As someone said, if Hillary Clinton can say she has White House command experience, Yoko Ono can say she was a Beatle.

To be fair, Hillary did go up to Capitol Hill as First Lady to push for health care reform. So she does have that experience of failing. You could argue that failing is good experience, because you can learn from it, but I'm not convinced that in her case she did.

I've often said that the best candidates lose in the primaries. (Or at least the ones I like. I was backing Tsongas in 1992 . . . )

Not havin' faith in the Obama. I hope I'm wrong.

Yeah, that was particularly galling. During the 1992 campaign, any comment or criticism about Hillary was strictly off-limits, because "She's not the candidate." Then, once Bill was in office, she's given the job of writing important legislation for the office of the President. Now, she wants to tacitly imply that her experience as First Lady counts toward her own Presidential run.

And now, I suppose, we're not meant to make any comment or criticism about Bill, since "He's not the candidate."

This kind of tag-team politics is silly, and it frustrates me that so many people seem to just accept it.

Honestly what frustrates me the most in the D nomination bid (and it will carry through the general election) is that race and gender card is played so easily. Hillary is going down in a tight race, so it is obvious that it is American sexism in action. America won't let a woman sit in the Oval Office, blahblahblah. If it had been the other way, people would be complaining that American racism was showing it's ugly face and we won't let a black guy into the Oval Office.

Seriously? When it is a field of white guys up there, what excuse should the runner up use? Certainly it can't be that enough people liked the other guy to beat him out.

Hillary is a woman. Deal with it. Early on in the cycle we were told to ignore the fact that she was a woman. We were told to believe she was the best candidate and move beyond that old way of thinking. Then the polls started looking a little less clear cut and we were encouraged to get behind our first female President because she was strong, experienced, tough, and oh yeah - a woman. Did we mentiont she'd be the first female president? Then the polls turned on her and words like shrew, cold, and calculating popped up. So she cried. Oh, now we have a woman we can identify with and she jumped in the polls again. When she was ahead we were supposed to ignore her gender, now that she's behind, it is because of her gender? No thanks.

Obama is a black man. Deal with it. We were told not to present him as a black man, but as a man. Cool, I can get on board with that. He ran his race as the "different" candidate. The one for change. And I think he believes in hope. and maybe even the future. We ignored his skin color until the polls got tight and then there were stories produced to show us that Obama was above using his ethnicity. IMO the dude was smooth. The stories about how he was above the issue popped up before any questions about the issue. He never once came up and addressed the issue, he simply let it play out behind the scenes so that the issue was upfront and in the open, but he could distance himself if necessary and point out that it wasn't him. BUT, if Hillary was in front right now, his camp would be dropping the "it's because he's black" card. People who don't like him must be racist.

That is what I'm not looking forward to for the general election. The R's have an old white guy, and the D's have a younger black guy. Does anyone believe that the race issue will not be well spun by the Obama camp while McCain feverishly tries to avoid the whole issue because he knows it is a minefield?

I tell you what - If we go all the way to the election without anyone in the cellar playing the "America won't let a black man be President" I'll drop $250 in the tip jar for November. Does anyone actually think I'll have to pay up?

Absolutely a black man can be president before a woman, if we're talking categories. Black men received the right to vote 50 years before any woman could vote. See you in 2058.

How about when McCain chooses Condoleezza Rice as his running mate? Like a cat dropped with buttered bread tied to its back, will all the "powers that be" simply implode with the cognitive dissonance of being unable to keep women out of the White House?

The people who fought that so hard are not dominant today. Look around you and realize these are teh people that vote, just like you. They might not like the female candidate because of her penis she doesn't have but because of the baggage she does have.

True, but they were only considered 3/4 of a person so only had a 75% vote. :)

If you criticize Obama, it's racism.

If you criticize Clinton, it's sexism.

If you criticize McCain, it's ageism.

If you criticize Paul, it's anti-Americanism.

Absolutely not - There is no way we'll make it thru the summer.

Nice one bro.

What if I criticize Radar?

anti-cellarite?