Okay, I couldn't stay away from politics for even one hour. I was going to write a whole screed on how HRC is poisoning the well for Democrats, regardless of our nomineee, by consistently saying the following: "“I have a lifetime of experience I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he made in 2002.” Carpetbagger has done it better, so click the link for the discussion.
John McCain thanks you, Hillary, for giving him the easiest and quickest commercial of his general election campaign. Since when was helping your Republican opponent a strategy for winning the Dem nomination?! Another piece of evidence in my mind that HRC absolutely does not care if she destroys the party in her quest for the nomination. I mean, really. On what planet do you favorably compare your REPUBLICAN opponent with your Democratic opponent? This is a person who has crossed the line. Again. But will she be called on it? Or will the press continue to give her a free ride because of who she is?
I was doing the math yesterday, in the context of the media's sexism, etc. John Edwards dropped out of the race after losing FOUR straight primaries and caucuses. Hillary Clinton was still in the race after losing ELEVEN. HRC has certainly been subjected to sexism, as I've said before, but what male candidate would have continued to be taken seriously after losing eleven straight? So while she has perhaps suffered as a result of being female, she has also benefited from being Hillary Clinton. Why was she still considered viable? Why IS she still considered viable? Especially in light of the fact that she has now apparently dedicated herself to assisting John McCain in his potential run against Barack Obama. She's not just fiddling while Rome burns; she's lighting the match.