I'm in a minority here.

I care more about what my government is doing to the people of Iraq than I do about which Democrat wins the nomination. A lot more.

Many of us, I know, tell ourselves that making sure the candidate we support gets elected is the single most important step we can take to end the war.

If that's you, please read the following brief excerpts from a piece by the estimable Thomas Powers in the current issue of The NY Review of Books. If it shakes you at all, kindly consider the two recommendations I make at the end of the article.

A particularly troubling debate has been quietly simmering in the blogoshpere this week.  Apparently, some folks think that Hillary, aware that her 2008 bid for the presidency is likely to end in failure, is now actively and deliberately sabotaging Obama’s chances in November to leave the way open another run in 2012, while others think that she is a "partisan animal" that would never sabotage her own party.  

The Politico laid it out very clearly yesterday - and solidified what we've known for weeks - this race is over.  Obama has the nomination.

Even Hillary Clinton's own campaign admits it! Politico reports, "One important Clinton adviser estimated to Politico privately that she has no more than a 10 percent chance of winning her race against Barack Obama, an appraisal that was echoed by other operatives. In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe."

There can be no doubt about it now. Hillary knows the math as well as anyone. She is unlikely to pass Senator Obama in the pledged delegate count, and is not likely to improve on her performances in Michigan or Florida if there is a revote in those states.

It is easy to underestimate one's oppoenent when that opponent is as inarticulate as Bush.  However we had better be careful.  He may be stupid but the people around him are not, and Bush does have good political instincts.  I believe that Bush is looking beyond 2008 in his thinking.