I have not been able to blog since the day before the New Hampshire Primary, and as such, have not yet publicly weighed in with my view of the surprising results. This delay is by no means because I am a big Obama supporter and was devastated by the outcome (no, that devastation is reserved for the Indianapolis Colts' early exit YET AGAIN from the NFL playoffs yesterday!), nor is because I can't easily admit defeat. No, the reason why I haven't blogged to congratulate Sen. Clinton on her historic victory is that I have just been entirely too busy with other things in life. So, cheers to you Hillary! You deserve it!

Yep, that is all I have to say about that. A cop out? Maybe. I will leave it up to the experts to find the reasons why and how a state that was clearly going to Obama according to both the pre-election polls and the exit polls could switch at the last minute and go the opposite direction. I have absolutely no theories on that one. ;)

What I would like to get into, however, is the way in which Hillary Clinton is choosing to run this race for Presidency. I don't know if any of you have seen the movie Election (if not, do yourself a favor and watch it, great show!), but in it Reese Witherspoon plays a High School student whose ruthless campaign for the office of student body president leaves a wake of devastation in its path. Why am I so reminded of Sen. Clinton by the character in this movie? The obvious (and somewhat sexist) answer would be that they are both ambitious women, hellbent on obtaining their goals at any cost. The real reason goes a little deeper. In the beginning of the movie, you can clearly see that Reese's character is the best fit for the position. She is sweet, intelligent, seemingly compassionate and humble. These are the qualities Hillary exhibited in the beginning of this primary election as well. It is not until Reese's character in the film receives some real competition for the student body president position (from a handsome, popular, jock played by Chris Klien, no less) that her darker, less appealing side comes out in the form of smears, threats and dirty tricks. I won't spoil the ending, or who gets elected, but I will say the winner is determined by a single, stolen vote.

So, isn't this just "sour grapes" on my part? The media were all starting to act as though Obama was going to walk away with it, and that Hillary was all but finished before the stunning events of the New Hampshire Primary. Doesn't it seem now like I am just bitter that they are wrong, and that I was wrong, and that Hillary will still most likely win this thing in the end? Perhaps that is part of the reason here, but it is by no means the whole story. While I believe a candidate's job (and responsibility to his or her backers) is to do everything in their power to secure the nomination, I do think that there should be limits to how far they will go. For the longest time, the Republicans have talked about the "Clinton attack machine", and we Democrats have conveniently ignored it or down played it. In this Primary election season, she unfortunately is going about proving them all right. Here are some examples of the latest Hillary attacks that have ruffled my feathers:

• 1. Obama has no experience, is a "roll of the dice" compared to my 35 years of proven leadership: First off, I SO WISH Obama would go negative just this one time and ask her to really define that 35 years of experience she keeps talking about. Yes, she has been a Senator for 8 years (4 more than Obama), but previous to that she was: First Lady of the US, First Lady of Arkansas, on the board of Wal-Mart (lots of proven leadership there in helping out the middle and low income earners!), and a lawyer. Taking nothing from her life and accomplishments, seriously, she talks like SHE was the President for 8 years, or that SHE was the Governor for 12 years. Obama has experience as a State Rep. for 8 years and a US Senator for another 4. From my count, that equals 12 years of elected experience for Obama (and 4 elections won) vs. 8 years of elected experience for Clinton (and 2 elections won).
  
• 2. Ridiculous and hateful attack on Martin Luther King's legacy: Seriously, when is it ever a good idea to attack MLK? While the comments she made were not direct attacks at him personally, she did say that "it wasn’t hope that King inspired that made the difference but President Lyndon Johnson’s decision to fight for and sign the Civil Rights Act into law". Here she is so OBVIOUSLY trying to do two things at once. First off, attack Obama on this Hope vs. Experience mantra she is trying so hard to make stick (see point one). And secondly, pull the positive comparisons to MLK rug out from under Obama's feet. Come on, she could have just as easily cited the example of Woman's Suffrage and how it wasn't really Susan B. Anthony that got it done, but the legislature of 1920 that passed the 19th amendment. Why wouldn't she use that example? Oh yeah, it cites a powerful woman.
  
• 3. The hijacking of "Change": Really, Sen. Clinton, do you think we are not paying attention? You think that we do not see what you are doing? Are you really going to change your message around every time someone else's message is more effective than yours? Change is not you, and change is not the dirty tricks you are playing in this campaign.
  
• 4. Obama = Madrassa: I so hope this is not true. There are numerous reports out there that these awful, despicable emails that have been going around ever since Sen. Obama announcing he was running, concerning the fact that he is somehow a "Jihadist" in hiding, have either originated from, or are being propagated by the people in Clinton's campaign team. Truly reprehensible if that is the case.
  

Will Hillary Clinton be the Democratic nominee for President come November? Most likely. Will I vote for her if that is the case? Yes, because, even with the dirty tricks, she is miles better than anything the Republicans have to offer. Will she make a good President if she is elected? I have to think so, given the things she stands for and the people she will most likely add to her administration. I do not want to jump on the "Hate Clinton" bandwagon here (there are plenty of people already taking that trip!), nor do I want to add any more ammunition for those that hate her to use against her (not like they don't already know!); I just really wish that she would end this ruthless, relentless attack campaign on her fellow Democratic nominees. Save some of that ugliness for the general election. If she keeps this up, all she can accomplish is a division within the Democratic party. And that is the last thing that we, or the country needs right now!

Thanks for reading...