Will George Will join the long line of winger pundits -- Kristol, Brooks, Broder, and Sullivan -- who find Obama strangely, compellingly attractive? Maybe:

So far, Obama is the Fred Astaire of politics -- graceful and elegant, with a surface so pleasing to the eye that it seems mistaken, even greedy, to demand depth. No one, however, would have given Astaire control of nuclear weapons, so attention must be paid to Obama's political as well as aesthetic qualities.

Steele notes that Obama "seems to have little talent for anger." But that is because Obama has opted out of the transaction Steele vigorously deplores. The political implications of this transcendence of confining categories are many, profound and encouraging.

Let's give George a moment to clean the steam off his glasses and straighten his bowtie, before asking the real question:

George, when you talk about "transcendence of confining categories," is one of the "confining categories" you're talking about the idea that sovreignty rests with the American people? Or are you pimping Obama as the future, charismatic figured-head of a government of national unity, on the South African or Sudanese model?

Just asking.

And Obama supporters--How does your guy feel about this? Does Obama's post-partisanship extend to joining a Broder government?