Where's the Greek Chorus when you need it?

Yesterday, I watched Fox News Sunday, which was a first for me. I haven't watched Sunday morning news in years, simply because I don't need anyone telling me what to think - especially the self-reagarding and vacuous bobbleheads of the Washington establishment. I made an exception yesterday because I couldn't resist seeing Obama and Chris Wallace chat (see above). After the Obama segment, Fox's pundits discussed Obama and Hillary. They concluded that Obama is a weak candidate who has been well-served by his campaign, whereas Hillary is a strong candidate who has been ill-served by her campaign. I found that laughable - a typically adroit feint by the pundits to obscure the issues and confuse up with down, black with white. If Hillary is indeed such a great candidate, why can't she run a campaign? Isn't she in charge of it? The pundits make it seem like Hillary is a really great gal who is being poorly served by her campaign staff. Well, whose fault is that? She picked her staff, didn't she? And if Obama's campaign is so well run, doesn't that speak to his strength at surrounding himself with competent people? That would seem to be a crucial test of someone who is likely to run the biggest corporation - I mean country - in the world.

Of course, Bill Kristol continues this morning to praise Hillary in his way (starting his article with a back-handed comment), reiterating his talking points from yesterday's show. Forgive me for being cynical in regards to Kristol's motives, but why would he praise Hillary? Are we to believe that Kristol is an honest, non-partisan commentator with no interest in the outcome of the Democratic selection process? Hardly - Kristol wants Hillary to carry-on her campaign for two reasons: the continued battle between the Democrats strengthens antipathy towards the party generally - especially amongst undecided voters - which benefits McCain, one of the weakest candidates the Republicans have put forward in years, and; should Hillary win the Democratic nomination, she is a far easier target for the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" to attack in the general election. Further, assuming that McCain lost the general election, I reckon that Kristol would prefer to have Goldwater Girl Hillary in the White House rather than Obama because Hillary's policies would align more neatly with Wall Street's and Republican norms, and another Clinton in the White House would give the Right a nice, easy target for four, long years, leading hopefully (in their eyes) to a single Clinton term and the resurgence of the Republican Party. Divide and conquer - the strategy that the Republicans have used so effectively for the last 28 years.

You can't trust pundits farther than you can throw them...