There are plenty of reasons to despise the divisive, misleading, negative campaign Hillary has run without "Hillary-hate". But the fact that the totally irrational attitudes cited by the article do exist is in fact one more reason not to pick her as the nominee. These attitudes may be totally off the wall--but some people who hold them do vote.

And the huge baggage she brings with her--both the 60's and the 90's--with all the visceral anti-Clinton feeling--not just her, but Bill-- which is still is surprisingly strong--makes it that much more likely the Republicans will be united against her in a way they will never be against Obama. (Look for instance at Susan Eisenhower--and she is not alone).

It's no coincidence that Rush urged his pinheads, or dittoheads, or whatever the official title is, to vote for her in the Democratic primaries. He knows she's by far the weaker opponent for McCain in the fall.   And she hasn't helped her cause by plumping for things like the Woodstock museum. McCain: "I'm sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event.   I was tied up at the time." (Cue standing ovation.)

In general, her addiction to pork, in contrast to McCain's loathing of it, will play well. Obama also is not an easy target here--his earmarks are nothing compared to hers.