Howardhoflich is a fascist and he is proud, DO YOU HEAR ME, proud of it - or is he just being ironic, satirical, and yanking everyone's chain? Maybe he's just trying to prove that old cliche that feminists have no sense of humour. He made me laugh, so that can't be true.

Hillary is not arrogant. She is very level-headed and level-ego-ed. And not to compare, but to be fair - certainly not more arrogant than Barack.

And certainly not more arrogant than you - who claim to know the truth and reality of her life when you have not been there.

You don't have a right to judge her until you've walked in her shoes, and you haven't - you don't know the truth.

You are spouting off Hillary hate lines, and that's all they are - it's sick that you think you have that right. You don't know all the good that she's done.

Politics is not a poem. No one can be a complete idealist. One Barack eventually has a chance (hopefully), he will have more of a record, and have made more mistakes too. And you'll probably blame him for them.

Some global citizen you're being - a big hypocrite.

Who really makes the best candidate?

I can't help but have the feeling that to think it would be

so much easier for Obama to win may be naive.

Sure, he's doing well in the numbers against McCain now, but what about after all the 527's get done smearing him?

I heard a Republican campaign strategist on "NOW" the other night say that they would "eviscerate" (1. to remove the entrails from; disembowel; hence, 2. to deprive of an essential part; take away the force, significance, etc. of.) the Democratic candidate, no matter who it is.

They have already eviscerated Hillary. They have been doing it for years, and it is part of the problem - it has worked.

But what will happen after they've thoroughly eviscerated Barack? They will not play fair - they never do. They will play on, and exploit people's fears of all of the unknowns to the hilt. That's what they always do.

They scare people into being conservative.

Will those same people - the swing voters who favor Barack now, still favor such an unknown, untested candidate after all the psychologically manipulative attack ads?

That is what scares me. For some reason, the prospects of McCain vs. Obama, seem daunting indeed.

Barack says he can win the debate with Mc Cain over which candidate has more experience in Washington, and which candidate is more likely to change Washington. But often in the end people react more to fear of the unknown quantities of change, than choose hope.

At least with Hillary, they've already eviscerated her - they couldn't really do any more damage. She would do much better at McCain in debates on the issues. She knows much more about the economy, and getting us out of recession, as she did with Bill did in his administration.

My concern is that if people choose Obama now, he might loose clout during the course of a national race with McCain. But Hillary might gain it, because she has the best economic credentials, and unlike how they will play Obama, she hasn't been weak on defense.

The greatest invention would be the crystal ball that would allow us to see both Hillary's and Obama's candidacies and/or presidencies play out, and then we could choose whichever works out best.

Ulitmately that's what I really want - what's best for all of us. And as much as I think Mc Cain is a good man, I don't think a Mc Cain presidency would be what's best for all of us.

Yeah, Kate! You have your own opinion regardless of gender.

Frankly, I see plenty of other women more qualified than Hillary but they didn't have the corporate machine, money and media behind her (ie-beware, this is what got Hillary part way here). It's Hillary herself we have a problem with, and we shouldn't coronate her just because she is a woman and/or a Clinton. That being said, I would vote for Bill if he could run again because he has become a global citizen and he can inspire. I would vote for Barbara Boxer in a micro-second. There are women governors I would support. It's Hillary's arrogance and how she spouts she is 'experienced' that makes me look for a more genuine leader; ie a less manipulative politician.

Excuse me, I don't get to put my husband's job on my resume as 'my experience'. What is this White House experience everyone thinks she has? Does that mean Al Gore wasn't the VP? Before and during Bill's tenure in the White House until 1998, she was...a housewife with a law degree! Oh let's not forget because of being first lady of Arkansas, she was on the board of directors for WalMart. Is this what you call a progressive feminist candidate? No matter how "hard" she has worked in the past nine years in Congress, she got there due to who she was married to and stayed there "fighting" (for herself?) - to get this exact opportunity for the nomination.

Didn't you wonder where she got 5 million dollars to "loan" her own campaign last week when she ran out of money? As far as I know her book didn't make her that much, although Bill's book did, and we know what her salary is. Doesn't that leave doubt in anyone's mind? And what does it say about her budget skills that she runs out of money? Arrogance, again, she thought she would have won the delegates needed by now...

Here is what I want the next President to do: end the iraq war and sincerely show regret for the war to the world, refocus the war in afghanistan to show al-qaida we know where the enemy is, stop supplying israel unlimited money and weapons, true universal health care without pandering to big pharma and big insurance especially, turn the economy green--at last-- in our lifetime. Support rebuilding our roads, schools, bridges, levees, public transportation, breakthroughs in science. Is Obama the only possible person who can address these things? No. Is he the one who inspires our younger generation to get involved in service to the world in all the areas listed above? Yes. I see plenty of evidence that Americans in their twenties are global citizens already. This is the greatest thing to witness. All of these things point to a candidate who will inspire, with long-term vision. The instant gratification 'greed in good' Reagan era is gratefully over. The obscene wealth of the very few is embarassing in this age of unparalleled poverty in my lifetime. Those rich people are supporting Hillary if they are Democrats. Except Oprah.

What will INSPIRE Hillary now that she has her "prize" of the nomination/presidency that every yes-man and yes-woman around her tells her she deserved? Obama has longterm vision and energy to come; Hillary will think she made history just being elected and that would be enough.

The time has come for a candidate for those of us who work in non-profit (healthcare, education, science, serviceworkers like police and firefighters, union organizers) to be a crucial part of the future. We see him as one like us who does things for "the greater good". I spoke to a 94 yr old man who said that is what inspired Americans in the past: always doing for the 'greater good' - for our country and the world. Not for our own selfish (personal/family) values, but the greater good of our country! It's not Hillary's gender, it's her arrogance. She assumes women like me support her, but we don't. We worked all our life with advanced degrees like her and are barely paying the bills if we are saved for kids' college. She is not one of us. I don't have five million dollars to loan myself if I get in trouble with the budget. Or rich friends I have made promises to.