It doesn't have any bearing on whether the candidate in question is black, white, brown, or male, female or transexcual! Hillary has always struck me as so very well versed in politics and the political arena, that she's missing the reality of the world. Obama is not like that at all. He's -- in a word, authentic. I like authentic.

Lots of issues have swirled around Obama, right down to his homeboy preacher (who made such an ignoramus of himself, and may have kept the first black president from becoming a reality). I figure these things are best gotten out of the way before the actual presidential fight begins, however - do it now, instead of when he is running against McCain. Hillary Clinton has so much garbage in her background (Whitewater, her health plan that got laughed out of congress, the mess her husband made of the White House, shady deals all over the place), I have to wonder why no one is raking her over the coals... because if she wins the nomination, the Republicans surely will.

Clintons have plans for the future -- as in four years from now, when she'll try to take the White House from Barack Obama (or McCain). If she ever gets down and out about this campaign, I'm she just reminds herself of the overall strategy and gets a big, egocentric smile. All publicity is good publicity, as they say. In four years, people, we'll probably be going through this all again!

I can see how someone doesn’t like the idea of abandoning a sinking ship, therefore they’re sticking with Hillary to the bitter end. A lot of people out there had an inordinate amount of sympathy for her when her husband was abandoning her, and they don’t want to abandon her now. I, on the other hand, see her as a scheming politician and have no reason to trust her in any regard. The fact that she’s upsetting the Democratic applecart right now is typical of her unrelenting control-freakishness; the thought of her as President of the United States – another chapter in the Bush-Clinton-Bush episode – has me seething. Of course she should just let it go for the higher good and greatest benefit of the Democratic party, but it’s hardly in her nature to think in those terms. One wonders if she’s trying to set some stage to vie for the presidency in four years, but I seriously doubt if even she in her bordering-on-insane egocentricity would imagine Barack Obama would invite her to work alongside him for the next four years!

... and I like Maureen Dowd, too. It's really ODD to me that people get so angry over what Camille has to say here.

I suppose it's possible there are people out there who don't "get" Stephen Colbert, either.

Now there's an idea, Camille Paglia on the Colbert Report!!!!

Joan, It is nice of you to be so fair minded, and it is true that Hillary Clinton probably was tired and just goofed, said the wrong thing. But do you really think that it has never occurred to Hillary Clinton that the dreadful scenario could take place and benefit her? Hillary Clinton did blow it. It is almost a Freudian slip on her part. Yeah she was exhausted, she did goof up, and I bet she regrets it now. But on some level it shows that she will do anything at all to get elected. It's pretty disturbing. For the record, I am an Obama supporter but there are people in my life who support Hillary Clinton, and I understand their position. But this latest "slip" on Hillary's part is causing them, honestly, to wonder if they're on the correct side.

Anyone who is clueless enough to even consider HRC as Veep needs to have their head examined. "...it would be a big fat minus in the general election," says Camille Paglia her Salon column this month. Here's more from The Queen Camille (and I'm on her side):

"Hillary for veep? Are you mad? What party nominee worth his salt would chain himself to a traveling circus like the Bill and Hillary Show? If the sulky bearded lady wasn't biting the new president’s leg, the oafish carnival barker would be sending in the clowns to lure all the young ladies into back-of-the-tent sword-swallowing. It would be a seamy orgy of scheming and screwing. Hillary could never be content with second place. But neither could an alpha male like Obama. The vice-president should be an accomplished but subordinate personality. An Obama-Hillary ticket might tickle party regulars, but it would be a big fat minus in the general election. Republicans have shrewdly stockpiled a mammoth arsenal of past scandals to strafe Hillary with. Only a sentimental masochist would want to relive the tawdry 1990s."

This writer is truly mad. I agree with Camille Paglia in her column this month in Salon. Following is an excerpt from that column. I'm grateful there are people around who can say it like it is. Quote from Camille's column follows:

"Hillary for veep? Are you mad? What party nominee worth his salt would chain himself to a traveling circus like the Bill and Hillary Show? If the sulky bearded lady wasn't biting the new president’s leg, the oafish carnival barker would be sending in the clowns to lure all the young ladies into back-of-the-tent sword-swallowing. It would be a seamy orgy of scheming and screwing. Hillary could never be content with second place. But neither could an alpha male like Obama. The vice-president should be an accomplished but subordinate personality. An Obama-Hillary ticket might tickle party regulars, but it would be a big fat minus in the general election. Republicans have shrewdly stockpiled a mammoth arsenal of past scandals to strafe Hillary with. Only a sentimental masochist would want to relive the tawdry 1990s."

Computer glitches, and I posted the same idea twice. Sorry about that. Administrator please feel free to delete either one.