Hillary's remaining advocates have said that she was only 'telling it like it is,' albeit with what they'd call a little awkward phrasing, when she told the AP last week that "hard working Americans, white Americans" will never vote for Obama. Okay. As long as we're telling it like is, let's go for it: Phrasing aside, when it comes to a avidly racist percentage of white working Americans she's right. But the problem is, a lot of those voters probably won't vote for a woman either. In fact, it could be the only way they'll vote for a woman is if her opponent's black (and she's not).

The "black candidate is unelectable" discussion is one Democrats usually hold in private. In public they're supposed to say :"If you won't vote for my opponent because of his race, I don't want your vote." (Wink, wink.) Hillary broke that rule, which was an offense to Democratic polity. Her candidacy was on life support after North Carolina. When she made that statement in the media, rather behind closed doors, she pulled the plug on it herself. She convinced a critical mass of superdelegates that her candidacy was too destructive.

To succeed in politics, you have to deal with ugly facts sometimes. Here's one ugly fact: Some voters won't vote for a black man. Here's another: Some of the same voters won't vote for a woman. It's foolish to think you can advance the rights of one group by inflaming prejudices against another. The best way to fight racism or sexism is to fight all prejudice.

America is evading meaningful debate surrounding Reverend Jeremiah Wright. The whole country is talking about a few decontextualized snippets of potentially offensive and inflammatory remarks and whether or not Barack Obama subscribes to such views. However, we should be talking about Wright’s wider interpretation of this country as needing fundamental change. This interpretation is not unique to Wright’s Black Liberation Theology. Instead, it is shared by millions of people of many different races, religions, genders, ages, sexualities, socio-economic classes, and even political affiliations. But most of America is evading this fact, thus avoiding any truly meaningful debate about America’s past, present, and future. Such evasion distorts our ability to openly discuss and presumably improve our society.

The supposed distinction between activist liberals and color-inside-the-constitutional-lines conservatives is not only phony but often backward. In its first 200 years, the Supreme Court struck down fewer than 130 acts of Congress; in the past 13 years, it has overturned more than 30, including a piece of McCain's signature campaign-finance law. This behavior is hardly the "humility" McCain argues should be restored to federal courts.

They wear their robes but leave the hoods off, the polite justices of the Supreme Court. They write decisions then issue them in a formal setting, behind the columns of a capitol monument, with a history that confers a dignity not deserved. The Court embodies the dilemma of our modern culture. The most awful acts are committed with bland justification by polite people who hide behind institutional trappings; for the sake of the few, at the expense of the many.

Sunday, this editor and his colleague faced the Chertoffian menace at Washington's Reagan National Airport while heading to the gate to board a flight to Houston.

When the dollar loses its reserve currency role, foreign financing for US trade and budget deficits will evaporate. US living standards will collapse, and the indispensable omnipower will be just another washed up country.

For a world weary of "American exceptionalism," this can’t happen too soon.