Their policies on paper are almost exactly the same.  But there were two things about Clinton that moved me from undecided to no-brainer.  The first is experience in politics.  The second is that she's a plugger.  She works her ass off.  She knows her stuff.  She makes mistakes (of course) but gets right back up off the ground and starts over.  I know she'll fight like hell.

The more I looked at the arguments supporting Obama, the more I thought they all boiled down to "he can draw a crowd." And the whole Jesus Christ Superstar phenomenon made me nervous.  Also it made me nervous that he didn't have any evidence of fighting like hell.  On paper is one thing, actions are another.

It's up at NoQ, but here is the original article

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjRhNDQ4MGFlYjk0YzUwNDk0MzYyNTE1ZDkwYmNmNDc=&w=Mg==

For which reason, I much prefer Mainstream Corporate Media (MCM, or, per NYTimes style book, M.C.M.)--MCM's second letter captures the corporate influence affecting of media.

"One good test as to whether folks are doing interesting work is, Can they surprise me? And increasingly, when I read Daily Kos, it doesn't surprise me. It's all just exactly what I would expect."

I did research the other candidates.  I never considered Edwards seriously because I understood his time had come and gone and the press would never give him a fair shake.  At the time, the only things on the net you could find on Obama was glowing reports of the kind kindergarten teachers send home for special students.  (Well, that's changed a lot, hasn't it?  Hahaha!)

I assumed that Clinton would be the presumptive nominee so I've been reading up on her since last year. As I've become more familiar with her positions and her proposed policies, I find the depth of her policy knowledge, and her ability to explain simply how she would implement these policies just remarkable. I have heard no other candidate talk as frankly or as coherently regarding how policy would translate to process.

Her ideas on staunching the outsourcing hemorrhage, her ideas on stimulating the economy, on using alternative energy to create more jobs, on universal pre-kindergarten, her ability to explain how all this would be paid for ... she is incredible.  And watching videos of her speaking to editorial boards is awesome -- I believe that her hour long discussion with the editorial staff of the Indianapolis Star should be required viewing for any voter. I can't imagine how any thinking person could not be blown out of the water by her grasp of the issues, and the simple brilliance of her proposals to address them.

And as for the primary process - who was it who said that there are two things you really don't ever want to know, and that is how laws and sausages are made? I'd add that watching how a democratic party presidential nominee is selected is another one of those things. How awful and squalid this process has been to watch, and how horrifying to see bloc after bloc of loyal democrats thrown off the train for no reason other than to support Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi, Dean, et al personal power grabs.