Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are wrong in the way they’ve argued their position on this topic. Hillary was miffed at the fact that Obama brought up the subject of authorizing the war so she waited patiently for her chance to pounce on Obama. The way in which she articulated a position that arguably contradicts an earlier statement on meeting with rouge nations was very strategic. In the final outcome it is too early in the race for these sort of battles especially when the Democratic party is trying to present a unified front.

The real issue is campaign funding. Clinton’s supporters see Obama’s grassroots network and Hollywood support as a threat to her fundraising and general election initiatives. Obama has the tools and ability to weaken her chances at unifying the party against the Republicans.

It is surprising to think that the Hillary Clinton and Obama controversy is still playing out in the media. Some media analysts and pundits crave this sort of cat fight in politics, but the real question is whether or not voters are receiving the information they need for an informed decision in November ’08.

When you factor in the fact that Obama has over 250,000 contributors at the grassroots level who’s very excited about this race you can understand why Hillary has put on the happy face during the debates. Bill Clinton is not going around saying Hillary’s voting record is similar to Obama’s for nothing as it relates to Iraq.

In the beginning of this race, it seemed as though Hillary Clinton could be swept off stage by Obama’s grassroots appeal until her advisors stepped in and told her, just wait ‘this too will pass’. Hillary is the champion of weathering storms.

When the politicians are calling to be on the stage to celebrate his life maybe one of them will stop to think about a little honesty and integrity.

One thing is for certain, Senator Clinton may not have defined the politics of late, but when you track her story from Park Ridge, Illinois Clinton has been most adept at understanding the best and worst of modern politics. Lately she has been using this knowledge to sway the most core constituents of the Democratic base to raise her numbers in the latest polls. The fact that she stated she would hunt down any perpetrators of an attack within the United States did a lot for her poll numbers as well.

Terms like "vast right wing conspiracy" and the proverb "It takes a village to raise a child" will forever be a part of the political lexicon in America simply because she uttered them. The Democratic field would look totally different if she wasn't "in it to win it." What will beat Senator Clinton is the task of defeating her on her own terms.

The White House was very stormy during the Clinton years. Never before has an affair unraveled in such a way. Honesty and integrity was in short supply during those years. It was painful to see living rooms, workplace and classroom discussions about the sleaze in the White House during Bill Clinton's Administration.

Today there is the potential that Clintons will occupy the White House again. Monica Lewinsky will write a reflective book about her immature years in the White House and have book signings in Washington, DC.

Republican contenders should waist no time in discussing Senator Clinton's policy decisions. Her flip on Iraq and other key votes should be analyzed and discussed in a substantive way. If Republicans walk gingerly on attacking Clinton because of the female vote she will exploit it and dance into the White House.

Ultimately she has her nomination sewn up barring no major surprises. And make no mistake about it she will be tough to beat. She was the reckoning force behind the Clinton campaigns. Today she is far removed and operating on her agenda and her own terms.

Some would argue that at the heart of all the problems besetting the Bush administration lies a great deal of stubbornness. President Bush's critics would continue to argue that some of the immediate major challenges and concerns of this country, like the Iraq war, immigration, and corruption within his own administration are the result of a brazen disregard for the intricacies of diplomacy and bipartisanship.

Bill Clinton's administration had it's problems, but I think your most staunch conservative would have to say that the issues of the Clinton years pale in comparison to the complexities of the Bush years.

Will history write that Bush was the right leader for this period? The pages are still being written. Bush did not exude the optimism, but as the candidates line up to replace him, will he be credited for the tough and forward thinking of the battle against terror?

Obama: World wants to see U.S. lead (CNN.com)