us weren't really thinking our way through the election last year as we were feeling our way. For me, the big question was trust, and I no longer trusted the Republicans to take out the garbage without spilling it all over the sidewalk.

But there's a problem. For many people, 2008 was the anti-Bush, anti-Republican, anti-BAU election. The Obama campaign had, and the administration has, some good, positive ideas, but a lot of people weren't engaged with those ideas in the first place. Ms. Martin is right - we need to do some growing and some learning, too. But we also need some positive goals to focus that energy.

Courtney... well written, insightful, inspiring, to the point! Obama is NOT going to improve America. Americans working together under his great leadership will improve America. We all need to ask ourselves, 'What can EVERY person do to make this world a better place for EVERYBODY?' The (old) answer is in my next book..."Learn to Love & Love to Learn." E. Gene Gorrell

A youthful perspective is good but does it need to be naive?? One needs to read a lot of the books out there ( from BOTH sides )... and although we need more than "just the facts, ma'am" I think maybe fiction/romance might be in your future. And remember, this is not all about YOU. Kudos for trying, though

If the 4990 entrants that didn't make the cut were worse than this, I pity the staff that had to read them all.

Courtney, I can see why you relocated. Colorado Springs, Home of "Focus on the Family" and a host of other firms that make up the industry that we call the religious right. Your piece was well written and described a lot of us...thrilled by the historical sigificance that BHO represents but now what? I suggest that the 1st step is for you to get past the fluffy nature of your 1st 2 pieces. Psychoanalytics don't count for much in the political realm...the response is "so what?" So confront your recent neighbors in the Rockies. Don't coddle Obama, he can take care of himself, beat Liz Cheney! I've developed a mantra in my comments. Don't chicken out, pundits pontificate!

Good maiden effort; very good question to ask all of ourselves, what are we litterally doing to change our imperfect world no matter what political pursusion or who we voted for.

Fricker, fracker, firecracker, siss-boom, bah! Obama, Obama, Rah-Rah Rah!!!
Good grief....All this "writer" needs is a chearleader uniform for the Obama team and she's all set!

I thought this contest was supposed to be about writing talent and persuasive reason skills. But apparently it's about who can wage the best PR campaign to rally her/his troops.

Check out what's posted on the ultra-feminist blog: http://www.feministing.com/

It doesn't say anything about reading all the entries and helping to pick the next Great American Pundit, but just urges readers to bring out the vote for Courtney. For a taste:

"Here's your chance to help put a feminist (and a particularly awesome one, at that!) at The Washington Post. I don't have to tell you the powerful platform that WaPo is, and how needed feminism is in mainstream media outlets. You know this. And now we have an opportunity to do something about it.

"Courtney's latest column is here [WaPo Link Inserted], and voting for the contest starts Saturday. So please get the word out - blog, tweet and Facebook the [Expletive Deleted] out of this - and help make Courtney WaPo's newest columnist!"

Nice work, Courtney. I hope your friends are able to bring out the votes you need, because your writing probably won't.

Naive indeed. Obama campaigned the way he has governed. A right leaning moderate. His cabinet reflects this. He said he would escalate Afghanistan and he has. He was supported by Wall Street and has shown why. His forward looking approach has allowed the right to escape justice. His bipartisan approach has gotten him nowhere on health care. The right is rearing its ugly head and the left is being ignored. Obama is no liberal. He is a centrist leaning to the right. That's what you voted for and that's what you got. If you want that to change your going to have to do a lot more than you have.

beckycamara wrote:
"@MARTYMAR123. Actually in today's world, newspaper writers need to edit their own work. Cutbacks, you know."

Thanks. I write a lot but this is not the kind of writing I do. Or, shall I say, should be doing when I am sitting here commenting on this site!

Keep drinking the kool-aid.

I like this perspective. One glance at the election polls this year tells you the American people can't bother to be engaged with the democratic process. Therefore, the American people have only themselves to blame when special-interest groups take over Congress and nothing seems getting done.

Well, I don't know what everyone here is talking about, I thought this was great! Some of the criticisms that there were not enough statistics or nothing that inspired engagement are kind of missing the point. This was to rate YOUR OWN engagement and I felt that by reading this frank and honest self-critique it was very fresh and very relatable.

"I aim to be informed. I make a concerted effort to understand the quagmire in Afghanistan. I actually read an analysis of the health-care debacle beginning to end the other day and e-mailed my representative. I can't bring myself to read much more about the economy than what the headlines tell me. "

I definitely identified with these statements. I like to think I'm pretty well informed, but there is just something about the economy that I just can't get interested in. Sure, that's a fault, but I'm willing to recognize it and put my energy toward my interests and passions.

Thanks so much, Courtney! Good luck!

Hello Courtney - As a professional writer, I enjoyed your column. It flowed nicely and was well written. It gave me an understanding of why younger voters like President Obama and how they view the world.

But - from my perspective - over 50, professional female, you sound very naive. I appreciate the positive outlook, but as some other commenters have noted, there is a lot more to governing than platitudes and lofty ideas. President Reagan - the great communicator - not only was able to connect with the American public, but he also had substance and a backbone to back up his words. Now, before you dismiss me as a partisan Republican, I was not a supporter of Reagan at the time, but have come to really appreciate his achievements nearly 30 years later.

Your column would have a lot more punch if you could have added some fact / discussion of exactly what President Obama is doing, or compare his achievements and leadership style with a past President with a similar style who did achieve things; for example, President Reagan. I also would advise you not to fallback on Bush bashing - so old news and not very original.

Best of luck!

This isn't a Danielle Steele novel---Sickenly sweet. Enough said. You're the first I will vote to get rid of.

@MARTYMAR123. Actually in today's world, newspaper writers need to edit their own work. Cutbacks, you know.

'In fact, far from pretending to be our superhero, he expects us to save ourselves. That's the tough truth. From the very beginning his campaign reverberated with the baselines of the hip hop generation, but also the echoes of our boomer parents' hero: "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."'

Thank you for paying no attention to what is actually going on in our country. Had you been, you might have noticed that his rubber isn't meeting our nation's road. Our president, prior to election, had the outline for a plan. I voted for him, as did most others I think, so that plan could be/would be implemented.

Where is the progress on Guantanamo Bay? In Iraq? With Iran? I mean, good job with buying Chrysler so early on, but no one thought Uncle Sam would interfere with his own hostile takeover anyway. Let's see... Wall Street is business as usual. Big oil is still using federal funding for R&D that they dont have to repay, while and raking in close-to-record profits. ACORN is a new problem, I am sure that will come out in the wash.

Some fundamental truths for you, Ms. Martin -
President Obama was born in America. He is the lawfully elected Leader of the Free World. I voted for him. He is a great orator and an extremely sharp mind. He cannot "free-style" and has fallen into the same do-nothing BS that every other politician eventually does.

One final truth for you - I pity your students and their parents. The teacher they are relying on is NOT fully engaged in paying attention to their needs.

You should be ashamed.

Courtney,

Great Post and so Refreshing! It's good to read something refreshing for a change. So far, I am rooting for you and two of the other pundits.

Good Luck!

So, the revelation here is that actually DOING something is harder than promising it?

This reads like a posting on an Obama campaign message board. I'm happy to read an opinion contrary to my own, but the presentation alienates me.

Well put.

This one is the worst so far...anyone who thinks obama doesnt talk down to the citizens of this country are naive at best..i shall move on to the next pundit column..and say no more

Five minutes after reading this piece nothing remains.

The type of change President Obama will bring around is a return to the conservative capitalistic values which have made America great. You can see it in the tea parties, conservative radio, and even a glimmer on one of the three minor networks every now and then as of late.

The type of change championed in the article is ethereal, no facts, no concrete description of the change desired. The sign of a humanist - One who can give you an example, but is unable to describe the problem or solution.

I commented earlier and want to append/revise my comments. My criticism of this column was harsh, and that's pretty much the way it struck me. But since it is unedited, what could anyone expect? This is not the real world, because in the real world, any flaws in the writing would have been edited out. And you would not have to deal with 4790 people like me who might have some reason or other not to wish you well.

We are criticizing what in the world would still be a work in progress and expecting it to be perfect. I just want to acknowledge that and wish you well.

Well done! Insightful. Different. Honest. Self depreciating. Big issue - success or failure of the president, 1 year after election day.

Swung between the big issue, President Obama, and how it effects the average guy. Gave a clear conclusion. Had the facts right. Well done Courtney.

Sorry, Courtney. I'll give you a C-plus as well. This column is pedestrian at best. You're likeable enought, but no pundit.

Next Great Pundit Scorecard:

Selected: 5 men, 5 women – no surprise there. Met the D word requirement – Diverse group.

Seven were either bad, dumb, light weight, single issue writers(3), Obama bashing, Fox news supporting, or watered down with “fair and balanced” writing (5). Not one did a credible job covering a big, national issue. Not one supported the president.

Three were actually quite good, all by women. One was youth’s view, one single issue, one was personal and very insightful. All covered big, important national issues.

Bottom line, WP did a poor job selecting. 5 men, 5 women - seriously? Several were so bad the contestants have no chance to win. Single issue writers, gone in 60 seconds. Excluding the 3, no depth, no insight, no original thought. Oh, I guess in that way it does mimic with current crop of opinion writers in the WashPost.

First, BarryPopik is clearly correct in contending that Courtney Martin is ineligible for this contest. The rules state: “Entrants may not have previously written or contributed to a regular column in a major national publication in print or online.” Ms. Martin writes a biweekly column for The American Prospect Online, for which she is identified as a senior correspondent. Did she not disclose her relationship with TAP on her entry (its not in her biography)? Or did the editors of the Post decide that TAP is not a major national publication? That would be quite an insult to the magazine.

Second, both of Ms. Martin’s submissions are incredibly self centered. Its all about her - her feelings, her father (A hapless lost soul in the initial column, but here an engaged political campaigner), her friends, her drinking. Maame Gyamfi has written two strong columns in which she drew up her personal experiences to illustrate the broader issues that were the real subjects to her columns. However, in Ms. Martin’s submissions, her personal experiences dominate.

This is a refreshing piece! Finally someone turns the mirror onto ourselves. I am so tired of people looking for a magic pill or “perfect” leaders to solve all the world’s problems. We do need to become reengaged in a becoming part of the solution process, instead of waiting for others to figure it out. I hope this writer is selected, we need young voices that call all of us to action and to make us think. I want to read more from this writer.

I don't understand why readers are so divided on this. This isn't about politics, people. It's about putting the onus on yourself to be the change. It's a point that has been made before, but can never be made enough, and was made here eloquently.

The problems you note with your waning enthusiasm Obama yes-we-can activism are problems intrinsic with a socialist mindset. Motivation for the utopian good of others does not last long, and requires constant revivals to instill. Socialism, in which value is distributed from those with ability to those with need, always struggles with motivation. Why work so very hard, when you see none of it come back to you, and you find some who abuse your altruism?

A better model that sustains enthusiam over the long haul is capitalism, in which the harder you work, the more you keep, and you exchange something of value for something of value. Every single day your efforts are awarded in proportion to value you produce.

It is strange that you would point to JFK, who believed in strong national defense (he was a cold warrior) and fiscal discipline. He is nothing at all like Obama, except of course, in the fact that Obama strives to use the same oratory JFK did.

In a socialist system, unless you have a continual stream of motivational speakers, eventually everything moves to its ground state of minimal effort, and everything grinds down into an unproductive malaise.

How about grading the nation? Long overdue as u.s. war crimes and frauds are getting worse and larger, respectively! ‘F-‘

What a waste of money they don’t have! What frauds! NASA Rocket Takes Off as Clouds Break Lets get real! A broke and broken defacto bankrupt nation, the u.s. is criminals, frauds, war criminals and war profiteers!

MOON ROCK GIVEN BY U.S. PETRIFIED WOOD-APOLLO PROGRAM A FAKE/FRAUD
Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed A treasured piece at the Dutch national museum - a supposed moon rock from the first manned lunar landing - is nothing more than petrified wood, ...BBC News BBC NEWS | Europe | Fake Dutch 'moon rock' revealed Prized moon rock a fake - A PIECE of moon rock given to an overseas politician by the United States is actually a lump of petrified wood, museum authorities revealed yesterday. ... 'Moon Rock' in Dutch Museum Is Just Petrified Wood Aug 27, 2009 ... Fake moon rock at Dutch national museum. Rijksmuseum / AP. This rock, supposedly brought back from the moon by American astronauts, ... http://www.albertpeia.com/moonfraud.htm
In reality it is just a piece of petrified wood. ... The plaque does not specify that the rock came from the moon's surface. ... Another piece of evidence that shows again that Apollo program is indeed a fake and a fraud
Occupiers involved in drug trade: Afghan minister The Afghan minister of counter narcotics says foreign troops are earning money from drug production in Afghanistan. Washington Post claims White House ‘appears committed’ to sending up to 15,000 more soldiers Afghan's Karzai effectively handed 2nd term as america’s tainted touch of corruption mars hopes for non-fraudulent election – america had too much drug money at stake to risk the loss (AP)
FBI documents reveal secret CIA prisoners ‘manacled to the ceiling’
Clinton in Pakistan encounters widespread distrust of US Palestinians accuse Clinton of hurting peace talks... Palestinians accuse U.S. of killing peace prospects - Pointing an accusing finger at the united states, the Palestinians on Sunday said washington's backing for israeli refusal to halt jewish settlement expansion had killed any hope of reviving peace neg...

Go to following pages for above links:
http://www.albertpeia.com/currentopics2ndqtr10108.htm
http://www.albertpeia.com
http://www.albertpeia.com/wallstreetlunacy2ndqtr10108.htm
http://www.albertpeia.com/alresume65393.htm

I'm less concerned with my own journey over the past year, having been involved in community affairs for over 40 years, than I am with the President's. It's not just his steep learning curve, it is some of his choices that stand out for me:

Deciding to jet to Copenhagen overnight to a fly-by opportunity to tout his home town for the Olympics when there were plenty of celebrities already on that mission.

Waiting for 9 months before visiting New Orleans, when he'd criticized Bush for his neglect of the area, and then jetting in for a 4-hour visit on his way to an overnight fund raising trip to the west coast.

Appointing his own general to Afghanistan in the spring saying he had studied the needs in that area, then letting the report from that hand-picked general languish for weeks while he handled Copenhagen, fundraisers, and campaigning trips to NJ and VA.

Every new president has a steep learning curve. I would have expected one with such an impeccable academic record to know how to address new learnings.

Kudos to Courtney for going beyond predictable in her topic selection, writing well, being honest about herself, and asking people to think and not just react.

The writing is fine, if a bit effusuve. The idea, however, simply isn't big enough.

I'll be 0bama still sends a big ole tingle up your leg, doesn't he?

Gross.

One of the skills required of an op/ed columnist is knowing when s/he has a 750-word idea for a column and when the idea is merely worth 250 to 350 well-chosen words and stuffed with filler. This piece falls into the latter category.
Also, I didn't come away convinced that Ms. Martin's intentions for becoming a more involved citizen were more substantial than a set of New Year's resolutions, largely to be forgotten within 6 weeks. And since New Year's resolutions tend not to make substantial op/ed material, I felt like I'd just eaten a good-looking but unsatisfying meal at a too-expensive restaurant.
Like Ms. Gyamfi's piece, this one invites the reader to see him/herself in the words. Unlike Ms. Gyamfi's piece, this one, for me anyway, doesn't quite succeed.

IMHO, the best yet by far. Clearly the most well written and the first with an actual point, not a meaningless screed.

Everyone has opinions about Obama, but Courtney has gone beyond personal feelings, pro or con, to talk about the fact of the remarkable wave that swept over this country last year. A wave or enthusiasm and activism that only the most callow and partisan can dismiss with derision. History was made.

The echoing of Kennedy, from indirect references to the Peace Corps and VISTA and tying the feelings of older boomers like me to her own enthusiasm was brilliant, poignant and insightful.

Courtney has done the job right, elevating the discussion above her own inclinations and others' disparaging viewpoints to focus on and highlight the real motive force of populism, activism and democracy that was behind the election of Barack Obama. She has succeeded in moving the discussion away from the constant sturm und drang of mere opinion to the morally superior plane of service and commitment.

Those who only see this as an Obama supporter wishing the party wasn't over show their partisan and mean-spirited myopia. Courtney is reminding us that the thrill of participation and assurance of our contribution to the democracy are something we should all be proud of and should continue to seek, regardless of our personal opinions.

Brilliant.

Lively writing, important premise, but it failed to rise above its subject. I would have liked the writer to be more specific about what it really means to participate in ushering in a better future, discussing some of the options. Some people separate their garbage and feel noble, some march on Washington in three-cornered hats and feel effective. The author described a disappointing experience at a community meeting. It seems that to be truly effective as a productive member of society, one has to find the right niche.

Good points. These people who question our president went 8 years questioning nothing Bush admin did as they ran this country in the ground and went to the wrong war so how can you expect they know anything?

Today the stupid ghouls have the biggest mouths.

Sophomoric, cliche-ridden, disorganized, pointless. Agree with Popik.

Courtney asks what I have done for my country. That's easy for me. You see, I have a small business, open to the public, with one employee: me. I know all you "activists" think my "profits" are obscene. But, I see it differently.

From where I sit, I know that not one customer is obligated to come through my door. He or she can perceive "value" in multiple ways, not of my choosing, but of theirs. Yet, every year, I am able to pay my mortgage, eat, and put some away for retirement. And, yes, I know as a fact that I am serving my country, because customers continue to bless me with their business. That more than any "activist" can say.

I didn't vote for Obama because he told people he wanted to rob me of the money I've saved for retirement thinking there were people more deserving. Perhaps he's right. Then again, what value are these people providing? They intentionally ratchet up the anger as "activists" figuring that "anger" is productive endeavor.

So, from where I sit, I can't see the virtue in Courtney's position. She should consider putting her thinking cap on before drinking the cool aide because, in the end, if non-productive endeavor is rewarded and productive endeavor is punished we will all have a future with less. That's not what I want for my grandchildren.

I give Courtney the highest marks yet. This was very well written and inspiring. She took on a national topic but added personal anecdotes, made her position on Obama clear and consistent, and gave me inspiration to do more civic action.

--Ahem---"Martymar123's Next Great Pundit: Barry of Popik."

Sorry, Barry, only the judges of the contest can determine who qualifies. But I will name you my Martymar Next Great Pundit, anyway, because I can.

Just as Barack Obama did not do enough to earn the Nobel Peace Prize, I feel that Courtney Martin has already done too much to try to write for a larger market! For heaven's sake, she wrote a book! That alone should disqualify her.

Please, Barry, will you now get over it?
I can't pay you $200 a column for 13 weeks,
but I can wish you well, and I do that.

I liked Courtney's first piece, but not this one. Sorry! I voted for him, too! I climbed sagging steps with only a liberal arts education (and an associate degree in nursing, which I got later)---and in determinedly Republican, redneck southwest Missouri, not the far more progressive east....and with a bad knee.....And was practically blasted off one porch by a rant from a Viet Nam vet who preferred Hillary....and being a former psychiatric nurse(I'm not making this up, BTW), I talked him down, and ended up thanking him for his service...

But back to the rest of the piece. I couldn't force myself to go all the way to the end. I'm finding in this contest that to me, age is the most important demographic. Nobody wants to be preached to, especially by a younger person. But then also, not by someone your own age. Give her time to gain more gravitas, and some of the experience I would respect. Also to cross her class line a little more often and intimately---if she does, in her teaching, e.g., I don't find evidence of it. After she gains that experience, I might care more about what she has to say, but she will be older, and will younger people want to read her then? I don't know. A younger person than me is a better judge of how reader's would respond.

I'm 55, and to be fair, probably not the target market for a writer like Courtney. Younger writers are judged by a different standard. As a reader, I try to be willing to give them a chance, but my time is valuable(especially since I most probably have a lot less of it left than she does).

But Courtney's piece has demonstrated a catch-22 in deadline writing. Since her first article was well-written and polished, I feel pretty sure what's wrong with this one is she didn't have enough time to develop a perspective on what she wrote before she had to submit it. Courtney, I predict that sometime soon, you'll be kicking yourself for your overuse of adjectives and adverbs. In this piece, they simply try too hard. Work on your nouns instead, to give your writing more power. You would have seen the flaws of your writing if you'd had time to set it aside, as you did with your last one, and reread it.

One more thing, due to Courtney's youth
and clearly advantaged background, she entirely misses the boat on whole swaths of the American public who really can't pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
So although she voted for the Democrat, she manages to come off sounding more like a privileged Republican---at least up to the point I stopped reading.

this is for BarryPopik...... another Americanism

Sour Grapes! :)

This is a feel-good piece. Evidence, zero. And at a point where even centrists are starting to wonder what Obama is up to, it is about as welcome or helpful as parental nagging.

I like a well-turned phrase, but the personal touch adds just so much, especially as I have no way of knowing you, and what keeps me coming back to the opinion page is in the end what I can find out there. Do you read widely and do you think about the news? If you wound up as the pick of the contest, would you be another dehydrated pundit: just add access?

First thing first--Courtney Martin must be disqualified. She writes a column for a "major publication," The American Prospect. Mara Gay writes for The Atlantic. Everyone here should write in to the editors and demand that the Washington Post follow its own rules.

Admissions second--I'm a noted, though penniless, scholar of Americanisms (Big Apple, Windy City, hot dog, hamburger, Democrat donkey, Uncle Sam, origin of punditry). I entered the contest and lost. "My guy" didn't win the presidential election a year ago. (John McCain wasn't originally "my guy" anyway.)

I don't like this column at all. Maybe an Obama supporter would like it, but I doubt it.

The first paragraph was way too long. State a problem or question and draw us in to see it answered or explained.

"My guy won one year ago" alienates about half of your readership.

"Struggling to reach across the aisle on health-care reform." You gotta be kidding. Republicans aren't even allowed 24 hours to read any bill!

"Surrounding himself with good teachers." Like the pastor Jeremiah Wright? Like the terrorist Bill Ayers? Like the communist Van Jones? Like two officials who quote Chairman Mao? Like the FCC diversity chief who praises Hugo Chavez?

"He doesn't talk down to the American people.' Tell that to Fox News and millions of its viewers.

"So I ask you, what have you done for your country since electing Barack Obama?" I get it that tea parties don't qualify?

"I missed the clean-up because I was too busy being hung over. Dance parties are important. Mostly I just skim the e-mails these days." Why should any reader of the Washington Post editorial page care?

"It was my own soaring sense that I had a duty to believe in the power of my one, earnest vote, to look my neighbors in the eyes and say hello, to use my privilege to make my country a more just, secure, and kind place." You got 10% unemployment, government takeovers of private industry, and at least a $1.5 trillion annual deficit. How's that hope-and-change working for you?

Is this the Huffington Post or the Washington Post? Who would want to read this piece?

Again, I believe that Courtney Martin should not qualify for this contest--not under the rules and not on the merits.

Tell the judges!

Ms. Martin would be a more engaging writer if she wrote exclusively about herself and people she knows. I don't mean that in a negative sense; she is observant, and communicates observations easily and with grace.

This contest calls for her to write an opinion piece. It's a different kind of writing, and Ms. Martin doesn't quite pull it off. She writes about neighbors she knows, and about a President she doesn't but would like to think she does. She would like to believe President Obama knows what he doesn't know, crams as fast as he can and makes decisions calmly and carefully. She does not know this, however, never having even met Obama. It shows in her writing because assertion is never as powerful as observation.

One other point: "I was too busy being hung over. Dance parties are important"? Yeesh! Lose your readers in just eleven words, why don't you? The phrase "too much information" means different things in different contexts; in opinion writing, it means putting a spotlight on a really good reason your readers should ignore what you want to say.

I like this lady because I am still striving to understand this generation. I read hoping it will provide the magic insight. But after two articles, I'm still remain in the dark trying to understand them. I'm so hopeful that it will one day make sense, so.... I would still like to read more.

Keep this girl around. She can be the voice of a generation that we will all long for to make sense one day.

Congrats on being a finalist, Courtney! I like the writing in this piece. It was an easy read.

I did not find it thought-provoking, though. It needed more substance. It didn't really say anything or inspire engagement.