Dickerson's got it spot on! People seem addicted to melo-drama...especially that which is political.These over-dramatic outbursts by the Obama campaign are not only tiresome and embarrassing, but go directly against what his recent speech suggests. Obama's words create more of a curtain that a window to his soul. His is a campaign of better judgment in words only. He is just as power hungry as the next guy!

Thank you for your clear headed thinking and spot on reporting.

The rest could do with some sobering up!

You are both wrong. I have watched Bill for years. He loves the understated dig and says it with a smile. And when he points with his finger you know he is up up to no good. Watch him again. Whoever said he will pat you on your back and urinate down your leg at the same time has it right. When are we going to get back to the fact that this guy might be White House again. He is a narcisistic sociopath

ann31:

You are both wrong. I have watched Bill for years. He loves the understated dig and says it with a smile. And when he points with his finger you know he is up up to no good. Watch him again. Whoever said he will pat you on your back and urinate down your leg at the same time has it right. When are we going to get back to the fact that this guy might be White House again. He is a narcisistic sociopath

That would be fantastic. He was an excellent President. So much better than what went before, and what came after. So much better than what supposed to come next as well.

Here's hoping!

"Whoever said he will pat you on your back and urinate down your leg at the same time has it right."

ann31, I'll bet you have 'cleaned up' this joke in a crucial way. But you did good.

It is undeniable that Bill Clinton is an imperfect man. He has his flaws. He's only human, and he's only a politician. But damn, he's a good one.

He was a great President because of his ability to speak to people and motivate them. But hell -- it's only words...

There is a big difference. When Bill Clinton speaks, it is like a conversation. He talks to your head and to your heart.

Obama talks only to your heart, but if you like that, well he is the right candidate for you.

I guess that both sides would agree if I said that (s)he started it. I'll put myself out there and say that She started it and he's been playing defense. Now that that's said, I'll take a shot one by one:

sam778: Clearly McCarthy is an over-the-top comparison, but Obama didn't say that. And the blog says let Bill off the hook. Big difference if you believe she should be given credit for being in the Clinton Admin and are thinking of electing her. He's going to play a bigger part in her Admin if only because of his ability to raise money. Beside your meoldrama comment, you are a little off. There's plenty of writing that does provide a window to his mind. So, bullocks to that, see the latest from the tnr: <link>. Unfortunately, I have seen some resent stuff that backs up the power-hungry claim, especially in winning a seat in Illinois from his former female mentor (De Ja Vu all over again).

NightSwimmer: irony caught; hope it was intended to be thrown.

SteveAustin: you should take a look at what he's written. He was a constitutional law prof, so this stuff is not secret. With Hill, it's hard to know what she wrote and what she had other people write.

SteveAustin: when is someone (besides tnr) going to ask more questions about the ghostwriting that took place on Hillary's books? Are we to think that (since she complains about Obama being about words, and she had someone else write the words for her, that she must be about ideas?) all of the ideas in those books are hers? It is hard to know because of all of the opaqueness due to legal threat (Atlantic, December 07 issue, I think).

Aren't you buying into the Clinton victim-playing game just a bit? It is the Clinton melodrama that we have had to endure for close to 20 years. Hillary's week-long public meltdown prior to the Ohio/Texas primaries was absolutely mesmerizing. She wrenched us off of the issues to make her victimization center stage; we all took the bait, and now she can accuse Barack of not talking about the issues. Well done, Hillary!

Bill Clinton is brilliant but self destructive. Barack Obama has all of his gifts minus the self destruction. Seems to me that Bill continues to act like a spoiled and jealous older brother who knows he is about to be surpassed.

Why not question Obama's patriotism? Isn't that exactly what half of the US was doing in our minds as we watched those clips last weeks from Obama's minister?

Then Obama makes yet another speech and he is attributed all this greatness. Bottom line, actions speak louder than words. The action that concerns me is that he sat in the pews of that church for 20 years. He is raising his two daughters in the same. So another Obama speech that was probably edited by 10 political advisors does not impress me.

If you want insight into a person character, don't read his books or his speeches. Look at his life and his relationships. Those are the evidence of his principals.

Why aren't we questioning the Clintons and THEIR patriotism? It's the CLINTON campaign that is insisting that Barack Obama be perfect, constantly pointing fingers to detract from their own tawdry behavior. How patriotic is it to drag the country through three more months of a hopeless campaign? That's the opposite of patriotic, it's selfish! Give it up already!

Bill Clinton's patriotism has been questioned. In 1992 he was framed as an unpatriotic draft dodger. He might have inhaled marijuana -- as far as I know.

We were told that he was a flawed candidate and that he was un-electable in a general election. Sound familiar?

I went into this primary season not caring which candidate was selected. I just wanted a clear message to be sent to the GOP that the American electorate wouldn't stand for 4 more years of business as usual. I actually want to see reform in the Republican party. Rewarding failure and mendacity doesn't effectively send that message.

Hillary Clinton has demonstrated that she is willing to destroy the Democratic party in order to get what she wants. If she loses the nomination, then she wants McCain to win the general election so that she gets a second chance in four years. How else can you explain her recent rhetoric? Common sense applies here.

Obama has more money, more delegates, more states, he is bringing out more new voters. If he is the nominee, he will provide the longest coattails for the Congressional candidates. But yes, he is black. And there are some Americans that will never vote for him for that reason and that reason alone.

If Hillary manages to wrest the nomination from the party bosses in spite of winning less public support, she will destroy the Democratic party for the foreseeable future.

But she will still have a chance to win in 2012. Apparently, that's all that matters to her.

You're right, Nightswimmer, Bill Clinton's patriotism was questioned - I'd forgotten. Now I'm even more annoyed! He should know better than to throw around a fog of war on someone else's patriotism.

I look back to the Bill's Fox News interview back in Nov. 2006 and remember the twinkle in his eye when he said, "I don't blame Karl Rove...when something works, you keep doing it... I honor him..." It revealed to me just how much Clinton loves the political game. At the time, I thought, "great! I'm glad you know how to fight Rove-ian fights." Now, I've reconsidered that sentiment.

mercadia,

You probably don't remember the 1968 convention.

I do.

The Democrats might remain tactful, intact is another issue altogether.