Hillary and Role Reversal

In this weeks' New York Times, Maureen Dowd does a nice job of explaining how Obama, with the closer-to-ordinary background, has worked to build a more sophisticated image that now is working against him, whereas Clinton, the more privileged, is somehow pulling off that she can better relate to the everyman.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/opinion/04dowd.html

And David Brooks, no fan of either one of them, points out how Sunday's talk show appearances displayed how Hillary is coming off as the more aggressive and, yes, masculine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/opinion/06brooks.html

This is how George Bush won. By being the one you'd want to have a beer with, and by being the one who you could believe might shoot first and ask questions later. These are apparently the perceptions that win elections, and Hillary seems to be betting--with some success--that America hasn't learned its lesson.

And to Hillary the knuckle-dragging Republican, I say: NO thanks.

Go have a beer with George, Hillary.

are virtually indistinguishable from obama's. So by your measure, he's a republican, too.

that's just blind hatred.

Not understanding this is Barack Obama's problem.

It's like soda - it's cheap and tasty, so it's all good, right? Then people wonder how they got to weigh 300 pounds and have diabetes.