Of course the Republican smear machine will gear up into full scale attack mode. But who do they speak to? They speak to the people who watch Fox, who read Drudge, who listen to Rush. These are not the people who are going to vote for Barack anyway. (And they are not the majority of Americans, thankfully.) It's the moderate Republicans, the Independents, and the Democrats who will vote for Barack -- and they already know how Drudge/O'Reilly/Coulter/ad nauseum play the game.

Even in full on smear mode, getting rid of McCain will be like shooting fish in a barrel.

McCain is simply an older, crotchieter, not-draft-dodging, less brush-clearing, better able-to-pronounce the word "nuclear" version of Dubya. And the majority of Americans despise Dubya and his debacle of an adminstration.

It's as beautiful as running against a 3rd term of George Bush. We have the oversexed buggering ministers and Congressmen to point to, the economic collapse, the failure of the war, Katrina, the hatred of America around the world, and at the head of it all, poised to continue, a senior citizen who wants us to be at war for 100 years, and who sings about bombing Iran.

They may dish their Rovian dirt, but the bottom line is, McCain is the Republicans sacrificial lamb. He served his country once, and almost died for it. They're asking him to serve again, but this time, John McCain's going on a suicide mission.

Just wait until the media narrative becomes McCain's health, his stability, his temper, his age, the effects of torture on the pysche, and so on.

Hey Alex -- he didn't say he WON the fight.

On a side note, how about parsing Hillary's "35 years of experience" one day when you're looking for something to blog about?

I'm just always fascinated by her idea that being married to a politician is experience that qualifies her to be president.

Or how about Hillary's experience in health care reform. She always fails to mention that her experience in health care was a national debacle...what makes her think that she's going to get it right after such a resoundingly BAD experience the last time, I don't know.

The so-called paper of record doesn't want a Democratic president. Just look at their ridiculous coverage and easy softball coverage of Bush, the war, ad nauseum the last 8 years. Bill Kristol. Allowing Maureen Dowd to continue her menopausal madness. Their crappy investigative reporting in general in the last decade.

If the Times unloaded this story 2 months ago, when they apparently had it ready to go, they'd have tanked McCain totally, leaving one of the chuckleheads who couldn't possibly win to go on to the Repub nomination.

So they endorse McCain. And they wait.

And now, they hit him. And just look at the response. All the wingnuts are falling over each other to condemn the Times, and support McCain. Rush Limbaugh is apopleptic.

The Times knew what they were doing...

Wonder how Hillary's campaign would spin THAT one...

Just wondering! Because it's almost time.

Barack did win, and he again showed that he consistently takes the high road, while Hillary scurries around, trying to shoot at him from the weeds at the side of the road.

The Xerox line was tired, stupid and needlessly snotty, and even Hillary didn't seem comfortable delivering it, to her credit. But she still did, and then when Barack protested, she defended it. She deserved those boos.

Hillary can occasionally muster a human side -- her ending statement showed that. But really, in a campaign of months, and 19 debates, she has had two moments where she actually "touched" people -- one, her questionably real crying and "I've found my voice" scene, and the other, last night's closing statement.

So she looks at maimed and limbless veterans and feels that, as a wife of a president, and now millionairess Senator and presidential candidate, they are facing much more crisis than she ever has...well, that's not exactly something that makes her inspiring, leader-like, or qualified to be president. Sure, it showed that she can be human, and isn't always a chilly policy wonk, but so what.

Not enough.

Conjuring up one touching moment in a debate isn't enough to save her demise.

If she doesn't blow it out of the water in Ohio and Texas, she should pull out.

She doesn't represent change, she's "back to the past." She's running on her health care reform, and she's already shown us that she failed miserably at it on her first effort.

Unfortunately, were I a Hillary supporter, I don't think I'd have appreciated having my candidate presented as a mean old bitchy nun who makes sure you know the capitol of Vermont by the end of the school year. I did Catholic School, I knew some mean, bitchy old nuns. Believe me, you don't want to be compared to one.

Maybe Tina Fey thought she was helping Hillary with this bit on SNL, but frankly, it just played into the whole Hillary is a shrill hectoring bitchy schoolmarm image, rather than the cool, competent Commander in Chief image that Hillary would rather convey, and that Obama effortlessly demonstrates.

As an Obama supporter, however, I thought the bit was spot on!!! And given Hillary's hectoring, nasty potshots at Obama all weekend, after her Thursday emotional valedictory applauding the suffering of the soldiers (who she helped send to war), she's certainly not encouraging anyone to find her inspirational, uplifting -- much less even remotely consistent.

The "Many Faces of Hillary" would be hilarious if it weren't such serious business for all of us. Gladly, she's going to soon be gone from the election and we can get on with business.