I'd be wealthy if I got a dollar every time someone I know has said that.

My father, a life-long Repub, changed parties so that he could vote for Obama in the primary. But if Hillary is the nominee? He despises her -- and will vote McCain.

A good friend of mine, who is a liberal Democrat in Texas, said he will vote Obama. But if she's the nominee, he said he just can't stand Hillary, can't stand her personally, can't stand her voice even -- so he'd even think about voting McCain -- or not voting at all. (Reasonable? Rational? HELL NO. But this is an otherwise sane, rational, liberal guy in Texas. -- Note...I'm going to work on him to at least stop him from voting McCain!)

The are just a few of the many people I've heard say this.

Who else has heard similar comments? I bet that every single Salon reader knows people just like I do, people who will vote Obama, but despise Hillary, and who will either vote McCain or not at all if she is on the ticket....

And the stories go on...and on...and on...and of course, we now even have the wingnut contingent threatening to campaign and fundraise for her, so that they can assure her as the nominee, because they know they can galvanize the opposition and help propel McCain to victory if their "She Demon" is the nominee.

What excites the wingnuts more that fighting against the "forces of evil?" To them, Hillary is the next best thing to Osama Bin Laden as the Democratic nominee!

Now, it's clear that voters are not likely going to be able to choose their Democratic nominee -- with delegate counts close, it's going to be back room negotiations, superdelegate finagling, and more opaque machinations that actually choose the Democratic nominee. That means that the Democratic leadership will, behind their closed doors and in their behind the scenes decision-making, face a crucial choice.

Go with Clinton -- bringing with it the "power" of the former Presidency, along with the baggage, and a candidate who, while competent and a woman (which is attractive to some of the older generation of women), but is otherwise uninspiring to her base, yet inspiring and motivational in the extreme -- in a counterproductive way for Dems -- to her many opponents, and who, despite her decades of touted experience, made the worst and most craven decision of her political career when she voted to give Bush authority to go to war.

Go with Obama-- bringing with him the accusation of less experience, and less proximity to the Presidency, but who is appealing to independents and even some Republicans, and acceptable to most Democrats in the end, and who has shown better judgment on issues like the war, is smart and competent, but is far better at mobilizing young and "on the fence" voters, and is inspiring and motivational to his own base, as well as to some who would otherwise not listen to or vote for a Democrat.

We all know that Mrs. Bill Clinton, and her Mr., will do pretty much anything she needs to to get elected. That is clear. If they have to divide and conquer, and destroy the Democratic party in the process, they will do so to get her as nominee in November -- if the Democratic Party leadership lets them.

But the Democratic leadership must realize that THE MOST IMPORTANT THING OF ALL is to ELECT A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT -- not necessarily to elect Hillary Clinton. They MUST look at this more critically, and not get Billarydozed into Hillary as the nominee.

This is one time when I hope that the Democratic party leadership is not an oxymoronic concept, and that they will look as cynically as they can at the two choices, and figure out exactly who can win, and make sure that person is on the ballot. Whoever it is I don't care -- put them on the ticket. I hope it's Barack -- and at present, the polls seem to suggest it's Barack -- but I don't care. PUT THE WINNER ON THE TICKET. PERIOD.

BUT it should NOT just be Hillary simply because she's Mrs. Bill Clinton...

*I don't feel this way, I will vote Democratic in November no matter what.

Barack and Michelle lived a middle class life, in a small townhouse, with him earning diddley as a state legislator and college lecturer, and her earning more as a full-time professional, but they carried heavy debt from student loans.

While a state legislator, in 96, Obama wrote a book, called Dreams of My Father. It sold a few thousand copies, making him almost nothing. Then he gave the keynote at the Democratic Convention. Everyone was saying, "Who's Obama!" That was the moment when he changed from Barack Obama, obscure Illinois state legislator, to "Obama the Rock Star!" After that, the book was rapidly reissued, and became a bestseller for months, and made him some money.

Before he was elected to the Senate, he made another book contract, and earned several million dollars for it, to write "The Audacity of Hope." He was then able to pay off their student loans, and buy the house.

The income from those two book contracts is where his money came from.

So, no mystery there, Grannie.

So...MOVE ALONG. Nothing to see here. No reason to be concerned Grannie...

(And just in case you're wondering, the Clintons have also earned the bulk of their wealth from book contracts -- though Bill does a pretty lucrative trade in speaking fees these days as well ...)

Ricardo --

El mundo esta cambiando. Y hay bastante latinos que pueden ver la verdad de "Hilaria" --

Si, se puede...