The news of the day is that Clinton attacks Obama. OK, what else is new? Just that this time, it's the meanest, most indignant moment yet for someone who felt teary because she cared for her country. A biased recap:

If only there were more vids that shows contradictions in statements among politicians... The moment somewhat reminded me of Sego at her last debate, when she was literally ripping Sarko apart, falling for his taunts. It didn't do an ounce of good.

Basically, if you're a Hill supporter, you think she made a powerful and accurate charge, showing the right amount of emotion. If not, it's her "Dean scream"

And a note to politicians everywhere: Zingers can backfire. In the debate the other night, Hill went with a line that pundits called pre-rehersed and uncertain, that Obama was promoting "change you can xerox." It was a far cry from "you're no Jack Kennedy" and was rightly booed by the unamused crowd, much to the delight of drama-searching reporters.

Why I'll have a hard time supporting her:

So you criticize someone on their speeches, how it has nothing to do with their actual solutions, and then try to be inpirational yourself, in a performance that makes the viewer think, "Ouch." Not exactly a speech that can out you over the top in a general election. As one comment puts it, "she really knows how to move a crowd."

Which is why I think, know, that a black man, yes, a black man, has a far greater chance of beating the Repubs than Clinton. You can judge it by the enthusiasm. Compare the MVs. I've found about ten fan-made Obama mvs (discluding the Obama girl series, since that was made mostly in jest) and two postive Hillary MVs.

And...

Thing is, I also feel that Obama can help seal the deal with independents disillusioned with the GOP and Hillary can't. The last thing we need is McCain democrats, like the Reagan democrats.

Which brings the question: Is Oba a Sego?
Does he bring inspiration and then narrowly loses to a straght-talker, as a professor who studied the 2007 French prez election argues in the CS monitor? The writer has a point and Sego did lead Sarko by a wide margin as she wraps up the nomination, only to lose. But somehow I feel that he is in a different scenario. Sure, there's no lack in those who feel that he is only made up of feel-good speeches. As for the French election, I've read a comment where a paper interviews a French citizen who says, "If I voted with my heart, I'll vote for Royal. If I voted with my head, I'll vote for Sarkozy."

There are some ways that make the two campaigns things different:

1. Obama is less likely to stumble. All the controversies against him, save the "slumlord" connections (which is also questionable, since Obama was acquitted), are exagerrated or untrue.
   
2. He's less likely to lose his temper in a debate.
   
3. Although France has been ruled by a right-wing executive, like, forever, it's still quite left-wing. Thus, Sarko can make the argument that socialist policies aren't working. What we're seeing now is that unrestrained capitalism isn't working.
   
4. He's more inspirational than Sego herself and even has a few Republicans behind him, including one state senator who appears in his ads. A GOP friend of mine changed her political status to Dem just to vote for Obama (while leaving the door open to changing back again) and says she'll have a really hard time if it's Oba vs. McCain. You can't really say the same thing for Hill or Sego.