In response to Mr. Adams:
My dad asked me last Christmas dinner who I thought would win in 2008 and I gave him the same answer, for a lot of the same reasons.
Conceding that (for the sake of the argument) it's Hillary vs Romney, whose background will rouse more prejudice in the voters, Hillary the leftist woman or Romney the whacko Mormon? A lot of people are going to be voting on that issue. The press, of course, will point to all the other woman leaders out there in the world - especially Thatcher and Meir - and at the same time point back to the troubles the Mormons and Utah had in their relationship with the US.
There was a front-page article in Time or Newsweek seven or ten years ago praising the Mormons for raising their kids the right way; I'm sure by next spring, Time will have forgotten that and only focus on the polygamists and gun nuts. (Hey, Swamp Fox, was Ruby Ridge in Idaho? Or New Mexico? Where?) (NB: Let's not forget that the Oklahoma City bombing was a protest againstRuby Ridge: unfortunately that was a GHWB administration, not a Clinton one, if I remember correctly.)
If Hillary is the candidate, I will bang the Waco & posse comitatus drum as loudly as I can.
I really don't think there's much of a chance of Hillary not being the candidate. She (and her minion, Rahm Emanuel) have had way too much control in disbursing funds to other candidates not to have coopted them and their organizations. Her status as a front-runner has none of that Willy Stark hellfire that Dean had in the winter of 2003 - 2004, although I would say that her administration would have all of that Willy Stark corruption.
Hey, good to be back.
