I believe that we, as Democrats, believed at the beginning of the nomination race that we would offer the uniting choice for the country. However, I believe that Hillary and Bill Clinton's political strategy has sought only to achieve a short-term victory and ignored the consequences of her strategy and his/her tactics.

The statements and actions taken by the Clinton campaign, even if she were to win, would only weaken the possibility of a mandate by the Democrats and weaken her standing as our country's Chief Executive after the Presidential race was over. And I'm not willing to contemplate the possibility of a Republican win even though I have such grave misgivings about a Clinton presidency.

I haven't been shy about my preference for Barack Obama as a candidate. Nor have I tried to play nice and say that I felt Hillary Clinton was a grand lady. No. So why am I even more angry and alarmed today about the continuation of Hillary Clinton's cynical campaign? It started with a simple link to a WHYY interview with President Clinton (that's how we are still supposed to refer to Bill out of respect for the office) in which the President says that he believes the Obama campaign "played the race card on [him]".

Next, on YouTube.com, I found a video clip in which the President then claims he never said (on WHYY, no less) that he believed the race card had been played against him.

I can hear the Clinton supporters saying, "Why are you talking about Bill, when Hillary is the one running?" The answer to that should be obvious. If Obama had to spend a week answering for the statements of a man he saw as little as once a week, how much time should Hillary spend answering for the statements and actions of a man she chose to marry in 1975? And whom she promoted so actively that she claims the majority of her public experience lies in her partnership with him?

Other telling bits to look at are listed below. Most shocking is the demonstrated and substantive racist actions taken by our former President. The first, a backhanded kind of compliment of the former president is just an appetizer. This video shows former Ambassador Andrew Young on Bill Clinton's 'blackness' and Hillary Clinton's willingness to create a "defense committee" related to Bill's alleged affairs before he began his first presidential run.

I thought this was a great Obama device: video of Bill Clinton on his perception of the importance of "courage to change" versus the "wrong" type of experience (in a 1992 debate with GHW Bush) and the obvious comparison with Obama. I didn't even realize that Bill was 46 when he ran for President in 1992. He was just a pup! Who would trust a guy that young to run the country!? Oh...wait, we did.

Sources that indicate a level of institutional racism that I am ashamed to say I didn't know of when I voted for Bill Clinton in '92 and '96. These include a news article and an appeal to the US Supreme Court from October, 1990. My reading may be inexact, but the gist appears to be that under Bill Clinton's governorship, state legislative voting districts were not apportioned in a way which was in legal conformity with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Finally, a documentary from the BBC that I never saw before but which has plenty of nastiness and maneuvering by both Bill and Hillary Clinton. Revealing statements by friends and former allies regarding how Hillary managed President Clinton's contacts with women during his 1982 race for the Arkansas governorship.

Oh, yes, and a very interesting statement that Hillary Clinton was into teacher testing long before the No Child Left Behind legislation was proposed by the present Administration.

All in a life's work, I say.

Still, Hillary later had to attack enthusiasm in order to make a case for herself. We all know this has got to be part of her repertoire in order to make Senator Obama evaporate, but it’s ugly to watch. Essentially she’s saying Obama needs to clear his plate from the adult table and sit with the rest of the kids. In response to a question about the “thousands" showing up at Obama and whether or not it translates into real votes or momentum for Obama Clinton discounts makes an argument for false consciousness. “I don't see that,” Clinton states, and proceeds to tell us all that her experience “trumps the...y’know...the excitement factor.”

I think I'll vomit if I hear Clinton utter that line about being ready on “Day One” again. I’m not ready for her level of cynicism to take over again. I think that independents would see a Clinton candidacy and victory simply trading one guise of the devil for another.

Obama’s interview with Steve Kroft revealed little, I felt. However, if you look and listen a little closer, you find out some of the best things about Obama. For example, when it’s pointed out that he hasn't really run anything other than the Harvard Law Review, he says that he’s running his campaign, which has gone from 30 to 700 paid staffers and hundreds of thousands of volunteers in just a year. He makes the point that sometimes length of time in power doesn’t equate to effectiveness. While a lot of companies have been around for longer than Google, he argues, Google’s performing--I guess that’s a quality over quantity argument.

In the interview, Obama answers Clinton’s statement that Obama is untested against Republican attacks while she has been “vetted.” Obama said “going up against the Clinton machine is no cakewalk. They're pretty serious about winning as well.” When asked about how he’s holding up under the strain of the campaign, Obama is understated: “It turns out that even under this kind of stress I’ve got a pretty even temperament. I don’t get too high, I don't get too low.”

His responses in this interview and others always seem measured and appropriate to the situation. We haven’t been treated to any Howard Dean-like moments for the press to skewer him on. I like Obama’s ability to be cool under pressure and his distaste for dirty tactics.

If the experience question is a factor for you in discounting Obama as a contender, I'd like to suggest a biography of Lincoln to you. It's called A Team of Rivals by Doris Kearns Goodwin and it shows that sometimes conventional wisdom is wrong and the best man for the job has experience in understanding other people and himself, not in the columns of legislative and administrative experience. I don't think that Obama and Lincoln are the same man but I do think that Obama is a rare person in American politics at this time and would go into the White House with more experience than Lincoln.

^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ # ^ #

This excerpt is from a Reuters wire story: Clinton did not spell out why Solis Doyle was being replaced, and a Clinton spokesman said the move did not reflect any change in the candidate’s overall strategy.

But Larry Sabato, a political science professor at the University of Virginia, said the shake-up “can't be a good sign.”

He said that replacement of Solis Doyle along with Clinton’s acknowledgment last week that she had made a personal loan to her campaign of $5 million were indications the candidate and her aides are concerned about the direction of the campaign.

“It indicates that they understand that things have not gone as well as they had hoped because if they had, the campaign would’ve been wrapped up by February 5,” Sabato said.

Obama’s landslide victory in South Carolina seemed to be a turning point in the race.

Sabato said that while Clinton may be in a bit of trouble, “It’s not over,” he said, adding that if she does well in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, she could win the nomination.