rainydaynews

 There is a question of fair play in the Demoratic party being decided this weekend and there are two important sides to the debate. One side, which seems to be the proverbial squeaky wheel right now, says seat all the delgates. We’re Democrats and every vote should count.

The other side says the rules were made and broken with Michigan and Florida knowing the consequences of breaking the rules. Permitting them to break the rules and still get what they want is like promoting anarchy. Worse yet, it is rewarding them for breaking the rules by giving them exactly what the state parties wanted in the first place, a bigger role in the nominating process.

The proposed comprise has been that the Rules Committee of the Democratic National Committee seat half the delegates, allowing some acknowledgement of the votes, but still punishing the states. this compromise stinks! It claims that a vote in Michigan and Florida is worth half as much as a vote elsewhere in the nation. And, it penalizes the politician who played by the rules.

Obama played by the rules and did not campaign in either state. He even had his name removed from the ballot in Michigan as a way of saying to the state party that they needed to comply with DNC rules. That left 40 percent of Mihigan voters saying they were undecided as Obama and John Edwards were not on the ballot. Others voted for alternate candidates like Dennis Kucinich rather than vote for Hillary Clinton, but now we are saying that it’s okay to give her delegates he could not possibly have won?  Obama played by the rules and Michigan and Florida state parties didn’t. So why punish him?

The problem is that those who seek to seat all the delegates are either Clinton supporters or believe that the individual voter should not be punished for state party decisions. The second part of the argument is atleast somewhat valid. For the most part, rank and file party members have no say in what the state party does or when the primary is held.  Those who voted wanted to be heard and are guaranteed that right but state and federal constitutions, though there is NOTHING in the national constitution that determines how the candidates are chosen.

So, what is the delegates from Florida are apportioned based on the pecentage of votes the candidate got.  Clinton got 50 percent of the vote there and Obama got 33 percent. That means she gets 105 of the states 210 delegates and he gets 70. The remaining 35 go into the convention as undecided or supporting a candidate like John Edwards who has already withdrawn from the race.

In Michigan, things are a little more complicated. There are 156 delegates at stake and Hillary won 55 percent of the vote. If she gets to keep just the delegates she actually won, that means she gets about 86 delegates. Barack wasn’t even on the ballot so he won none, officially. But we know that 45 percent of Michigan voted “Not Hillary” so why not give those delgates to the only other nominee still in the race.  Or just give him the 40 percent of the vote that was undecided, meaning they could not choose a candidate on the ballot?   Those 62 delegates (from the undecided votes alone), give him the magic number of delegates to win the nomination.

Honestly, even though it is unfair to Obama, a punishment for playing by the rules, if all the delegates are seated and assigned based on the percentage of the popular vote that each candidate earned, he is still the nominee. Hillary can gain another 191 delegates and make it so much closer than it is, but the 70 delegates from Florida would put Obama over the 2,026 delegates needed to win the nomination.

Obama shouldn’t be punished for obeying the rules. Fair play should mean something in the nominating process. But at this point, Senator Obama has everything to gain by asking that the delegates be seated with the proviso that they be spilt acording to the popular vote. The 191 delegate gain for Senator Clinton still leaves here about 80 delegates behind Senator Obama.  He satisfies the demands of the voters and becomes the legitimate and unquestioned nominee of the party.

Really, the math is easy. It’s the ethics of the situation that are difficult. Michigan and Florida voters should be counted, but the rule of law or the rule of rules is a basic tenet of the American political system. Without it, we invited anarchy to replace our representational system of government. The DNC must find a way to punish the state parties that disobeyed the rules, but disenfranchising the voters is not the way to do it.

Guilt by Association Strikes Again

Apparently, the new pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ did not get the memo that a member of his congregation is actually attempting to become the next president of the United States. So, he invited Father Michael Fleger to speak at the church.

Whether the new pastor knew what Father Fleger was going to do or not, he should have known that the Father would be controversial. Fleger has called Louis Farrakhan one of the best Bible scholars in America today and apparently, has some rather strong beliefs about the concept of white entitlement. We know that he has these opinions because he said so, from the pulpit of Barack Obama’s church last weekend. Oh, and for the record, Father Fleger is white.

Ugh. Are you really that big of a supporter of the other side, Father Fleger?  Surely, you had to know that mocking Hillary Clinton and claiming she felt entitled to the nomination because she is white would have a horrid backlash against Senator Obama. You can’t really expect anyone to believe that you thought claiming she and other white Americans were crying because of the loss of their entitlement would be good for Barack, can you?  Are we supposed to believe that the priesthood left you stupid?

Father Fleger, perhaps because he really believes it, claimed from the pulpit that Senator Clinton was upset because she thought she was entitled to the presidency because she is white. Umm, hello?  Since we have had so many white women as president before, his logic seems a bit faulty. Sure, there may have been a sense of entitlement in Hillary, but I don’t think it had anything to do with her race. It had to do with the work she put in. She thought the years of standing by Bill through his shenanigans and working for the party would earn her the nomination. If anything, the party showed Hillary that a charismatic man would be preferred to a hard-working woman.

That is by no means a slap at Seantor Obama. I like Obama. I voted for him in my primary election and will probably vote for him again in November. But seriously, he did kind of sneak in out of nowhere and win the election that she had been working toward for years. Notice I didn’t say he stole it.  Senator Obama obeyed the rules and did things right and deserves to win. Senator Clinton screwed up. She trusted image makers who cannot connect with real people in America and she trusted the Democratic Party which has shown oh-so-much concern for women over the years. She threw her own people under the bus, like Geraldine Ferraro, instead of saying that “Yes, it matters that Barack is a black man. It’s not a reason to vote against him, but it has made him a ’special’ candidate just like being a woman mae me a ’special’ candidate.”

Barack won the contest, obeying the rules as they were explained to him and now people want to change the rules about Michigan and Florida. That, Mrs. Clinton, is your mistake. You can claim that you want every vote to count, but everyone can see that you don’t like the outcome, so you want to change the rules.  That makes you someone I do not want to play games with, but does not make you guilty of feeling entitled to the job based on your race. Unfortunately, for Father Fleger to say so smacks of his own liberal white guilt or an attempt to sabotage Barack Obama.

Surely everyone associated with the church knows by now that whatever happens in that pulpit will be fodder for talk show hosts and another way to point fingers of guilt by association at Barack. So, what were you thinking, Father Fleger?

Was this some sort of revenge against Obama for his disavowing the sermons of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright? Are you a closet supporter of white entitlement?  Did you just get so wrapped up in preaching a popular message to a black church that you were willing to cut off the favored son for your own fifteen minutes of fame?

As far as I know, Barack Obama has no control over the pulpit of the church he attends, at least not anymore than any other congregation member and yet he is beat up again and again because of the people in the pulpit. Maybe the pulpit ought to pay more attention to preaching the word of God and less attention to preaching the politics of the country!

Barack’s opponents use this same tactic to blast him over a prfoessional affiliation with William Ayers, an English professor and former member of the Weather Underground.  Apparently, every person that Barack encounters is an opportunity for people to cast aspersions on his judgment, ethics and character. Until this week though, it had died down and people were talking about issues–that is until Father Fleger opened his mouth and secured the world with the knowledge that he is either a fool or an agent working against Obama.

Next week, as part of Internet Week in New York City, Associated Content will be hosting a one day contest for writers featuring a $5,000 grand prize. The company, based in Denver, has been marketing the heck out of the contest and will probably see entries from thousands of the 100,000 or so “content producers” that write for the site.

In the interest of full disclosure, count me as one of the people that will be entering the contest.

But the more personally interesting part of this contest is the buzz that it is creating in writer’s communities around the web. People want to know what the judging criteria will be and just how many people willa ctually enter. Writers are paranoid about sharing their topic ideas with anyone other than a trusted few and some are working harder at this contest than they do on most things they write.

Personally, I have three people reviewing my entry, something I rarely do. But the other discussion on the writer’s forum I most frequently visit, Accentuate Services, has been abotu the odds of winning a contest like this. Even if all of the people registered with Associated Content enter, they are limited to one entry per person. That makes the odds of winning one in about 100,000 and much better than your average lottery. The investment is small too: No charge, just the time it takes to perfect an entry. And, there is a guaranteed payoff.  Associated Content pays writers via page views. The better the entry, the more people will view it and the more money the writer makes,not to mention the possibility of winning $5,000.

Don’t imagine for one second that Associated Content is doing this out of the goodness of its corporate heart. Most estimates are that they will get at least 10,000 entries and are issuing just one prize. So that means in terms of upfront payment, they are paying fifty cents per article or less, depending on the number of entries. The publicity for the contest is overwhelming and the buzz is all over the web. You can’t buy the kind of advertising that they are getting for a mere $5,000.

Articles I have seen in critique at the forum have impressed me and mean I am working that much harder to polish my own and I can’t wait until Tuesday when I can start reading the others!

At a Memorial Day speech, Barack Obama erroneously said his great-uncle was part of the brigade that liberated Auschwitz Concentration Camp. Apparently, those familiar with world history know that the camp was freed by the Russian Army and not American forces and Obama’s uncle was actually helping liberate some other concentration camp.

Okay, so we lambasted Hillary for getting the facts of her landing under sniper fire wrong, so Barack has to eat some humble pie on this one and apologize for getting it wrong. Yup, did that. So let’s move on. Nope, people want to continue to harp on this. If he was so proud of his uncle’s accomplishment, he would have gotten it right, right?  Well, not exactly.

As any amateur geneologist can tell you, getting the facts of family history absolutely right is a bear. Sure, Obama’s speech writer should have done some fact-checking before using the factoid in the speech. But really, especially when dealing with family traditions, it can be hard to let the facts get in the way of a great story.

My husband, for example, has an uncle that according to some members of the family was a high-ranking official at the Mobile Naval Station in the 1990s. I have yet to be able to verify this information via an outside the family source and we do not have contact information for that uncle. So, it makes a great story to tell, but it is probably a matter of perspective and what one calls “high-ranking”.

Likewise, there was a story in my family about great-grandfather’s adoption. The story was that his parents were killed in accident, perhaps involving a train, about the turn of the century and he was adopted by the Morgan family years later. He went to live with the Morgans when he was 3 or 4, but they didn’t officially adopt him until he was 17. Then, the story goes, his adoptive father was dying and wanted to make sure my great-grandfather wasn’t cut out of the will.

Turns out, part of the story is true.  He was taken in by the Morgans when he was 4 as they needed more hands for the farm and his own father had left him at the county orphanage after his mother died. It seems his father was remarrying and the new wife wanted to raise her own children, not the ones from her husband’s first marriage. Talk about a wicked step-mother! 

My great-grandfather lived with the Morgans until he was an adult and they did indeed finally adopt him when he was 17. He called his adoptive father “Mr. Morgan” until the day he died. The story is more colorful perhaps, but certainly not the same as what the family had been taught.

I don’t know the Obama family, but if it works like other families, the chances are that Barack heard the story told one way his entire life and never thought to question his uncle. And, to be honest, I never knew it was Russians who liberated Auschwitz. I grew up in the height of the Cold War and I believe my teachers simply said Allied forces. After all, the USSR was the great enemy then and it might have hampered American pride to admit that our enemy had liberated the best known of the concentration camps.

Does it really matter what camp Obama’s great-uncle was at? Auschwitz is the most infamous of them, but that does not mean others were less brutal or less important for liberating.

What does matter is that Senator Obama needs to verify what he has been told and taught in the future. It’s an importnat lesson for the future president to learn and one better learned via a Memorial Day mistake than a mistake that leads the nation into war, into a financial crisis or a diplomatic faux pas. Yes, he made a mistake and admitted it. As long as he learns from it,  I say, no harm, no foul.

For some, the call of duty is grand and involves sacrificing their lives to make sure that the rest of us remain free. For others, the call of duty comes in a much smaller way serving on a community improvement committee, running for public office or even jury duty.

Today, I am stuck in my local courthouse awaiting the presence of the judge to determine if I will be called to sit on a jury ot allowed to go home and get some work done as I prefer. I would sincerely like to not have to spend my day in the basement of the courthouse. On the other hand, I understand the importance of the job that is set before me today and will do it well, if begrudgingly, if I am selected.

I know that jury service is a fundamental part of the American justice system. We need people to willingly participate if the 230+ year old American justice system is going to continue to work. On the other hand, it’s hard to justify giving up my normal salary and personal goals for the day for the $15 plus gas money that I get for showing up. With the gas money and the $15, the court has effectively paid what I would normally earn in about an hour. Not quite, but well, close enough.

The problem is that it’s 10 minutes to the courthouse and I’ve already been here for an hour and all that has been accomplished was the roll call and a 15 year old video about the importance of jury service. And, I agree that it’s important, really I do. But the gentleman behind me, who comes from a law enforcement family and has two sons who are state troopers, is probably just wasting him time.

As a professional reporter, I am probably wasting my time. I am willing to serve, but the likelihood that the attorneys could agree to put me on a jury is small. There are three or four other people in the same boat, unlikely to be selected, but wasting a Tuesday anyway.

And then there are the people who need to be excluded. Too many people think that this is Law & Order or some other cop drama. They had to be told that they cannot conduct their own investigations or try to discover the truth on their own. While that makes for great television and fun John Grisham novels, it is not the way the system really works.

The other amusing irony is that the baliff has turned on CNN to pass the time until the judge is available. Just after warning us that we may need to avoid media exposure, we are locked in a room with CNN. Does anyone in the courthouse see the irony?

Like many people, I would avoid jury duty if I could, but I am willing to be here because I believe int eh American justice system. I just wish there was a more expedient way of doing it.

I suppose that most Americans are patriotic on Memorial Day, Veterans’ Day, and the Fourth of July, but I’m one of those people raised to be patriotic all the time. Yup, I think we should sing the Battle Hymn of the Republic, all four verses, on a regular basis. I know that there is more than one verse to the National Anthem and still get tears in my eyes when we sing God Bless America.

I think that Toby Keith’s “Courtesy of the Red, White & Blue” is one of the great songs of our time and should be a staple of pretty much any radio station.  And, I think that visiting war memorials should be required of every student in the country, along with the obligatory speech about what the monuments stand for and who is buried there.

Locally, I live close to Mounds National Cemetery, sometimes called the Arlington of the Midwest. Sadly, it is a somewhat neglected national monument, cared for lovingly by the same hands that tend Jefferson Barracks in St. Louis, but barely noticed on an Illinois state road map. It is an impressive and inspriational site.

As you wander back to the monument to the unknown soldier, a poem about those who stand and watch is painted on placards that line the roadway. There is the cemetery guide for those looking for a specific soldier, but the casual visitor can also wander among the gravestones and find the names of soldiers who have served our nation in times of trouble since the Civil War. Soldiers from both sides of that war are buried here as Mounds and Cairo, Illinois, held sympathizers to both North and South.

Every American conflict since then has left its mark here and sadly, there is room for more.

But I wonder sometimes why more people don’t respect these hallowed places for more than just their historical significance, more than just the record of the dead. We need to just feel them sometimes, hear the stories of these men and women and know that we are blessed.

This Memorial Day I have a different and more personal outlook on the war and yet I hope that I am no more and no less reverent today than on any of these holidays. My friend, Rebekkah Henderson Thomas, is in the final days of her pre-deployment training at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. For her and her family, this day is more than the kick-off of summer and celebratory barbecue. Another friend, Shad Lewis, is career Army and will begin his second deployment to the War soon.

Each of these people and thousands of soldiers I have never met guard my life each day and they ask so very little in return. I wonder why we cannot offer them a dollar for a poppy and a day or two of remembrance for all that they give?

Too many people who don’t approve of the motives behind the war are critical of American soldiers and the job they are doing. Like school children, these people need a reminder, a guide tour of America’s war monuments and a history lesson this Memorial Day instead of barbecued chicken and potato salad.

There is nothing wrong with a picnic to celebrate the things that our country has achieved and all the potential that is here, but in between bites of corn on the cob, a few words of thanks and prayers for our troops is not only appropriate, it is appreciated.

I listen, on occasion, to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. I started doing this as a sort of know-your-enemy campaign, but I eventually determined that both are well-educated and well-spoken. Listening to them is definitely an insight into what the Republican Party would do if the party as a whole were smart enough

That said, I am well aware of Rush’s “Operation Chaos.” For those outside of the loop, this is Rush’s plan to keep both competitors in the contest for the Democratic nomination for as long as possible. His idea is basically that as long as the Democrats are sniping at each other, they make each other look bad and more people start to like McCain.

Let me first say that this is sad that even conservative talk show hosts have to support McCain via destroying his opponents. I think that says a lot about the attractiveness of the Republican candidate.

However, more importantly, someone pointed ut a major flaw in Rush’s plan to me the other day and I could only gape and wonder if this person might not have a point. He said, “What is the tension between Obama and Clinton is just a ruse?”

I thought, “You have got to be kidding!”

But then, I thought about it. What if they were workign together?  After all, it has been a forgone conclusion for awhile now that Obama was likely to win the most delegates, but not enough to secure the nomination. And, the Clintons are among the most savvy political intellects in the world, so what if…

One day, it becomes clear that Hillary has lots of appeal to some voters and Barack has lots of appeal to a different set. The trouble for her is that he can swipe more of hers than she can of his in a few really important states and the delegate split begins to seriously turn his way.

So first, you circulate the rumors of a dream team and then immediately quash it, saying, if you are Senator Clinton, that you’d love to consider Barack as your vice presidential candidate. Then, you look at the remaining races, see that you can win enough to keep the race tight and you hatch a plan.

The Republicans have already chosen John McCain and he is yesterday’s news. The man has to work at it to get anybody to care that he is still campaigning.

So, behind the scenes, maybe without telling even your campaign staffs, you call Senator Obama and hatch an ingenious plan to keep the Democrats in the limelight right up until the convention.  You agree amicably on a couple of digs that you an take at each other, preferably things that the world already knows.

Sean Hannity has been harping on the Reverend Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers issues for months, so those seem like good targets for Sen. Clinton. The whole world knows about Bill’s infidelity and an easy “misremembering” of a trip during the first Clinton presidency could make a silly, but headline grabbing attack for Sen. Obama to use.

Because you are so busy sniping at one another, McCain tries to be a gentleman and stays out of it. Great! One more story about the election that his name doesn’t appear in.

In fact, you tie up the headlines for months with virtually no mention of the Republican candidate. Then, as the convention draws closer and Obama appears to have a lock on the nomination, you create another controversy, demanding that Florida and Michigan delegates are seated at the convention. You know full well, if you are Senator Clinton, that the delegates will make very little difference to the outcome of the nomination process, but the battle keeps you firmly on the front page while McCain releases information about his health to prove he’s not too old to be president.

Finally, and this is where I hope the scenario goes, on the eve of a court battle over the delegates, you reach an amicable agreement with Senator Obama, with him graciously allowing the seating of the delegates (even though everyone knows they should be punished for breaking tradition) even though he wasn’t even on Michigan’s ballot.

His “graciousness” and “problem-solving” ability are heralded as genius and you, as Senator Clinton, are equally praised for defending the right of every vote to be counted. This should drag on into the summer as the convention approaches.

Then, mid-summer the rumors begin to circulate again that an Obama-Clinton ticket is in the works. This time, you deny the rumors only with a smile and a “we’ll see.” The furor over the choice of a running mate reaches fever pitch as you head to Denver and on the floor of the convention, you proudly and historically stand arm-on-arm with Senator Obama and graciously announce that the two of you have decided to run together, regardless of who the party puts at the top of the ticket.

Net gain: a dream ticket and months of Republican exclusion from the media circus regarding the nomination.

I supposed, the likelihood of this is small, but a girl can dream, right?

When I was a teenager in the mid-1980s, the American media was enthralled by the idea of homelessness. It seemed you couldn’t watch the news or see a movie without some reference to the homeless.

Movies from ‘Trading Places’ to ‘Rambo’ addressed the issue and comedians united to create “Comic Relief” to fight the crisis. And, we as Americans got bored with the continuing “crisis”.

A decade later, when they revisited the issue, most of the news programs did so to expose the fraud of homelessness. To hear that decade’s version, everyone who ever held up a “Will Work For Food” sign was actually a millionaire, preying on the soft hearts of hard-working people.

Everyone seemed to have a story about someone they tried to help only to be rebuffed or have the food thrown away. Personally, I only offered help once. My husband warned me against it most of the time, saying that I would become a target for every panhandler around if I gave to one. He was probably right.

However, just once, I saw a man and his dog near the interstate claiming to be broken down and hungry. I was going to the burger joint anway, so I got an extra burger and fries and took them and a cold soda to the man. He was gracious and thankful and immediately gave the burger to the dog, though he ate the bun and fries himself. Maybe I found the one truly needy person or maybe the fraud was as overblown as the original crisis.

When I tell that story, people invariably ask what a homeless person was doing with a pet. Maybe at one time I thought the same way, but I now find it hard to deny anyone the right to companionship. His dog was thin, but not unhealthily so, and obviously well-cared for, with a clean, shiny coat. I have seen pets of the well-to-do that look less loved.

In 2005, the idea of homelessness came roaring back to America with Hurricane Katrina. For the first time, we had Mother Nature, and the Army Corps of Engineers, to blame for the homeless problem. Ten thousand people fled to Houston and sought refuge in the AstroDome. Thousands more were left homeless or jobless because of the hurricanes that season.

For a short time, homelessness regained its popularity as a crisis worth paying attention too. But as news of the hurricanes grew old and people began to cynically ask what these people were doing for themselves, it faded from view again.

Recently, with the mortgage crisis, every aspect of the loss of homes has been exploited by the media from the things that are left behind to the long-term credit damage, but no ones talks about where these people are living. many have gone to live with friends and family members, the classic definition of homelessness. Others are living in their cars and some can afford a home, but it is inadequate based on their family size.

In my community, despite the national glut of housing and a number of empty homes here, rental expenses continue to rise. The average two bedroom apartment is $500 to $600 depending on the neighborhood. Nice places are even more. And yet, that is 30 percent less than the national average cost for housing.

Even though housing here is considerably cheaper than in the rest of the country, it is hard for many people to make ends meet. One friend rents a room from married friends rather than find his own apartment because any decent single bedroom apartment is $500 a month. As a single man working as a mall security guard, he brings home just over a $1000 a month after taxes. He cannot afford to pay more than half of that each month for rent and another $150-200 for water and electricity. So, he rents room.

Another young man I know broke up with his girlfriend and, obviously, they couldn’t live together anymore. Now, he is living in his car until he can get together the money for a security deposit and first and last months’ rent. He shows up almost daily at another friend’s home, conveniently at meal time, knowing she will not turn him away.

As if the American housing crisis is not enough to remind people of the dire consequences of homelessness, one need only to look at Myanmar and China to see the depth of need we currently have. Estimates indicate the two natural disasters have left more than 5 million people homeless. China has asked anyone around the world with spare tents to send them for temporary living quarters.

But while living in a tent can be a fun weekend activity, imagine the horror facing these people. Tents provide little protection against torrential rain or windstorms, against summer heat or winter’s chill. There is no bathroom, no cooking facilities, no refrigeration. Today, the Chinese said the death toll in China exceeds 80,000 and the long-term health effects of the quake are just starting.

Sadly, the simple reality is that China must grab the headlines and get whatever assistance it can for its people now, or like the plight of the American homeless, it will be yesterday’s news and no one’s concern.

With just a few minor primaries to go, Democratic candidate Barack Obama has closed within 100 confirmed delegates of finally grabbing the nomination for president. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton pressed him all the way, complete with a convincing victory yesterday in the Kentucky primary.

The Senator has made a historic effort for women everywhere and her ability to change history should be respected. Because Hillary stayed at the front of the bus, the presidency of the United States will no longer be decided by old white men in smokey backrooms.

A year ago, there were three major candidates that attracted my attention. Despite his not being right enough for the Republican Party, I thought Rudy Guiliani would have made a great president. Sen. Obama is my senator and I like him. I thought perhaps he was running for the presidency too early in his career. That’s not to say he was too inexperienced, but that there were great lions in the race for president this year and I thought he would be better off waiting until later to run for the office. I was wrong.

And, then, there’s Hillary.  There are so many things that I like about this woman that it is hard to not vote for her. She is intelligent and strong when women catch crap for that. She is generally graceful under pressure which is something I think a leader needs. She is also not an idealist; she’s realistic enough to know that sometimes you have to cut deals to get anything done.

So, why not vote for her? For the same reason the right-wing talk show hosts blast Obama: guilt by association. There’s a point when stand by your man becomes or should become stand up for yourself. I suppose a divorced woman for president might have been an even harder sell than the woman married to Bill Clinton, but I’m not sure.

I think a lot of women of the world might have had more respect for her if she had set aside her political ambitions and, just for a moment or two, been visibly human in the wake of all his philandering. Believe it or not, we respect women who cry too, when crying is appropriate. And, when the man who promised to love and trust you betrays you in front of a national audience, it is appropriate. Women understand that tears can be out of anger as well as pain.

And, your daughter didn’t help you at all. As much as I admire Hillary Clinton, my impression this campaign season of Chelsea was that she was a priviledged brat, making use of her connection to the candidate and her age to try to draw in a specific crowd, but nasty and mean when she was vetted by the press.  Hundreds in the media have referred to Hillary’s attitude, the idea that she deserve the nomination based on her hard work. But I didn’t see that nearly as much in her as I did in Chelsea. Maybe the former first daugher remembered how things were when she was a child and thought the media would treat her with kid gloves, but as an adult woman she should have handled things better. Getting snotty with the opposition does not get your mother elected.

And, if Hillary had an air indicating that she deserved the nomination, can anyone really blame her? For eyars, we have been told that if you do the right things, you can become president. She did everything right. She married a man with similar interests and ambitions. She forged coaltions and won the senate seat in a state with lots of convention delegates. She followed the party line and she eventually got spurned for a younger guy who did the same things.

In fairness to the Clintons, Michelle Obama has never been held to the scrutiny that faced Bill Clinton on the campaign trail. In fairness to her, that’s because she hasn’t earned it. Until she is a candidate in her own right, Michelle is subjected to the secondary guidelines for spouses. Bill had his time in the limelight and is a public figure in his own right. Michelle is a publci figure by association.

Still, Hillary had a right to expect the nomination. She paid her dues. And, while nobody wants to officially address the gender issue, I think that ultimately it was a factor. Hillary had been taught and conditioned that to be viewed as a strong woman, she had to shutter her emotions and that left Barack appearing as the more compassionate candidate. Her image makers got the tough, but forgot that she still needed to be human.

The lesson Hillary has taught us  is that we still more than we expect in a woman politician than we do in a man. She has to do everything they do and more. She ust work doubly hard to prove her toughness and still be feminine and compassionate. it is a hard standard to live to.

But the time has come for Hillary to bow gracefully out of the campaign and to become an active member of the Obama team. Though it is unlikely she will be chosen as the vice presidential nominee, I believe Obama would be greatly served by drawing this intelligent and experienced woman into the fold and letting her shine as a high-level official in his cabinet once he is elected in November.

Then, Hillary can ditch the Margaret Thatcher approach, knowing Americans don’t always want a stiff upper lip,  and run when Obama’s term is over as a softer, gentler and more real version of herself. And, if she ditches Bill along the way, so mcuh the better.

Today, the Kennedy family announced that Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy has been diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor. For those of you like me, who sometimes get confused by the words malignant and benign, malignant means cancerous.

To people my age, Ted Kennedy is something of a relic, a politician who survived a drunk-driving scandal and the assassinations of both of his brothers. In some ways, he is the underachiever of the Kennedy brothers, settling for remaining his state’s Senator for 45 years after he took over the seat vacated when John Kennedy was elected president.

John was the president; Bobby was the attorney general and Ted was the survivor.  As Senator Kennedy decides what to do with the remainer of his life in light of this diagnosis, my mother’s generation, baby-boomers everywhere feel a strange tugging at their heart strings. Sure, there are other generations of Kennedys, some even serving their country well in politics, but this is the final blow, the crumbling of the last bastion of Camelot.

Ted Kennedy is like a fixture in the United States Senate, a power broker whose endorsement of Barack Obama made a difference in the smoke-filled backrooms of politics.  Without him, the Democratic Party loses one of the oldest punch lines in the business and the deep respect that America had for Rose & Joe Kennedy and their kids. It’s a little like the death of a prince, who is third in line to the thrown. Sure, he never fulfilled that potential, but he was still a prince and the Kennedys were American royalty.

It seems likely that another Kennedy will be appointed to take Ted’s place and that he will retire, to live out his remaining days with his family, as the battle against brain cancer is a horrible one for anyone to face. If he chooses to remain in the Senate, America should give him his due and when he is wrong, fight him as stringently as we have for the last 45 years. To do anything less would be disrespectful of a man who has earned his place in history.