AddieStan

Reading today's Washington Post , one would be forgiven for concluding that the editors of its Sunday opinion section, "Outlook," decided that they didn't care if another woman ever bought the paper. In essays run side by side, two women -- one a self-described feminist, the other in the employ of a right-wing, anti-feminist outfit -- both reached similar conclusions: a lot of women are dumb. Coming from the anti-feminist Charlotte Allen of the Independent Women's Forum, the argument was predictable. Women swoon, have more automobile accidents, can't do math and vote for Barack Obama . But Linda Hirshman should know better. Or perhaps better said, she wants you to know that she does know better -- than you or me, dear reader, or any woman who might dare to vote for Barack Obama rather than Hillary Clinton . Educated white women, claims Hirshman, are sinking Hillary's campaign by voting in increasing numbers for Barack -- and that's because they...

CLICK HERE FOR THE AUDIO TO YOUR BLOGSTRESS'S APPEARANCE ON 'TO THE CONTRARY'

He didn't do us much by way of favors, as the sage Hans Johnson points out: Let it not be lost in his death that Buckley, like most in the right-wing cohort he anchored from mid-century onward, was quite familiar and at times reliant on gay people in his career. He wrestled with homophobia. Mostly he lost. CLICK HERE TO READ JOHNSON'S ESSAY ON BUCKLEY AND GAYS

When your blogstress was a little girl, her father would make her read a newspaper column that ran regularly in the Elizabeth Daily Journal , the afternoon paper then published in Elizabeth, New Jersey. The column was called "On the Right," and it was written by one William F. Buckley, Jr. "Good for your vocabulary," said le père de votre net-tête . The veritable inventor of the the modern conservative movement, Buckley delighted in penning arguments in the code of the erudite; so much so that for a child who crawled out of the primordial ethnic soup that is New Jersey, a dictionary was a mandatory companion to Buckley's weekly reader. The Buckley exercise missed the desired effect: Your Webwench forgot most of the words she learned from the columns and became a liberal. However, she cannot discount the influence of Buckley on your cybertrix's ambition to become a columnist . CLICK HERE TO READ THE NEW YORK TIMES OBITUARY

By the traditional rules of debate, Hillary Clinton won this debate on substance. But Barack Obama doesn't play by those rules. He plays by the rules of the Taoists, whereby victory goes to the one who yields. Tonight he proved the point.

He's using the present tense in talking about himself as the nominee. She's using the past tense in talking about it having "been an honor" to have campaigned with Obama . And he did the same in talking about the campaign. But in justifying her candidacy, Clinton said, "I think it's time we had a fighter back in the White House."

"There's a difference between rejecting and denouncing," Clinton said, appearing to try to make it seem as if Obama was trying to split the difference by not strongly enough disassociating himself from Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright .

Tim Russert is questioning Obama 's stance towards Israel and the Jewish community -- because of Louis Farrakhan 's endorsement.

In asking Obama if he will hold to his promise, as Tim Russert cast it, to hold to only accept public campaign financing (in the general election), Russert said, "You seem to be waffling." Russert used the terms set by the Republican nominee apparent, John McCain, effectively making it seem as if Obama's nomination is a fait accompli .

That's Obama 's response to a video showing of Clinton 's critique of Obama's oratory, in which she mocked him, saying, "celestial choirs will sing..." Clinton laughed heartily. A welcome moment of levity in a very tense debate.

Huh? Tim Russert wants to know if Obama "reserve(s) the right" to go back into Iraq "with sizable troops" (as opposed to short people, one presumes) after having pulled out if the situation warrants. Huh?

He's getting centered on national television while being castigated for being inexperienced in matters of foreign policy. Hands pressed together in front of his face, eyes lowered, he seems to be bringing himself to the middle path. Whoops -- now he seems to have remembered that he's supposed to be staring down his opponent.

NBC's Tim Russert started out going hard after Clinton on her previous support of NAFTA, trying to push her to say she would pull out of NAFTA. (She says she'll renegotiate.) Now Russert is accusing Obama of having been ambivalent on the issue, even though the Illinois senator has been sending out mailers in Ohio accusing Clinton of being a NAFTA booster (which she was, at one point). Tactically, Obama seems to be seeking to disarm Clinton by saying her answer to Russert's NAFTA question was correct.

Hillary Clinton made a point of noting, when asked the next question, that in the last several debates, she's always gotten the opening question. "I'm happy to answer," she said, but just wanted to make the point. She then made a reference to a Saturday Night Live segment that your blogstress did not see, saying that " Barack " should be asked if he's comfortable; if "he needs another pillow." Obama did not take the bait. He did not even acknowledge the insult.

Having started off the debate with a question on Barack Obama 's disputed healthcare mailers, moderator Brian Williams unleashed Hillary Clinton 's inner wonk on the topic she most cares about. The result, by Williams' own measure, was "a 16-minute discussion of healthcare."

You'll recall, mes amis , that when last we saw our Democratic presidential rivals debate each other before the television cameras (less than a week ago), Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York fixed her gaze, quite constantly, on Sen. Barack Obama , a tactic that was noticed by commentators. Obama tended to write on note cards and issue wry smiles while looking down during Clinton's speeches. So far the Cleveland debate has been a mutual stare-down contest. He does learn quickly, non ?

At her first glance at Tilda Swinton tonight on the small screen, your blogstress's first thought was, that woman's stylist should be shot. Shapeless -- in a weird kind of way -- black dress, haphazard orange air, missing eyebrows. Then, called to Oscar's mic to accept her best supporting actress, Mlle. Swinton, kicked butt, by turns gracious and audacious. Humility with swagger. A woman after your cybertrix's own heart.

At a presser today called in response to Hillary Clinton 's accusation that the Obama campaign has misrepresented her health care program and trade position in mailers sent to Ohio voters. "He is continuing to send false and discrediting mailings...," Clinton said. "He says one thing in speeches...this is not the new politics that the speeches are about..It is not hopeful; it is destructive." "Shame on you, Barack Obama ," Clinton said. At issue was a mailer whose imagery appeared, according to Clinton, to echo the " Harry and Louise " campaign launched against the plan Clinton tried to get through Congress as First Lady in the 1990s. Here's Harry & Louise: And the Obama flier: See the rest of the flyer at Ohio Daily Blog At Obama's rebuttal media op, he remained cool, and accused Clinton of having subjected his campaign to all manner of attacks, "except when we were down by 40 points." He ably rebutted the particulars...

I had the privilege of appearing on Bonnie Erbe 's groundbreaking show, To The Contrary . Subject: the state of feminism and the Democratic Party after the Clinton-Obama showdown. In some viewing areas, the show airs on Saturday; in others, it's a Sunday show. CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT WHEN YOU CAN SEE 'TO THE CONTRARY' IN YOUR AREA.

Alas, mes amis , your Webwench feels compelled to follow a trail of tissues back to her sickbed. You'll have to comment amongst yourselves.