She makes me sick too (literally, I'm finding her repellent in much the same way I find Bush repellent--the brazen contempt she displays, the smugness, the entitlement), but don't ever be embarrassed to self-identify as a feminist.

Feminism is honorable although Hillary Clinton is not.

In fairness to her, though, as my mother pointed out to me recently, HIllary did come along at a time when, in order for a woman to succeed, she had to "out-male" the men.

I appreciate the position she was put into, but I don't like that behavior in men, either.

She has much in common with Bush and Giuliani, as far as character goes.

It's not ok in them and it's not ok in her.

My suspicion is that she's in raw survival mode, which is what I mean by siege mentality.

I don't think she has an endgame per se, other than simply surviving day in, day out, until the bitter end.

I could be wrong about that, but that's what it looks like to me. Her chances are so remote, and her tactics so desperate that it's hard not to draw the conclusion this is about short-term political survival, plain and simple.

That's probably why Carville called Richardson a "Judas." He was speaking as a wounded animal more than anything else and the only response to setback these people know is to lash out.

Actually, that's not entirely true. First they were in denial, as Clinton kept up her "ready on day one," inevitable candidate routine long past the point where it appeared to be resonating.

Then she tried to be charming for those couple of weeks, gracious, even, before going full boar with the Rovian tactics.

Some mix of instinct and calculation, I guess. But I don't know, politics isn't my field of expertise, I'm just an engaged amateur.

Who really knows what's going on, in the end. I only know what I see through the media.

"I don't think so much about a person should be explained by their gender and by gender politics. We are way too complex a product of the interplay between our genes and environment for that."

Agreed.

"BTW I think personality/intellect-wise Barack's power comes from a unique blend of high analytical, creative, and emotional intelligence, including deep empathetic understanding of diverse points of view."

Yes! I definitely respond to this in him. He really seems to respond genuinely to criticism and to different perspectives.

The fact that he went out of his way to acknowledge the legitimacy of white resentments about their perceptions of being short-changed by affirmative action speaks volumes about him. He really does have empathy.

It's so interesting to me how we can have such varied perceptions of the same guy. You and I see emotional intelligence, creativity and empathy, detractors see phoniness, vagueness, lack of substance, even duplicity.

Actually, from a certain point of view this makes sense: the ability to empathize necessarily means the ability to shift perspectives.

Perhaps this kind of shifting strikes some people as duplicitous or as lacking a core.

To me, he has a strong core, and it's just what you point out. It's not squishiness at all, but rather a bedrock confidence in who he is that allows him to listen to others without the fear that doing so is somehow a sign of weakness.

What can I say, this guy is truly special.

Heartening to read your sister's words, thanks for sharing them!

I was tepid on Obama for months, precisely because I was hung up on whether he was liberal/progressive enough. Eventually I got what he was up to and recognized just how radical his vision actually is.

"It isn't the calculating pragmatism of immediate political opportunism however, it is a pragmatism grounded in a better and more informed vision of where this country needs to go." Exactly. This is the suspicion about centrism or pragmatism, and it's a valid one, imo. But in this case, I think it's unfounded. Sure, he's still a politician and a case can be made that he's just an opportunist, but so far, such arguments just don't convince me.

One can seize an opportunity without being an opportunist. It's called rising to the occasion, which is what he did in his speech, refusing to pander (for the most part, anyway) and yet refusing to default to siege mentality. He attempted to demonstrate empathy for others ("If all I'd seen were those clips, I'd be repulsed too" and "White people can be concerned about crime without being racists") while asking that that empathy be reciprocated ("Anger in the black community is not going away and it's legitimate, if unproductive").

Sigh.

It saddens me that so much vitriol continues to fly around.

God, the speech was so rich, so complex, so full of things to talk about...

Why didn't Salon spend more time actually discussing the content of what he said?

A golden opportunity, wasted.