Your penultimate para - this is one of the best commentaries I've read.
Ive concluded that Hillary, in the way she fights, is incredibly polarising. And under pressure she loses it - often. One of the major problems with that is that it tends to have the effect of making everyone else who isn't in her `do or die` camp lose it too!
Quite honestly she's had me occasionally questioning my own judgment: ie I've veered between, when she's come out with one of her corkers, absolutely loathing her and concluding that she has fundamental psychological problems; and then, when she occasionally reverts to talking about party unity etc, making me think `oh no, she's just someone who's under terrible pressure, exhausted, probably on some sort of `upper` to keep her going, she's grieving...' The thing is I've realised she has yet reached the `grief` stage - she's still in denial.
I've resolved to stop this wretched up and down she creates and simply revert to something most of us always have known: under pressure, people reveal both the best that they are and the worst that they're capable of.
Reviewing the campaign, surely everyone who's followed it with any depth, who isn't a diehard Clintonian, has reached the same conclusion: that there's simply no comparison between the two of them.
Perhaps Obama supporters should be asking all waverers to remember `The Titanic` and ask them, if you were one of those people scrabbling in the water, needing to get on a boat...

HELLO TO ALL YOU GREAT PEOPLE. WHAT A MESS THIS ELECTION SEEMS TO BE. WHAT WE REALLY NEED IS SOME TRUTH PUT INTO THE EQUATION. LET'S ALL GET REAL AND GET BACK TO REALITY. ANYONE THAT THINKS THESE POLITICAL FORERUNNERS ARE IN THIS FOR YOUR BENEFIT IS BEING GROSSLY MISLED. AH, BUT WHAT ARE OUR CHOICES? manni9ja@aol.com Yo, Jack

I couldn't read most of your post, but I have to say that you seem really worked up. For your sake I hope the RFK flap lasts at least one more news cycle so you can get it all out of your system.

The problem with Clinton, in a nutshell, is that she doesn't seem to get that when you cast yourself as a "fighter," you gain a certain power but you also make an enemy out of anyone going up against you. And if you want those enemies as allies later on, a good fighter needs to be a lot more clued in than she seems to be about what kinds of obstacles you're putting in the way of ever winning them over.

Oh, thank you, professordarkheart, for putting words to what I've been thinking and feeling. Your nutshell touches on exactly the problem I've been dealing with on a personal level.

When I read Sen. Clinton's op-ed, I thought, "Wait. Am I supposed to feel ashamed if I assumed the worst about her comments? Is this a result of my own moral failing?"

I can only speak for myself, but I don't think I'm naturally predisposed to thinking the worst about Senator Clinton. I certainly wasn't when these primaries started. But as time has gone on--as she has revealed a willingness to engage in right-wing campaign tactics (exploiting Wright, Ayers, Farrakan, bitterness 'n guns 'n religion); after hearing her say things like, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen," and touting how she can stand up to the right-wing attack machine like no other Democratic candidate--why is it now my apparent cynical nature that's to blame for my uncertainty about her intent? It's not as if I'm normally a suspicious or paranoid person.

But politics--especially high-dollar, big-stakes politics like Presidential campaigns--often involve innuendo and subliminal messaging. I hate that. Those tactics are manipulative and seek to rob voters of their ability to reason with facts, leaving them with only their emotions (usually negative) to motivate their votes. I know this, and I approach campaigns feeling defensive, as if I'm buying a car and having to steel myself against the unavoidable experience of having to deal with the car salesmen, who may or may not try to misrepresent their product or the price or their competitors or other details. And isn't part of her argument that she is very skilled at this stuff, and that she'll use the skill to beat the Republicans? And hasn't she already shown that she has no problem using those skills against her Democratic opponent?

So...when am I supposed to think of Hillary as the tough, take-no-prisoners, skilled politician, and when am I supposed to think of Hillary as the sensitive, straight-forward, non-ambiguous, compassionate human being? And if I get it wrong, why am I supposed to feel ashamed?

Thank you, Emperor!

Holy smoke! I hadn't thought about citizen renditions...hee hee!

Seriously, though. I've tried to keep my opinion of Senator Clinton distinct and separate from my opinion of her campaign. That strategy has helped me, to some degree, avoid developing a hatred for her. Right now, I'm just angry about how she has conducted her campaign.

But it's getting awfully difficult, now that she's started saying stuff that is startling ("...hardworking Americans, white Americans...") or downright creepy-odd ("We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California" -- a specific reference for making a generic point about primary timelines). And then shaming those of us who say, "WTF??? Was that intentional or what???" It's crazy-making. And it's gotten exhausting.