Joan,

The way you've framed this question is just helping me on the path toward despondency. Russert's job as a journalist is to ask the questions we want to ask of our politicians- it's not an 'attack'. Honestly, I could give two figs about Russert, but when we criticize journalists for doing what so few journalists actually do in this day and age- i.e. their job- well, we shouldn't be surprised when we get stenographers or interviewers that don't press for answers or ask difficult questions. So I think you're framing that Russert went on the attack is a shockingly poor one for a journalist.

As to your question about Hillary's performance, she did fine on the race question except in that, for her, it never seems enough to answer an attack. She has to counterattack ferociously, and, if I were advising her, I'd reign in that temper. Is what Obama's campaign did in pointing up a comment out of her mouth which was not agreeable to large segments of the Democratic electorate really so 'shameless' she couldn't just focus on herself for the incredulity??? And this from a campaign that constantly tries to sling the most slimy most dirty tricks low down type of mud: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3177684.ece If she would just have given her explanation, touted her record as champion of civil rights, and left it at that, she would have come across far far better. You would think she was in fourth rather than the clear front runner.

As a whole, I think though her performance on Meet the Press was a very binary one. She was at her very impressive best discussing policy when she wasn't at her spinning worst and most aggressively disagreeable. The rewrite of history that was her explanation of the Iraq war vote was impressive. I can't believe the campaign thinks they're going to get away with the line that she 'didn't vote to authorize the war' or that the Levin amendment vote or her speech didn't emphasize that. I mean, it defies belief. Kerry and Edwards already had to run on that vote while it was obviously a huge gaffe, and they acknowledged that it was a vote for the war and that it was a mistake!

Really shocking the degree to which that campaign likes to prey on ambiguity in the language or take things out of context to rewrite history. Well, it worked for Bill, so I guess it might for his better half. Whatever. This election that had excited me, who was cynical, has now depressed me to such an extent that I'm not sure I'll vote in the general if it has to be for Hillary.

You left out 'on day one'. She's ready on day one- get the talking points straight.

Thanks though for the substantive analysis. Happy to hear Obama's race card has been forfeited. As a white man, I had been concerned. Question though: you claim that Obama has called Hillary a racist. Would you care to provide the source on that?

Yea right, like I should suspect a response from anonymous Hillary supporters (Mark Penn, is that you?). What is it with you Hillary's blog support that gives you the feeling they walk around with lead pipes when they're not posting. Did I say depressing? This is a friggin Greek tragedy.