"not betting on that horse" eh? So, you really view the presidential election as a horse race, and you're really only interested in voting for who wins? Do you have any principles at all, sir?

It's an expression, but of course you already knew that.

And seriously dude, wake up. Of course it's a horse race, especially vis-a-vis the GOP. Those guys annointed Bush 43 at the beginning of the primaries back in 2000 and then spent the rest of the campaign season marginalizing the other contenders in the partisan press. And the average GOP voter is going to be far more swayed by FOX news than the Internet.

If Paul doesn't get out of the GOP and go on his own, then this debate and debates like this are meaningless. He won't secure the nomination.

Principles don't win elections, sir. Backing by big media and the leadership of a major political machine do.

Right now the GOP is in flux, mostly because the religious branch is at odds with the economic elite. But Dobson and his bunch will eventually realize that they'd rather not have Hillary as President, so Giuliani will promise them strict constructionist judges and they will fall in line.

Then, once the party elite is sufficiently corralled behind their Chosen One, the GOP media will do what it always does; ridicule and marginalize the other candidates, like they did to McCain seven years ago.

Your man Paul will be a prime target.

I appreciate your stance on the issues and divergence of the current GOP from its erstwhile allegiances.

I also admire some of the Ron Paul supporters who have written here, expressing how they discussed him on the Internet and read about his stance on the issues.

But I assure you, Bobby Hoffstetler in Southern Pines isn't going on-line, but he is watching FOX. And in six months, he's going to be telling his friends that Cavuto said Ron Paul was "out there" and "wierd." And with that, Ron Paul will be relegated to write-in campaigns and other dying gasps of fading campaigns.

Principles don't win elections.

Goodbye, gentle artist. It's obvious you loved and were loved.

"I am disheartened by the nasty Anti-Hillary vitriol coming from the Obama supporters. Our country has a history of holding female politicians to a double-standard, but this has reached a level that I never would have expected from Democrats. The Obama nazis express much more contempt for Hillary than they do for GWB. How will we be brought back into the fold?"

Milton, there is no need to talk about anti-Hillary vitriol and then employ the phrase "Obama nazis express."

Seriously, get a grip. THE VAST MAJORITY OF OBAMITES WILL VOTE HILLARY IF SHE GETS THE NOD. We're all Dems, our candidates stance on the issues are very similar... we just think he has a better chance of bringing over those independents into his camp than she does... those same independents who always decide the election.

"As I wrote in the NYT blog, I am particularly offended by the good-negro epiphanies of many Obama supporters. I think there is something inherently racist in people who live in states that are 2% Black (ie Iowa/New Hampshire). What now you have 2 Black friends – Oprah and Obama and you are ready to join the NAACP?"

Milton, there is NOTHING RACIST about happening to live in Iowa or New Hampshire. It is almost mind-boggling how idiotic that statement is. Seriously.

Listen: I am neither black nor white. I am a Democratic keenly interested in finding out which candidate can deliver the Oval Office to *OUR* side this November.

Obama, as shown in Iowa, can galvanize young people and independents in ways Hillary never could. He can go toe-to-toe with other candidates in the debates and keep his cool, unlike Hillary who gets upset and alienates viewers. In short, he's got a much better shot at giving us what we want.

It's not about racism, sexism, or any other ism. It's not about feminists, post-feminists, or whites feeling good about themselves because they voted for a black man.

It *IS* about results. Reagan exuded sunny optimism and spoke in breezy generalities about a better America. And you know what? He not only won for his side, but he brought over people from the OTHER side, so-called "Reagan Democrats."

Obama could do that for us, Milton. He could bring over "Obama Republicans" and "Obama Independents." He could ride that coalition all the way to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, whereupon he could ratify the Kyoto protocols and get us out of Iraq.

So let's keep our eyes on the prize, stay focused and stay united. If you, Milton, honestly think that Hillary can win it for us, then by all means, vote for her.

But I don't and I won't.

If November finds Obama squaring off with McCain, the winner will be determined by one thing only: what direction we, as a country, want to go with Iraq.

Obama was against the war before it started. McCain is willing to stay there indefinitely.

America wants to get out, regardless of the surge. We know this because the casualties are down, but the war is just as unpopular as ever.

If the GOP thinks McCain is their man to beat Obama, let them come. I like our odds.

I don't have to be Chris Matthews to be suspicious of Hillary.

Hillary Clinton says she's for change, but she makes no effort to distinguish herself from her husband. "Thirty-five years of experience" means "his record IS my record."

Don't get me wrong; the Clinton years weren't all bad. But the agony of the Bush years washes away the pallor of wasted hopes and missed opportunities that littered the Clinton presidency.

We as a nation are ready for a woman President. But I'm not an ogre for distrusting Hillary, and she'll only get my vote begrudgingly, at best.