No subject

Jack
the Ripper on. Of course, these are extremely disturbed individuals, not
just ordinary male folks with hostilities toward women, but the specific
things they do reflect, I am convinced, responses to what might be =
termed
social signals.

Okay, that's an interpretation.

But nonetheless I think this has NOT at all been a decisive factor in
Hilary's decline. Much more important has been her complete and total
complicity in the Clinton-Bush era from start to finish.

That is Clinton has been a leader of the process of offensive against
working people of the world, including the US, from 1992 on -- the
Clinton-Bush offensive for hegemony at home abroad which has now, =
#SPECIALLY
but certainly not only ABROAD, come completely acropper.=20

That's why you can't get away with, as McCool does, setting aside =
Clinton's
two-decade political record, of which her vote for the Bush war on Iraq =
is
simply an organic part. Obama's record -- despite all the other things =
--
begins in most people's minds with his vote against that resolution.

Does his vote on that have something to do with his race or nationality? =
You
bet it does. It gave him, as a bourgeois politician, a better tactical =
sense
of what to do than the woman feminist or whatever Clinton had given her
whole past participation in the war against Iraq since 1991. The =
Clintons'
exploitation of Bush's fateful -- for his second term prospects -- not =
to go
to Baghdad and so on.

Hilary Clinton's decline has sexism as a component but it is NOT driven =
by
sexism as McCool, Brooks, and Morgan can be seen as implying.  This is =
just
not what is happening.

Obama is heading toward the presidency, both in the "illusions,"{ valid =
and
invalid, of the masses and in the calculations of the ruling class. The
latter is attracted to him because of his limited responsibility for the
discredited crimes of the past, because he does not have the same =
absolute
commitment Clinton (and McCain, whom she has virtually endorsed as more
qualified than Obama) does to the discredited -- and perhaps more
importantly, defeated -- policies of the past 16 years.  The =
Bush-Clinton
years which have more continuity than differences.=20

She is in shock at finding that people are rejecting not only Bush's =
record,
but implicitly hers and former President William Clinton's, and that the
change they want is from the whole package, not just the  Bush part. The
rejection is of a certain era of bipartisanship, and, whatever may =
happen to
Obama as an individual if he attains the office to which he has aspired, =
the
next period looks almost as rough for the Democrats as for the =
Republicans.
Fred Feldman