Mine is pretty clouded as well. However, I note today Rush Limbaugh was running a pretty strong campaign against Obama. IMO, it would be far easier for Repubs to smear Obama than Clinton. Not because he is the worse of the two, but because of stuff that is surfacing now as his official vetting is taking place in the public eye.

It would be pretty tough for the Republicans to come up with something against Clinton at this stage. Or so one would think. I'll never say never about the Repub bag of dirty tricks.

But that You Tube video of Obama's preacher is pretty damning stuff. And then the guilt by association game, which the Repubs are so masterful at--you know, the Repub ads will all use Louis Farrakahn as the Willie Horton of '08.

What will the Repubs use that will be as effective against Clinton surrogates? That Geri Ferraro has bad fashion sense? That was a brilliant move by the Clinton campaign, to have Ferraro make the comments--then have Hillary apologize to blacks for Ferraro's statements...and Hurricane Katrina??? And then have an unrepenting Ferraro "resign" very publicly, but still keep playing her tune--which is what so many white voters are thinking but weren't willing to say. Which is, of course, an inherently racist strategy.

But then, considering the Obama quagmire with Wright, I just read this from the NYT:

"Mr. Wright is no longer on Mr. Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee, though Mr. Obama's aides would not elaborate on the circumstance of his departure, and Mr. Wright did not answer a message left on his cellphone requesting an interview."

Compare that to how the Clinton campaign was practically out front of the Ferraro story practically before it broke.