Walter Shapiro quotes Governor Ted Strickland on Hillary Clinton:

"She understands that life is tough, that people struggle ... that, although people work really hard [and] do the best they can, they feel like life doesn't give them a fair shake."

I have no doubt that what Governor Strickland says is 100% true. I also have no doubt that the exact quote could be used for Obama and it would also be 100% true. The Clinton campaign complains about her unfair treatment at the hands of the media. But I believe that the media along with Clinton's supporters have constructed a narrative that is equally unfair to Obama. Governor Strickland's quote is a perfect example of the "Hillary story". As is Mr. Shapiro's closing sentence:

"She is going out (if that is her fate) as she came into the political orbit three decades ago -- as a smart, serious and sound policy maven who leaves to others soaring rhetoric and stirring emotions."

The "Obama story" goes this way: Obama's "soaring rhetoric and stirring emotions" is just smoke and mirrors used to hide the truth that Obama is an inexperienced lightweight who wouldn't even be able to find the light switch when he moved into the White House, let alone muster the resources to lead this country out of the mess it is in. Maybe I need to re-check the definition of "fair" but as I understand the meaning of "fair" pigeon-holing Obama as nothing but an "empty suit" seems to me anything but fair.

The narrative is presented as either/or: one cannot be both a master of "soaring rhetoric" and "a smart, serious and sound policy maven." Why on earth not?

Where is the evidence that Obama is any less smart, serious and sound on policy than Clinton? Believe me, I was just as bored reading Obama's "Blueprint for Change" as I was reading Clinton's policy positions and proposals on her Web site. (Not so much with McCain - there's not enough "there there" to even get to the point of boredom.)

Going off on a complete tangent: can anyone explain "Picnic at Hanging Rock" to me?

You write:

"if you try to say, 'Well, where's the evidence of racism in the Clinton campaign?' you're accused of being a naïve shill for the Clintons."

My response is "if you try to provide Clinton supporters with evidence of [take your pick - the list is long], they dismiss it out of hand as propaganda from "Kool-Aid" drinking, delusional members of the Obama cult." And, I'd point out that that is much more insulting than being called a "naive shill" - naive implies, well, naive. Describing someone as a delusional, cult member implies that they are dangerous. Further, calling someone a "naive shill" says you are on the other side, calling someone delusional, etc. says that you are paranoid.

Of course, there is no overt racism coming from the Clinton camp - they are not stupid. I can, however, point to evidence:

1. How about the sub-text of what Bill said about the results of the S.C. primary. How is shrugging off the significance of Obama's win by pointing out that Jesse Jackson won S.C. (which, by the way, in political time is ancient history) not racist? Do you only see racism if it jumps up and bites you on the nose (i.e., when someone uses the "n")word? If you do not see the racism in his remarks, either you don't want to or you just don't get it.

2. As far as I know, the Clinton camp has not yet denied any involvement in the Obama "photo flap" (if they have I will withdraw this evidence with apologies). Moreover, they have stubbornly refused to acknowledge the sub-text of circulating this particular photo of Obama (and that has nothing to do with their involvement or non-involvement). Their position is that by taking offense to the photo's publication, the Obama camp are the ones who are implying that there's something shameful about being Muslim. They are wrong . The one and only purpose of circulating the photo was to feed the rumors that Obama is Muslim, and because he is Muslim people should neither trust nor vote for him. This is the subtext underlying circulation of this particular photo: Muslim = bad; Obama = Muslim; therefore, Obama = bad; therefore vote for his opponent. If you can't see that as racism you either don't want to or don't get it.

No apologies needed for the "Nixonian touch." It is is quite apropos. Speaking of Nixon, I'm surprised we haven't heard the Clinton camp complaining about the "nattering nabobs of negativity," a la Spiro Agnew.