I have been (and still am) a Hillary supporter, but only because I think she's insanely competent. I don't really care about her personally. Similarly, I have no problem with Obama as a candidate apart from believing him to be the weaker one. I have not felt or understood the intense personal regard from many (well, all) of my peers, but perhaps this makes me suited to say, now, "So what?" I am profoundly not upset by this flap. In fact, let's say Obama joined the church way back when as a political decision--that it made the most sense for his place in Chicago politics at the time. Well, isn't he a politician, after all? I never saw him as anything else. Most likely there were personal and spiritual motivations. Still doesn't mean that Obama and Wright should line up in a one-to-one correspondence of beliefs.

I don't say "so what?" in terms of his electability, because I think it will hurt him. But you know what? Something would have. You think the Republicans wouldn't have dug this up? You think if Obama had won the primary without this information coming to light, they'd have come up with nothing? Oh, no. They've got a whole bagful of goodies on both of them. They are both damaged candidates, as all politicians are. Neither Hillary nor Obama are to blame for the other's history.

"This is the power they will never give up. They need to scream about the evil Jews, the need their people to blame every miserable thing that ever happened to them on the Jews."

Right. We should make that easier for the rest of the world to realize.

I don't really disagree with you on the essentials. I am just disgusted by the way it plays out in American politics.

You seem to think, "It's only the uneducated, older women and redneck, blue collars who support Clinton (with the exception of the more educated zionists who fear Obama just might be more even-handed toward Israel--he wants Zbigniew Brzezinski in his cabinet, and he consults with Carter on a regular basis )."

Not that you really deserve a response, based on your post, but: nope, not here.

But you came up with quite a list. A pretty long list, actually. Are ALL those votes worth less than yours?

'"the ideal man's name" (e.g., James, Daniel and Ben), "the ideal man's job" (e.g., fireman, soccer player and lawyer), "top 10 pet names for him" (e.g., Babe, Honeybun and Tiger) and "top 10 pet names for her" (e.g., Princess, Baby and Angel).'

A harmless enough diversion, like the quizzes I used to take in Sassy and Cosmo...when I was 12. This wasn't a scientific article, so I am only amused.

Hmm, the other use for unrealistic list-making comes just after a break-up, when you decide that the NEXT one will be everything you want; until you meet someone who's none of those things but whom you love anyway.

So let's see: none of those names, since they overlap brothers and exes; doctor; Tiger (!); baby (an old Dirty Dancing fan here).

Like, Joan wanted to talk about Wright so badly she made Bush (Bush! hand-puppet of our destruction!) into Wright. As if Bush is, like, as bad as Wright! (Psst...he may be even worse.)

It's all love, Joan Walsh, even if you aren't ready to Let It Go.

Although--I agree that the notice is not a bad thing. I know a couple of (adult!) women who have been, let's say, strongly pressured to get an abortion by their parents or the man who refused to wear a condom (and who they slept with anyway). Stupidity on both sides, maybe. But basically, women should not get abortions if they don't actually want them, and doctors should not perform them if a woman is visibly upset at the prospect and saying she's only doing it to keep her boyfriend, or whatever lame reason I don't understand personally but to which I am nevertheless sympathetic. In a perfect world, yes, women would stand up for themselves and a "notice" wouldn't be the permission they need to refuse an abortion. Alas.

Because I think Obama's going to get the nomination. If he loses, and right-wing Jews who managed to scare the rest of 'em with lies (and they're doing a great job with my family so far), had anything to do with it, I just don't know what. How do the stories that he's either a) anti-Jew and/or b) Muslim still have legs?

Maybe the silver lining of the Wright cloud is that it hammers into people that Obama has belonged to a *Christian* church for 20 years...20 years...20 years.

How can you include a woman smoking pot while pregnant in the same post as the story out of Austria? I don't want to be the first poster on this thread, all, "pot? no problem!" but you do realize that pot is like 1000 times (or exponentially) less harmful for a developing fetus than alcohol? That in spite of very determined and motivated studies attempting to find long-term damage, very little is found? Not to mention, um, not as dangerous to drive under. I'll probably be pregnant one day, and I won't do any drugs. But if I were going to pick one, it would be weed. Over cigarettes any day.

Not politician.