Throughout the Primary season, we've heard about how sexism has hobbled Hillary Clinton's Presidential bid. Some of those charges are spot-on; are are mere hyperbole and hyperventilation. But could it be that the largest bastion of sexism was within the Clinton campaign itself?

The Wall Street Journal kicks off the Hillary Clinton for President 2008 Post-Mortem Field Day with a long article analyzing the mistakes of her campaign. Jackie Calmes sings the familiar refrain that Clinton didn't let the voters see her true colors:

[UPDATED: Pelosi proclaims that we have a nominee. Disregard this post. :-) ]

Well, this is just sad. Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and DGA Chairman Joe Manchin have released a statement declaring the Democratic primary over. But the way they talk, you would think we still don't have a nominee:

"Democrats must now turn our full attention to the general election. To that end, we are urging all remaining uncommitted super delegates to make their decisions known by Friday of this week so that our party can stand united and begin our march toward reversing the eight years of failed Bush/McCain policies that have weakened our country.

As the bruising Democratic Primary season dragged on, Team Clinton attempted to bash Obama's brains in with any club they could get their hands on. There was Jeremiah Wright. There was gun control. There were those 3am calls on 90s-era telephones. (Really - the Senator from New York can't afford a frigging cordless phone?) There were the racially fueled insinuations that Obama would be pummeled as a druggie.

With every new barrage, Obama supports like myself shook our heads and wondered in dismay: How is she ever going to walk back from this?

Well, here we are. The Democratic nominating contest will end some time this week, leaving only a handful of diehards manning the barricades. By next week, Hillary Clinton's only viable political option will be to get behind the Democratic nominee for President, Barack Obama.

Earlier today, Al Giordano reported an amazing story from unnamed sources: that Hillary Clinton "went nuclear" with the Democratic Primary nominating process because Obama had privately rebuffed her as his Vice Presidential pick.

That argument from "secret sources" appears to have been brought into question by none other than Barack Obama himself.

According to Andrew Romano at Newsweek, Obama was asked if he'd consider a VP nom "even if his or her spouse is an occasional pain in the butt." Obama laughed and, echoing a London Times piece by Andrew Sullivan, responded:

I just received an email from Barack Obama celebrating his loss in Kentucky.

What? Celebrating? That's the only way to describe it. Perhaps the best title for the email blast is "Hillary WHO?!" There's no mention whatsoever of Clinton. Instead, Obama explicitly tackles the General Election against McCain with these words:

Unfortunately, our opponents in the other party continue to embrace yesterday's policies and they will continue to employ yesterday's tactics -- they will try to change the subject, and they will play on fears and divisions to distract us from what matters to you and your future.

What do you think of when you think of "Karl Rove"? Okay - leaving out anything that couldn't be printed in HIGHLIGHTS FOR CHILDREN, that is? Well, hold on to your seats, folks, because Karl Rove is about to show you a side of him you've never seen:

KARL ROVE, DEFENDER OF THE CONSTITUTION!

No, wait, I'm serious. Why are you kneeling before the toilet like that?

Even while West Virginians were going to the polls yesterday, it was clear that the media wasn't going to give Hillary Clinton a "wedge" that would allow her to simultaneously overturn the laws of mathematics and of the Democratic Primary process. It was obvious that this campaign had crossed another threshold: the Clinton campaign had lost control of the press narrative - and they stood no chance of gaining it back.

The Associated Press kicked off the festivities early in the day with their article, "Clinton seeks largely symbolic win in W. Va".

Hillary Rodham Clinton reached out for a largely symbolic victory in the West Virginia primary Tuesday over Barack Obama, front-runner in a historic Democratic presidential race nearing an end. Obama conceded defeat in advance in the state, looking ahead to the Oregon primary later in the month and the campaign against John McCain.

A majority of Americans say they want us out of Iraq. A majority of Americans want universal health care. A vast majority of Americans wanted Congress and the President to extend health care benefits for children of poor and lower-middle-class families - even if it meant raising their taxes.

House Republican leader John Boehner and his colleagues have heard their calls, and responded...by crafting a marketing slogan that tells Americans what idiots they are.

Hmmm. A Freudian slip - or signs of a diehard Obama supporter at Talking Points Memo? This graphic from TPM this morning shows a little, um, spelling mistake near the bottom that is oddly congruent with current affairs:

With Clinton team member Howard Wolfson acknowledging that the Senator from NY is $20 million in debt, and even John "Endorsement?!" Edwards admitting saying that it's Game Over, it's a hard label for Clinton to dodge. We'll see whether she continues to wear it as a badge of honor, or comes to her senses and gets behind the Democratic nominee for President in 2008.

Yeah, I'm not holding my breath either. Hey, a guy can dream.

The cynical (and hey, that might be me if I'd gotten out on the wrong side of bed) will say this is an attempt to distract from Mark Penn's firing. Maybe, maybe not. But it's refreshing to see Hillary Clinton take the bold step of demanding that President Bush boycott the Olympics opening ceremony.

This is an issue too important to convert into an anti-Clinton commentary. Over the course of the past 40-some years, the Chinese government has waged incessant genocide on the Tibetan people. Today, the country is predominantly composed of Han Chinese, all while the West looked the other way. Now, we have the gross spectacle of Western democracies like Britain spending millions of their own taxpayer's money to "protect the Olympic torch" by quashing pro-Tibetan protests.

A month ago, I finished reading Marion Nestle's book What to Eat. Nestle is a frequent critic of the government's lack of oversight of the food industry, pointing out how the same agencies charged with promoting American food and drug business are the same agencies tasked with regulating them. Ever since meat-processing industry catcalls forced the McGovern commission in 1977 to back off its recommendation that Americans eat less meat, the USDA and associated agencies have sided with American big business interests against the interest of the American consumer.

As today's news proves, this is not an uncommon phenomenon.

I predicted in a comment yesterday that Obama's campaign would announce today it had raked in over $40 million in donations for March. And...good news indeed! It seems that the Dinner with Barack campaign (which, I'll admit, got me to throw another $15 at Obama for auld lang syne) netted the Obama campaign another large haul, the Rev. Wright "scandal" notwithstanding.

Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign raked in...well, we don't know. according to Ben Smith, Clinton won't release her fundraising digits until the forms are due with the FEC on April 20th. That's very telling. I take it as meaning one of two things:

The Associated Press has an "Obama fact check" on the campaign's claims that he doesn't accept money from oil companies. Here are the most damning stats they could produce on either candidate:

As of Feb. 29, Obama's presidential campaign had received nearly $214,000
from oil and gas industry employees and their families, according to
an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Clinton
had received nearly $307,000 from industry workers and their families
and Republican Sen. John McCain, the likely GOP presidential nominee,
received nearly $394,000, according to the center's totals....

When Barack Obama began his candidacy, many in the liberal community had reservations about his cross-party message. Was Obama saying that he wouldn't fight back hard against the GOP and it smear tactics? Was he saying that he'd water down noble goals - health care, worker protections, an end to the Iraq occupation - all in the name of high-mindedness?

Well, we're near the end of Primary season. And it's become clear that just because you vow to work across the aisle, it doesn't mean you have to embrace Republican political tactics. Indeed, if anyone's embraced such tactics in this campaign, it's Hillary Clinton.

This came home to roost for me recently after I saw that Clinton had attempted to resurrect the Rev. Jeremiah Wright controversy after Obama's speech had effectively buried it. Clinton emphatically said that she would have left Wright's church, in marked contrast to Obama's impassioned defense of sticking by his spiritual mentor.