Gasket,

We obviously perceive Hillary, her behavior and the way she is treated in irreconcilable ways.

I didn't recognize any argument - any actual argument - behind your allegation that Hillary is treated differently because she is a woman. You simply assert that her treatment has never happened to a man. This seems to be the core of the assertion:

"Of course it's impossible for Hillary to compete in a socially acceptable way and still win. She has to go for the jugular and she does, which isn't ladylike behavior. Because she's clearly not a man, she's obviously not judged as a man would be. Yet she is not judged as Barack's equal. She must rise above human nature, she must subvert her all-too-human desires, she must perform with supernatural ability."

Nobody is asking her to rise above human nature. People are begging her to show the same decency they like to see in male candidates and, you are right, it is often missing in the campaigns of men as well. That doesn't mean we don't like it when we see it.

On the unfair representation of Hillary as a monster: she wasn't represented as a monster. She was represented as having created a monster out of a trifle in order to slime Obama and then to have slime showing on her human hands.

When it does come to depicting male politicians as monsters, it isn't so rare. Since Cheney is an obvious example, you claim that the Darth Vader depiction of the new torture champion is a compliment to Cheney. Nothing to do with his manifest evil, disregard for international and American law, etc. I disagree. I do not think the comparison of Cheney to Darth Vader is a compliment. It is apt. The guy is from the dark side of history. You don't have to search long to see George W. Bush depicted as Frankenstein with the label "unchecked executive power" on his chest. It is apt. Hunter Thompson's obit for Richard Nixon called him a monster straight out of Grendel. It was apt. Somebody depicted Joe McCarthy as Frankenstein. Also apt. Men, too, get called monsters.

Only I didn't call Hillary a monster. In my metaphor, Hillary created the monster. My choice of verb "transmogrify" is about the bizarre and extreme transformation of Hillary when she fell behind and went negative. I point out quite clearly what she transmogrified into: a slimy Republican. A slimy human Republican.

I see no reason to think the Democratic Party has sanctioned Hillary's slime throwing. They want her to stop. Many Dems have said so publicly. No one has been able to get Hillary to stop despite very serious concerns. That doesn't mean they like her doing it.

You see no damage from Hillary's apparently innocent little antics. I see damage in the polls. There's a weak Republican candidate running even or out front even though Republicans put us into an unjustified war, ruined our global standing, blew up alliances, repudiated arms control treaties, wrecked the economy, repealed the Constitution, etc. McCain shouldn't be competitive under these circumstances. But the clearest damage in the polls is in the soaring negatives for both Obama and Hillary since Hillary went negative. She's killing them both and Democratic prospects too.

There's additional damage from Hillary's attacks because they lend credibility to whatever attacks the Republicans choose to launch. She has given them a head start. She has said Obama is vulnerable to their attacks - in other words, that there's some dark monster in his background to expose.

There's also damage in Hillary's cues to her followers. She has given implicit blessing to their voting for the wonderful, experienced, global-warming-wise, commander-in-chief-ready McCain. She has contrasted him with Obama, the pipsqueak who amounts to one empty speech, lacks experience, isn't fit to be commander-in-chief, etc. Hillary is going to send a good chunk of her supporters out to vote for McCain and put him in the White House. I consider that damage.

You think Hillary is providing a public service. I don't see it that way. From my perspective, you have to see Hillary as blameless by definition, automatically cleansed of all her sins by a Clintonian god, to excuse what she has done. Since you always bring it back to allegations of gender bias, perhaps the god cleansing Hillary is a feminist on high. Fine, but make the argument explicit. Say Hillary's behavior is excusable because the goal of having a first woman president outweighs all other considerations, including the behavior of the woman who will take office. From my perspective, it is a colossal misfortune that Hillary spoiled this opportunity by revealing herself as one of the last people who should be trusted with power.

Is Hillary among the worst politicians in American history? By no means. But she's trying hard and she's getting there. There seem to be no scruples to inhibit her progress.