Conversely Clinton has run on only one pillar...I am due.

You said it well. I'd like to add that if Obama had not entered the contest, not only would at least 70% of the 90% African American population be solely behind Clinton, most of the armchair pundits on this site (of which I count myself one) would be splattering their vitriolic hatred on McCain, and signing themselves "Go Hillary '08!"

If anyone has caused a rift among Democrats, it is Mr. Bring-Us-Altogether-Obama himself. You are so right when you say that Clinton's supporters do not demonize Obama. One rule of thumb that all real leaders know: One only needs to look to the followers to see the philosophy of the leader. The buck stops there.

I made the converse argument in a post just below yours:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/she-got-our-antipathy-the-old.php

I would appreciate it if you would address my thoughts there if you would be so kind, and I think my post also highlights some areas in which I disagree with your central premise. Without being redundant, I will just say this: I don't agree that Barack Obama's campaign has been without substance and I don't agree that he has espoused any of the three pillars you listed.

In terms of content, it is clear by now that in many ways, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have similar ideas and mildly-differing approaches to solving the issues we face. Those issues have been addressed during 20 debates, innumerable television appearances, and other speeches and town hall events. I don't want a candidate to stand up and give a speech that outlines every single detail of their approach to the Presidency. I want substantive representations of how that individuals views reflect the values of the Democratic Party and any contrasts with their opponents' track records or stated positions. I have the internet. If I want policy papers, I can find them with easy. You may want something different from a campaign event, and if Hillary Clinton is giving that to you, then so be it. But the candidate we select now and in November is going to be someone we'll be seeing and hearing from pretty regularly for the next four years. I don't need to know how they'd stock their cabinet. It is much more important to me to know whether or not they value a balanced diet, three square meals a day, and room at the table for as many people as possible, regardless of what they look like, who their parents are, or what's between their legs.

As for the three pillars, as I said, I don't think they have anything to do with Barack Obama whatsoever. Hillary Clinton decided that she was going to use "experience" and "Ready on Day One" as her mantras. I think it is a perfectly fair contrast for a younger candidate to say that while experience can be good preparation, sound judgment is also a vital tool for the next President. George W. Bush had plenty of experience as a governor and as the son of a former President, but his lack of judgment will certainly taint his legacy more than his prior experience will redeem it. There is nothing wrong with being proud of having had the courage to oppose the Iraq war and having been vocal about it. There is nothing dishonorable about having mistakenly voted to authorize the Iraq war because you were swayed by the intelligence community and the Bush Administration. But HRC tiptoes around an apology because she knows that those of us who opposed the war and were adamant that 9/11 had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein have been vindicated, and apologizing means admitting that you got outsmarted by the stupidest President in American History.

As for the second pillar, has Hillary been a victim of politics as usual as practiced by the GOP? Absolutely. She's got plenty of experience in that category. And apparently she's lost sight of who victimized her. She's lashing out at everyone who opposes her. But I look at politics a bit like I look at sports: Lots of people say sportsmanship is important. Some of them mean it and play that way no matter what. They would be the same competitor in an empty park with no referees as they would be before the televised masses. Some people talk about sportsmanship, but their tactics indicate a mentality of "if you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'" or "if the ref ain't lookin', there was no penalty". Maybe Senator Clinton was, once upon a time, an honest broker. Maybe she believed in sportsmanship. But the way I see it, some people get corrupted by the game itself. They get poked in the eye while the ref wasn't looking. They get mad. They realize how effective an eye-poke is. They forget the rules and their values. Senator Clinton doesn't seem to remember that part of the appeal of being a Democrat is NOT being a Republican.

The third pillar you mention is just silly. If you don't think the GOP hates the Clintons, you're not paying attention. If you don't think Hillary Clinton is a divisive figure, you're not paying attention. If you don't think a Hillary Clinton candidacy is going to bring out Republicans who aren't particularly enthusiastic about John W. McCain, you're not paying attention. That's EXACTLY who would be energized by a McCain candidacy. If the Democratic base holds any measure of the enthusiasm that has been displayed in the primaries to date and Obama and McCain split the independent vote 50/50, McCain doesn't have a chance. It's not that Hillary is unelectable. It's just that it will be tough for Hillary to suddenly have a reversal of fortune in appealing to independents and Republicans, only in the states that trend blue, when she is running again someone who her own husband has publicly stated is a great friend with whom she agrees on a great deal. We want to draw contrasts with the GOP in a way that causes their moderates to support our ideals because they realize that we are acting for the common good. How will that contrast be drawn between such two good buddies? I just don't see it.

Finally, I would just add that Hillary's campaign hasn't exactly been pure as the driven snow in the last few months. If you want the demonization stopped, you should want ALL of the demonization stopped. In order for a cease-fire to be effective, all parties must observe it.