I respect your admiration for the Clintons, and your disappointment that their legacy has been tarnished. We differ on the degree of unfairness involved, but that's ok.

At the risk of sounding overly cynical, or condescending, that you do not persist in the illusion of viewing any politician as "regular people like you and me." If a "regular person" were to tell you, you know what, I see all of the problems in the world, and I think I should be the one to fix it, you'd likely think they were crazy. It is my humble opinion that all politicians should be regarded with a healthy dose of skepticism. That's not to say that some aren't better than others, but it is to say that none of them, not a one, is just like you and me. Personally, when I hear someone say that they're going to vote for someone because they are "just like me", I involuntarily retch, because I dont WANT "reg'lar folks" running the country. I want exceptional people, and I understand that they will sometimes make decisions that I disagree with, or say things that I think are complete b.s.. The important thing is not to sacrifice the good at the altar of the perfect. I agree that the Clintons need not be demonized, but nor should we serve as hagiographers.

One more thing (I sound like Columbo):

I disagree strongly with your assessment that Harry Truman was "the best President that we've ever had". I'm not saying he wasnt better than most, but FDR crushes him like a grape :).

You keep talking about how flawed the primary process was, which I dont entirely disagree with, but is your assessment based on the objective conclusion that you've reached, or on the fact that Hillary didnt win? If she had won a majority of the pledged delegates, would you still be bemoaning the flaws? I am doubtful of this.

The name of Eisenhower's driver was McMurrough. I read about the wartime romance maybe l5 years ago. She came from.....You guessed it. The point is that this was very much like the l999 film "The End of the Affair". He went back to America after the war ended and back to Mamie. That's what America expected in the l940s and it's truly amazing to me that this narrow-mindedness still persists. Bill Clinton's priapism wouldn't endear him to me, as I'd probably discover Lorena Bobbit tendencies, but, when he was President, America's standing in the world was pretty good.

John Edwards is a fool and a hypocrite but it's not for me to judge him. That's all personal stuff, apart from the hypocrisy. If the criterion for Presidential capability has to be chastity, you could always confine it to eunuchs. Now I really, truly, irrevocably have to go to bed to enjoy "the death of each day's life" or, in Christian terminology (without wishing to offend the easily-offended) "she sent the gentle sleep from heaven that slid into my soul".

This is the same Primary process used for Decades. Hillary's campaign knew the primary process. They knew Fl & Mi would not count before the priimaries started..end of story..she lost.. get over it.

I'm sort of feeling like everybody here is in on some joke regarding maureenodonnell except me. All the fawning and attempts at playful dialog with her seem to result in a hand slap or worse, but everybody keeps going back for more. I'm genuinely sensing a disconnect b/t the tone of her challengers and the tone of her responses, which seem to have traversed, as I see it anyway, from "sharp" or "wicked" to "just plain mean." Anybody care to explain?

btw, On the "getting paid" reference to doloresflower: I never know quite what to do with that idea. On what basis do we assume somebody's getting paid? Surely it's not just because we disagree with them? So, what else is it? I suppose time on the threads would be an indication, but almost all of us today spent way too much time here. Are we all being paid? Now THAT'S funny. What an irony on the whole stinking "new media" and "social networking" concept--whole sites filled with paid operatives sparring with each other while the candidates foot the bill. That's cracking me up for some reason.

Alas, I'm not getting paid. What I'd like to know is: How can I? I'm a substitute teacher who wants more work. Why not get paid for what I'm doing right now? I got a jobnotifier (a notification in my email for jobs I might want) for what sounded like just that, and I'm posting it here to see if any of you can find the single word that disqualified it for me:

Make an immediate impact on the 2008 election by joining New Media Communications, an award winning leader in online politics. This position is ideal for a candidate who would like to stand at the crossroads where technology and politics meet. Explore and apply the capabilities of technology, including social networks and online communications, to enhance the current state of politics. Work directly with candidates, campaigns and conservative groups to develop and implement online strategies. If you are interested in working hard, while having fun, in a casual work environment, please submit your resume for consideration. We offer employment benefits that match any Fortune 500 company. Job location is in Richfield, OH.

Ah, yes, that word "conservative" kind of blew it for me. So there really are people here who are being paid for what they say? But does that matter so much? I assume that, like me, they wouldn't do it if they didn't actually believe in what they were pushing.

Anyway, I simply don't buy that doloresflower is being paid, but I can't say for sure why. Dolores, why were you not more offended? Or is that a compliment?

PS Regarding the ad for New Media Communications (look them up--they support many, many recognizable names), I immediately called Dennis Kucinich's office nearby and asked the clerk who answered if there was a comparable organization for liberal networking. The young man audibly asked around the office and after much discussion came back with a disorganized, "No, we don't have any idea, and we don't know anything about that outfit either." Well, if you know the area, you know that Richfield Ohio is right here near Cleveland and there's no reason why the local Democrats should not be on to such competition, much less have nothing to counter it. But I was not surprised. Democrats...sigh.