"Our other leading candidate, B. Obama has allegedly delivered inspiration but in so far he has not had to put any significant details behind his vision or his rhetoric. He has any decent person would have to admit, been held to an entirely different standard. In so far. In so far."

I can't say I quite understand what you're saying but let me say this. I've read both websites and both websites are a little vague on details of what they "promise" to deliver. Health care for example. Clinton's website is better, but it still doesn't entirely explain how its going to work either. Both are basically outlines, Clinton's outline being more specific, but it is still an outline.

I'm not sure what different standard you would hold him to. Some Clinton supporters have said that Obama's legislative work has been insignificant and yet at least two pieces of legislation could help him (and hurt Hillary) in a race against McCain:

1. Ethics Reform. You can look it up if you haven't heard of it. McCain and the Republicans have heard of it, and McCain is extremely proud of this bill. How could it hurt Hillary? She famously said to Russ Feingold that he wasn't living in the real world when he was talking about campaign finance reform. Further she has accepted PAC money and McCain has not.

How can this help Obama? Obama worked with McCain on this piece of legislation and helped him to get it passed. McCain can't use it against Obama, especially since Obama also doesn't take PAC funds.

2. Climate change bill. McCain and Obama also worked on this bill together. It shows that they both are able to cross over partisan lines and work to get things done in Washington (which is very important to many voters with so many issues on hold). How can this hurt Clinton? McCain can say that Clinton does not have the record he does in working across party lines. (ie "Hillary is divisive" arguments).

Are those issues specific enough for you? There are more examples I could list, but I don't want to bog you down with policy details....

you write "2. Obama is ALSO rejecting matching government funds, but predictably relies on his rabids to be too ignorant to notice and the fawning Salon articles to ignore it.

(Regardless of how he allegedly would have voted on McCain-Fein, much like how he would allegedly have voted on Iraq)"

I hate to call anyone ignorant, but haven't you even researched the person you are writing against? Obama helped to sponsor and write the ethics reform bill. There's no "alleged" about it. He doesn't take PAC money. Yes, he has some other issues with Chicago lobbyists, but nothing like Cliinton faces if she takes on McCain.

I've written a couple of posts here but I wonder how do Clinton supporters feel about the fact that McCain will definitely take her on for her lack of enthusiasm for ethics and campaign finance reform (one of McCain's big feathers in his cap--its a feather in Obama's cap too since they worked together on it). This could be a big problem for Clinton's campaign.

Obama and McCain also worked together on a bill to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Clinton will no doubt scorn their bill, but what equivalent bill has she sponsored? They both can appeal to voters for crossing partisan lines to build coalitions to "get things done" in Washington.

Just wondering, what do you think about all of this?

"Actually it was pioneered in the House by Pelosi and sent to the Senate from there where all they did was add a few footnotes and sign it. And ethics reform is NOT McCain Feingold and has nothing to do with PAC. But I'm sure that won't deter you."

footnotes?

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/releases/07/01/20070108.html

http://www.wrn.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=0379953B-EC5D-8B80-30A0B1B27FA39AD2

"He doesn't take PAC money."

Again--Okay, then please give me the source that says he accepts Washington D.C. PAC money.

And I have read the opensecrets website which still puts Clinton at least a million dollars ahead of Obama in the Wallstreet money game, despite these "anonymous" leaks that he is a corporate shill.

"But really, I'm sure his schister ridden Chicago background won't be an ethical issue at all. You just keep tellin yourself that."

Okay, anonymous--put up or shut up. Please go ahead and give your sources if you know more about the Chicago scandals than we do. The voters would like to hear about it. I would like to hear about it--provided that its true and not a made up source like you talking through a pair of socks in your back hallway....

The unfounded innuendo about Obama in this campaign has been really amazing. I hope anonymous, that you were not previously an honest person who has been drawn into the Republican-inspired circle of intrigue by the Clinton Campaign. Do you work in Washington D.C.? How do you know the things you say that you know?

What do you think about the fact that Newsweek says that McCain's campaignn manager primises not to...you know, never mind. I'll wait for you to provide sources before I go on with this phatasmagorical game based on absent or fictional information on your side.