Everyone loses.

Amongst other things it is two candidates tainting the image and reputation of each other, one of them will emerge better off but the stabs during their war with each other will bleed into the presidential election. In other words, Hillary has hurt Obama to a degree that Mccain can just continue where she left off, even using some of the content of their very face offs against him in November. I do believe it was Al Gore (Or possibly another democratic primary candidate) that opened the wound in Dukakis’s campaign for democratic nomination that Bush Sr. rode to victory during the presidential campaign as I believe the “soft on crime” issue, which was brought about to the public by a rival of his during the democratic primary race (I believe Gore, but may be wrong). … It lead voters to believe that, “Yes, he must be soft on crime. It wasn’t even the republicans who initially made that claim; so what does that say?”.

And sorry marriage does not grant experience. Furthmore the contradiction of her campaign is amazing. First she claims to be involved in her husband’s administration, but then says she opposed NAFTA from the start. Then she lies and claims that it was due to a lack of sleep, but she will be ready for the 3am call.

Finally she voted for the war and refuses to apologize for the vote.

The notion that the ongoing race between Hillary and Barack is hurting the democratic party in some way is silly. Why would the democratic party be hurt by open dialogue? In fact I believe that in initiating and maintaining open discussion about real issues in the economy etc. the two candidates are hurting the republican party.

This, of course would upset all of the major media executives. This is why stupid trivial bs like that preacher or some pretty celebrity get so much airtime.