The Bill Moyers journal on the run-up to the Iraq War had a segment that showed Oprah viciously attacking a young woman who had dared to question the administration’s premises. Told me all I needed to know about Oprah.

I’m surprised to hear that. I’d guess that video might still be on pbs.org

It would be interesting to see that here on fdl.

Psst> He started attacking the front-runner for her strengths.

With all three of the top Dems, we know what kind of general election campaign will be run against them by the Republicans: John Edwards was a trial lawyer, Barack Obama is not only black but his mother was white, and Hillary Clinton will carry the Bill Clinton years. It’s going to be very ugly no matter who the standard bearer is.

Sen. Clinton, in this case, has the easiest race: we already know most of the stuff from those years and I don’t think the charge of bitch or hysterical female will play very well, especially to women voters and the men who love them. The other two will have a harder time with Sen. Obama having the hardest.

But be clear, there is not a Republican on the horizon who can beat ANY of them unless Democrats shoot themselves in the foot (not unheard of).

The tricky part now is to run as if this were the General and not primaries. Why, you ask? Because everything is online, print and youtube, and everything can be brought up and used again and again. This, I think, was the purpose of K Rove’s column earlier today – to try to stir things up for future use.

Some of the Democrats are being smart in this and not running to the far left, but are giving us a view of how they will govern the whole country and not just the “base”.

The Republicans haven’t figured this out and are running so far to the right that none of them will be able to head towards the middle after the primaries. For instance, Gov. Huckabee will never be able to restate his stupid opinion on “creationism”. They are running a traditional 20th century campaign and it will hurt them.

The Democrats have to keep their collective eye on the end goal which is to take control and actually govern. And to that end, each needs to clarify their positions, not necessarily to explain their opponents positions.

I can’t vote in the primaries, but fully expect to vote for the Democratic nominee so I am watching all this pretty closely and there are things I like very much about each of the Democratic candidates – I don’t have a favorite, but, Deandra, Sen. Clinton’s “place” is wherever she wants it to be, as is yours, as is mine.

no fan of the Clintons here, but this is a pattenly way off the mark comment: Bill Clinton elected the youngest Governor in US history; a woman running for president in the US… ’small time thinking’ – come on already. The Clintons are not in anyway small time thinkers – they are quite ambitious.

What they are is inside game players, manipulators, they are NOT progressives. Their goal is to win, whatever that takes with little regard to ideology – hence the triangulation and the frequent sop to outrageous republican positions that should be anathema to progressives. They have no strong ideological underpinning, which is highly undesirable, but does not constitute “small” thinking.
.

1) making the eventual dem nominee battle-hardened for the slime blitzkrieg they’ll face against the wingnut noise machine: honing attack and response skills.

2) not inducing permanent damage to the eventual nominee.

My take so far is that everybody has been running with kid-gloves on. A little rising temperature is necessary.
.