I was quite surprised to learn in reading her biography by Carl Bernstein that Hillary was considered one of the leading lights of her generation; did work on impeachment hearings for Nixon (moot by his resignation) and worked to keep legal services for the poor (a nationwide program) from Nixon's ax (before his troubles, obviously) and Reagan's ax, and actually helped increase the program's budget. I had no idea the extent to which she's worked in politics -- and I'm just a quarter of the way in the book.

And whose fault is that? Obama makes references to his community organizing all the time. Hillary chooses to simply refer to herself as having 'experience,' without giving any details as to what that experience means-- and (perhaps more importantly) what she's learned from it. Last night's speech was mostly potshots at Obama, rather than touting her own positives or taking on McCain-- a candidate I'd like to think everyone could rally against.

Look at the Dems in Congress, they got elected all screaming they're going to end the war in Iraq, they haven't, and their approval rating is like literally 10%. That's not good.

It was actually 22% according to the last AP poll; AP/Washington Post has it at 33% last month. (Link at my name.) Which is, you know, a tremendously shitty number and right in the toilet next to Bush's. Which should send a signal that the 'old way' of doing things-- governing with 50% + 1-- doesn't cut it any more, but here you are arguing on behalf of Hillary Clinton, who wasn't present for any FISA votes and seems to think the 50% + 1 strategy is brilliant for both the primaries and the general.

Ronald Reagan, for one, managed to use his landslide victories to get his policies made into political reality. If we have a candidate with crossover appeal-- and Obama has far more than Clinton-- we have a chance to get something done. It really is that simple.

And while I'm here-- if you want a case where Obama's more progressive than Clinton here's one: He supports full repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, and Clinton does not. That's a big one to me.

Great review-- I'll definitely take a look.

Yes, the Ryan story was a result of divorce proceedings-- and particularly nasty ones. Maybe Jeri Ryan was secretly working for Obama all along-- was she in that celebrity-studded "Yes, We Can!" video?

I don't believe any politician is squeaky clean but the 'scandals' created around Barack Obama make me wonder sometimes if he really is as decent as he claims to be.

Hillary Clinton supports partial repeal of the act; Barak Obama supports full repeal. (I have no idea what 'partial appeal' means and have not looked it up.)

I'm offended by the use of 'marriage' when it means 'civil unions.' They're not the same, and even gay marriages in this country don't offer many legal protections of straight marriage, thanks to DOMA and the federal goverment's policies.

@Maureen: You can use more than two paragraph breaks when replying in the Salon letters column. While I'm not sure it would make your arguments any more coherent, it wouldn't hurt.

@BenSen: Nice points, and I agree.

@Baby Boomers whining because we'd like to move beyond you someday: Please. You've dominated government and our political discourse for years, your retirement and the health costs of your later years are going to be a huge load on our national resources, and you're still whining because one commenter is happy you won't get to completely dominate our politics forever? That's why we call the other generation The Greatest Generation.

Actually, I just think it's crazy that when one person makes a crack about Baby Boomers the Baby Boomers jump all over it. (Especially ironic if someone's been complaining about "Obamaniacs" just before.) And yeah, I could've been kinder.

I work at a not-for-profit too. Could make a lot more money in the private sector, but I'm pretty happy here. My direct co-workers range from Greatest Generation to Baby Boom, and I like 'em all. The fact is that for every civil rights activist who risked their lives, there were plenty of people in the Baby Boom who supported the Vietnam War, were too busy getting stoned to care, or who just went about their lives with no real regard for the greater economic or sociopolitical consequences. My aunts, uncles and parents aren't teachers, or social workers, or any of those laudable things. My brother-in-law is, though. One more of those insignificant, easily swayed young'uns.

You guys weren't perfect. You fell down on gay and transgender rights. You couldn't get the ERA passed. There was progress, yes, and I'm grateful for it. But don't think you were particularly unique in anything but demographic size. There have been plenty of pioneers before you and will be plenty after. Some of us think this is a good thing.

Ezra Klein took a look at that article and has some skepticism. Link's at my name.

Why are people so antagonistic and bent on making Obama supporters out to be mindless dolts?

There really aren't that many of them, I don't think-- a few people who can't shut up, one or two I suspect are sockpuppets of the people who can't shut up, and then all these anons, who are really just us hiding under the covers pretending to be ghosts or Cassandras.

I mean, if you throw the negative arguments of the last two pages of comments together, you get Obama losing to McCain in California because he was mean to Gavin Newsom.

And yeah, Grassroots Mom isn't straight Hillary-bashing but I do feel obligated to give Hillary Clinton some credit. I'm glad she's a Democrat, even though I've gotten frustrated and angry at her during this campaign for a variety of reasons. I hope we'll be able to pull off a reconciliation and really kick ass in November against McCain.