SPITZER HAS RESIGNED

There is now a lot of conversation along the lines that this entire Spitzer situation will be detrimental to a huge extent to the presidential aspirations of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Clearly she is down one superdelegate – but how else should this harm her? She didn’t give Spitzer the money during the past ten years in order for him to patronize whores, nor did she encourage him to do so. Ergo, how is it something that should cause harm to her campaign? I’m just saying.

While I will grant that one cannot help but hearken back to the peccadilloes of Madame’s erstwhile horndog spouse, I find myself somewhat offended by the entire notion that the actions of a third-party should be considered a black mark against a presidential candidate. Hold Hillary responsible for her actions, positions, agenda and speech, absolutely. Do likewise with both Obama and McCain, as well.

Likewise, Democrats seem to be willfully misunderstanding what Geraldine Ferraro said about Obama. Am I the only one who understands that what was said is that, given Obama’s rather miniscule resume of public service and non-existent knowledge of foreign affairs (ala the disastrous Jimmy Carter), not to mention his not-even-one-term as U.S. Senator – and the fact is that he is completely unqualified on any objective basis for the office he seeks and the only reason he IS being considered is BECAUSE he is the “flavor of the month” – that is, an exceptionally skillful public speaker who happens to be half black and half white? The problem is that Mrs. Ferraro didn’t go far enough in what she said. I don’t think HILLARY would be considered qualified either, based on HER resume, were it not for the fact that she’s a woman! And former first lady.