The only thing really 'detestable' about this campaign so far is this article. If you like Hillary so much come up with a article that stresses her virtues, not one that smears her noble opponent so nastily.

Jimothia Begley, london, united kingdom

I'm not an American and cant vote in your election, But i'm amazed at the people writing in about the lie's the Clintons tell

Surley the word Lie and the Bush/Republican party go hand in hand, Like i say i cant vote but for the sake of this great little planet please please Mr & Mr's America Vote for anyone accept those liar's The Republican party

Michael Dennett, Alexandria, Scotland

Wow...no prizes for guessing where Alice Miles' sympathies lie. The subheading "An historic Democratic contest is being ruined by the TWO contenders flinging mud" is a bit misleading though; it suggests that what follows might maintain some journalistic balance. And wasn't it Obama who offered the first olive branch, contrary to what is implied in the second paragraph?

Sara, London,

Hillary is maybe the smartest politican ever, she knew in the end people like you would take her side, and blame Obama simply because his skin color is black!! who cares about the facts, or that He was THE FIRST one to call truce, when he had not even commented on hillary's dumb comments.

Whats funny is Hillary didn't Inslut black people really, she downplayed Martin Luther King jr's efforts. Who she claims is one of her heroes. so why don't the media report on how proposterous that is rather than make this about Race and worst of all Bring Obama into it because Hillary said so!!

I'm sure the media will be happy when Clinton is telling them what to do for 8 years, they already bow to her, so imagine what will happen when she has the code to the nukes. Lord save us!!

Jay, California,

"everything to cheer about in the stunning choice between, potentially, the first female and the first black president".

alice, all you are showing here is your own prejudice (as many have correctly noted already).

the important thing about the two candidates is that one is a vacuous, inexperienced dreamer (with no practical ideas) and the other is a weasel on a stick.

if we are to put into practice the concept that everyone is "equal" - black or white, male or female - then the fact that these candidates are black and female is irrelevant. as is the fact that the republicans have five old white men.

the contest between obama and clinton has been divisive. your comments, however, are slanted, ignorant and ridiculous. hillary clinton called for a truce? oh, well done her. there must be votes in it. but if she wins the nomination, there will be an old white man as president.

jem, london, uk

Amazing. You don't provide a single quote from Obama. Yet you claim he said something.

In fact he did not. Hillary Clinton knew that he had not commented on her remarkds when she claimed he had distorted them.

This is one a growing list of Bush/Rove tactics which I have already had to put with the last 8 years. I don't plan to vote for someone who is going to continue in the same vain.

Blake Adams, Benning/NewHampshire,

I agree with you on this 100%. Hillary is certainly not perfect, but you have seen through the man and his claims of racism. In my opinion, he's doing that to distract us. He has nothing going for him, and nothing to say.

Ken from Arizona

Ken Wachsman, Sierra Vista, AZ

Barack Obama has run an exemplary campaign to this point and I don't believe he's to blame for ambiguous statements made by Hillary Clinton, Bob Johnson or others. He is almost single-handedly responsible for restoring idealism and hope to American presidential politics. At this moment Clinton supporters are using the legal system to challenge Nevada caucus rules -- rules to which the Clinton campaign agreed months ago. Why? Because the rules no longer favor Clinton after an expected labor union endorsement went to another candidate. Does anyone want or need more of this slick maneuvering? Does it say something about integrity and character, or the lack thereof?

Mitch Wright, Denver, Colorado USA

Since you find it imperative to mention Obama's foul cry of race (which he never actually did), you neglect to point out that Hillary, on more than one occasion, cried sexism. Interesting. It's also interesting that she was able to drag a tear or two in New Hampshire - only after being told by advisors that she needed to show more emotion.

On one hand, Hillary's saying to treat her equal because she have what it takes to be leader. And on the other hand, she's trying to pull out the stops from the 'female victim' playbook.

She's attempting to take the mantle of change from Obama and I have to agree with her in one respect - she is a candidate for change because she changes her mind at the drop of ANYONE'S hat.

PS - I'm a black female whose actual favored candidate has dropped out of the race, so I have to choose the lesser of evils in this upcoming election since media set this up to be a race between Obama and Clinton from the beginning.

I am not pleased.

H.C. Buck, Michigan, USA

This article is at best naïve; but it is also dangerous as it can mislead readers who have not got access to all the facts and rely on an outlet like this.
Hilary Clinton is a politician and she has the right to her ambitions, but she is also shrewd and she knows her comment was a mistake. The generous will say just a mistake and the less generous will say it is a slip that unmasks her true elitist, establishment, exclusive nature: they talk we do!
Obama too is a politician and he too is ambitious and shrewd but he is certainly not using the racial card not because he is holier but because he knows that his strength lies in his crossover appeal.
For this author not to get this is just unbelievable.
I think Predictor is being too generous in saying this article is naïve.
Anthony Cambridge UK

anthony kila, Cambridge, England Uk

This article is naive. Immature. Indeed close to teenagerish in its support and rose-tinted view of Hilary Clinton. If this writer thinks she is a feminist, I think a review of what that means is in order.

Hilary Clinton was very sly in her choice of words to bait Obama and shame on you girl for missing that feminine wiles and guiles move!

Predictor, Hove, UK

A load of old cobblers!

Keith Lyons, Mt Riverview, Australia

I notice you've failed to say anything about Bob Johnson's 'Guess who's coming to dinner' comments, I wonder why.

Jack Damse, London,

uuuum obama admitted last night in the debates that HIS campaign was fanning the flames of this after tim russert nailed him with papers from his campaign and sorry but i agree with the writer of this column--shame on obama--how the hell anyone could construe any of what the clintons said as racial is flat stupid(i agree charlie rangel).......and it hurts the race subject by furthering the divide---

ann, denver, colorado

How much is the Clinton campaign paying you for this hatchet job? If you cannot be objective, please refrain from on writing at all.

Harry Rodriguez, New York,

Are the American public going to vote for the Bush and Clinton families for ever, there are plenty of members of the Bush abd Clinton family to be elected, this could go on for years.

I can not imagine that a country of how many million people have such a small pool of people to chose from, I am sure that amongst the people of the United States of America, there are people of vision who could lead the country, but perhaps not with the ability to raise millions of dollars, is this what the peoplw the United States of America wants for a president?

Muriel Parke, Cowes, Isle of Wight

You support Mrs Clinton, that's one thing, writing as a journalist an unfair article to play the game the Clintons want you to play is another! Obama is way too smart for that. It all started with Clinton's silly comments.

Sam D, Bristol,

Hillary Clinton could yet be the first high profile politician to to do a reversal of the norm and actually go into movies. Her TV dramas of late are a very good stepping stone for this future career but were just a little too late for the Golden Globes.
The comment made by Shawn gerrits, Chicago, USA/IL, sums this facade up really well, I just hope the 'stupid' people and the 'educated' can read between the lines.

Stuart Farrimond, Bolton, England

YOU MUST BE JOKING!!!!... Please I live in the States and have followed this whole thing. The Clintons remarks were insensitive and ill advised. I am a republican and the Clinton machine is all out to attack Obama on every angle. So far, he had been very nice and the only time he responds to two vicious attacks by both Hillary and Bill Clinton, he gets criticized. I am very offended that you have taken a very one sided view without looking at the whole picture. Very disappointed!! Please leave American politics to the Americans. You are clearly not well informed or educated to report on this election.

Maureen, San Diego, USA

I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU ON THIS MAUREEN - T O T A L L Y A G R E E!!!

Jason Walker, Oxon, UK

This very disturbing as an all out attack on Christianity. A reporter can say that all the republicans have "strange religious or bigoted views" and compares it to insanity. Who is the bigot? Although they are not "altar boys" they at least have some morals. The democrats are the ones that needed to find better candidates. The mud slinging is just showcasing their character. If they wanted a woman or a black man for president they picked the wrong ones.
Only the bad int'l community is licking their chops at the thought of another 8 years of Clinton. What madman will they let go this time, and how many will he kill this time.

Tom Linnebur, Sherman, USA

Sorry, Alice, but it has me 'gripped' only like stomach cramps do! I wish all this coverage was about something real in this world not about American politicians! Don't we have enough [or too much already!] with our own?

S. Barraclough, Huddersfield, W. Yorkshire

One of the 5 “old” white men will win in November. McCain is the strongest Republican candidate and he will beat either Obama or Clinton hands down. Obama is way out on the left field on the political spectrum, and if history is any key, US presidential elections have been won by candidates occupying the center, and not from the far left. The internecine warfare of words between Obama and Clinton will weaken the Democrats, and whoever is selected as the standard bearer will have no chance against a revitalized McCain. Obama has no foreign policy experience, and his so-called judgment is laughable, in view of his advocacy for the use of A-bomb on Pakistan to root out Bin-Laden. Obama might be the darling of the left, and the anti-Clintonites, but most of the latter group, if they are Republicans, will turn against him in a general election precisely because of his leftist politics, and his foreign policy naïveté in dealing with belligerent countries like Iran, Syria, Venezuela, N.Korea.

R. Lewis, St. Louis, Missouri

Thanks Alice! You hit the nail right on the head!

Nick Simpson, New York, NY

Thanks for the article, but what can I say, I am a Hillary’s supporter. She is the one that consistently shows to have the preparation and the determination to improve quality of life in America, and we certainly need those for the position.

Anne, LA, USA

Great article and in my view right on the mark. What I find most disturbing about Mr Obama is his inability to publicly recognize his full heritage during this election. I feel he's choosing to be a black man when it suits him something I find fundamentally deceitful But I guess that's just politics.

Richard Rayward, Newtown, USA / Pennsylvania

Karen, Pasadena, California
Are you talking about leadership of America or leadership of Yale University Alumni Association or leadership of some research group? I happen to come from a country where PhD holders and top university professors dominate public offices and that country is the most corrupt and hopeless in the world. That country is Nigeria! Nigerian leadership is dominated by the top university dons and non-academic PhD holders, but Nigeria is the biggest disgrace of the Black race because it is hopelessly backward and corrupt.
I used to think a bit like you when I was in the university and at the same time involved in local politics at home in Ebonyi State of Nigeria. I actively fought to stop illiterates getting elected because I felt the educated ones were naturally better. Most people in my place thought the same, but today we know better!! If academic brilliance had any correlation with good leadership skills, Nigeria could have since become a successful society.

John Iteshi, London, UK

No matter the opinion regarding these two candidates, it is important for Americans to open their ears and realize what the world is saying and thinking. We must wake up and remember to vote for a president who will represent the US on a more global environment. The days of isolationism must end. While one may not agree with the comments of the author, this is a UK paper, not an american one.

Sally, ny, us

First, it was Barack Obama that first called a truce and Senator Clinton, to her credit, followed one hour latter in a press release.
Senator Clinton made statements regarding Martin Luther Kings role in the Civil Right's movement that many Americans took issue with and ignited a firestorm of protest on the internet.
Bill Clinton called Obama a kid, which to many African Americans is just another word for boy. A term that was commonly used in the South to disrespect black men no matter what their age. Barack Obama is a 46 year old man, A U.S. senator.
Others, for example Carl Rove, very publicly, went on to use phrases that historically were used negatively in describing Blacks in America, shucking and jiving, trash mouth, lazy, stupid, drug user, pusher, ect.. The only way Senator Obama has injected race in this campaign is by being black. So, when others speak of him derisively , he is accused of being divisive , not those who made the original statements.

Kevin, Los Angeles, USA

The problem with the American political system...and there is definitely a problem considering our leadership over the last eight years...is that we have a press determined to turn politics into a popularity contest and an American populace too lazy to take the time to understand how the candidates stand on the real issues at hand.

If the press were to actually discuss the candidates in respect to the real issues...health care, Iraq, education...rather than putting so much emphasis on Clinton's little crying episode or whether Obama is playing the race card...perhaps the American people would actually make an informed decision this time around. After all, we're choosing the leader of one of the most powerful nations on Earth here, not a prom queen.

Shane Johnson, San Diego, California

Ms. Miles is woefully uninformed on American politics, and obviously tainted by a bias toward our Democratic establishment, and a desire to return Bill Clinton to the White House, albeit through his wife as a surrogate candidate. Obama represents a chance for meaningful change in this country, a chance to heal the divide caused by the Clinton/Bush liberal/conservative war. It was the Clintons, upon surprisingly finding themselves slipping from the lead, attempted to portray Ms. Clinton as a victim of the gender card. She refers to "breaking the biggest glass ceiling" as a woman, yet barely acknowledges the monumentality of an African-American president. The Clintons then subtly attempted to disenfranchise Obama from his natural African-American base, by stirring up this debate, and then after it had effect, tried to play peacemaker. Obama was, in fact, the first to tone down the rhetoric, and try to move beyond this. Ms. Miles should investigate her sources more thoroughly.

Kevin Ruskin, Chesterfield, VA

the author seems to have the facts completely backwards. Clinton with the help of the media seemed to have turned this into a race issue. Barack Obama was silent on the race issue because he knows that race is political quicksand for him. The Clintons have injected both race and gender into the campaign. It was Clinton who used her gender as a selling point during a TV debate to indicate that her gender alone reperesented "change." I think that the Clintons wanted to turn this election towards a conversation about race because it works to the disadvantage of Obama. If they force Obama into a corner where he has to make any statements about race he then becomes the "black candidate" for president rather than the candidate who will reperesent all of the American people. The Clintons have the luxury of talking very frankly about race and racism (to their credit) but that same luxury in American society is not availabe to Obama because he runs the risk of making whites uncomfortable

CW, Washington, DC

I agree that this is detestable, but I hope all readers see the ploy here...this editorial is calculated to get a massive response from its readers and as you all see its working. Racing baiting or selling fear will not and should not work during this election. I think I will support Obama and I will support a republican if he is not the nominee. If Hillary were to divorce Bill and remarry then I may consider voting for her. But, I don’t like the “Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton…” It is time to pass the Leadership of our country to another. God Bless America.

Lex, Jacksonville,, FL

After watching the antics of the past few days from both campiagns I have come to realize that the mud slinging about race did not originate from either campaign, it was created by the media, each of the campaigns merely responded to what was being reported by the media.

Bill Clinton never refered to Obama's race or even his experience when utilizing the term, "fairy tale". He did not call Obama's campiagn for the presidency a fairy tale, The former President was refering to Obama's anti-war speech. Claiming that there was no difference between Hillary's stance on the war in Iraq and Obama's. Additionaly Hillary did not say (as mentioned in this article and numerous media outlets that MLK's dream was realised when LBJ signed the civil rights act. The quote from Hillary was actually, "Dr. Kings dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964". You see the media has created a big difference in this 1 comment.

Nafsllib, Dallas, TXz

Not sure if Alice Miles is unable to see things objectively or is not sufficiently immersed in US culture and politics to see things clearly. Her view is completely backwards. The Clinton campaign has been engaged in dirty tricks and Obama has kept the high ground throughout. When Hillary went on NBC to say "...Dr. King...made great speeches and...speches were important...But if all there is (is) speech, then it doesn't change anything", she knew those words would be incendiary in the African-American community. Then when those voices arose to criticize her, she could posture that Obama was injecting race into the campaign and count on co-opted or uninformed media elements like Alice Miles to perpetuate the mischaracterization.

Michae, Iowa City, Iowa

yeah ok brit get it right. Clinton is running the most manipulative campaign ever. She tears up on Q to trick a group of naive women into voting for her. She drags out a plant to parade in front of the media with "iron my shirt" sorry but if you know anything about college educated young America in the year 2008, you would know that was a political ploy so she could fire back her "glass ceiling" comment. She is making a huge deal about being a woman and the media is the one that is injecting this race element. I think it is because the media and corperate america wants clinton in office. They are quick to make obama the "black" candidate now that he has been shown to be a uniting force in american politics. I think that this whole race is a disgusting insult to the intelligence of the American people. Unfortunately, even stupid people get a vote, and as we have seen in New Hampshire, they can turn elections in favor of Bill's wife. Also, Barak called for the truce on race....

shawn gerrits, Chicago, USA/IL

"The Clintons have ALWAYS run dirty, lying, nasty campaigns and then turned around and played the victim card. "
When was the last time, anyone can remember a completely clean, nice ,and happy election. Our very own media fans the flames of discontent that keeps the real issues sidelined.
Left or Right, Republican or Democrat, Black or Female, the
fact remains that we need a president who can address the problems of our times.
Do we elect the person who can fix these problems or do we follow party lines or do we just pick the person who offends us the least?
Obama said this! Clinton said that! The list goes on and on. We, as Americans, should be able to cross race, sex, and party lines and find the best choice for our country.
We need a strong leader. We need a voice that speaks with wisdom.
I marched with Dr. King in 1965. I am sure that he would not want us to get caught up in the political game, but in one voice, demand a president that could help build a better world.

leif erickson, Mcminnville, Oregon

Ms. Miles,

Lay your down your own identity for a second. When you start to see race as inherent in every discussion or Dr. King or Mr. Obama, you start to realize the white privilege in which the Clintons are ensconsed, no matter how much they support or "do things" for African Americans. Hillary's comment speaks to the idea that only an older, more influential white president can help a younger, black person get civil rights. It's as simple as that. She is too deep in her own privilege to realize that's what she's saying perhaps.

The irony is, by speaking to the subtle racism inherent in every institution, her example also implies that all minorities (less powerful) need majorities (more powerful) to help them achieve, and those minorities include women. Not only does she call Barack's ability to make change (aka win) into question she also doubts her own.

Brian, Somerville, US

British analysis of American politics can be...interesting to say the least, but in this case it appears a bit of distance has revealed the forest and the trees. It is indeed a dangerous game for Obama to let his surrogates suggest, as Ms. Miles has accurately stated, that any attack, perceived or otherwise, against Obama is an attack against black people. The real danger here lies in a potential fragmentation of the Democratic party: the Republican establishment in America has shown it's ability and willingness to use any dirty, underhanded tactic to win (including outright theft) to win elections. The only surefire way to win is to win by a large enough margin that trickery and sleight-of-hand on the part of the right is not an option for them. If Ms. Clinton does end up being the nominee, and the Obama camp has by then alienated the crucial African American voting bloc by repeatedly playing the race card, the 'five old white men' and their establishment just might have a shot.

Al Rogan, Portland, OR, USA

The whole Democratic party is full of self-serving people. You are too beholden to so many interests that they are often at odds with each other.

The true disaster to the United States would be to elect either of these two, with the third being a trial attorney.

There are "real" candidates in the Democratic party, but if they speak up, they are thrown out...and still win - i.e. Lieberman.

Good day to you all.

Jeff, Greensboro,

By the way, the idea that the Clintons would do more for black folks than a black man who was a community organizer in a working class black community, goes to a black church, and is a civil rights lawyer is preposterous!

If you read both of their books you see of this. In Living History, Mrs. Clinton discusses going to the south side of Chicago in high school to campaign for Richard Nixon against John Kennedy. When her dad found out she went to that "neighborhood" he was incensed. In retrospect, she calls the decision "stupid." This was before Clinton campaigned for Barry Goldwater. Her lines this week about seeing MLK as heroic when she was a little girl and admiring JFK are just untruthful.

In Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama details how he worked on the south side with people who'd lost their jobs to help them get back on their feet. Michelle Obama is from the south side! Barack's first political involvement was working on South African divestment!! The choice is clear.

Brian, Somerville, US

Hillary Clinton showed she was not leadership material when she cried and told eveyone she was just so upset that someone besides her might get the presidency and ruin the country.

Anyone who thinks they are the only one who can lead, should not be nominated.

I am so tired of seeing articles by females that try to give all these other reasons why Obama is so bad, when they really just want Hillary. As a professional female (Ph.D. Yale, 1996, and unlike Hillary I graduated at the top of my Yale class) I think its a disservice to females to elect Hillary. She's not good enough, she's going to fail, and its going to be very hard to elect another female.

Hillary was NOT the top of her class. She married the guy who was. She does NOT have any experience, she didn't even have security clearance when she was first lady. She is running on her husbands name. Not at all very feminist. Why can't women see this?

Obama '08. The country needs a leader. Not another 'C' student from Yale.

Karen, Pasadena, California

Well done, Alice Miles. Others need to investigate the facts concerning this issue and wake up! The press, especially MSNBC, are accusing Senator Clinton of just about anything they can conjure up. I was appalled by the remarks of Chris Matthews. He insinuated that Senator Clinton is where she is today because, "people feel sorry for her.” Come on Matthews, give the American people a little more credit than that. We don't put people in office because we feel sorry for them. Americans need to take a good look at the facts concerning these issues. The Clinton’s have always stood for equal rights – civil rights activists. Obama’s supporters are sly in how they are playing this ‘race-card’ and by the responses to your column a lot of people are playing right into their hands. If you’re still torn between who to vote for this Presidential election take a hard look at Senator Clinton. She worked hard as a young female to get where she is today and continues to ‘earn’ her status.

Wendy, North Canton,

"five old white men" I think you mean experienced and committed politicians that reflect the well being of an entire nation and not just a select few! Shame on you Alice!

Alex, Fairview, NJ, USA

The age, race, or gender of the candidates are not what represent me. It is the the *timelessness* of the ideas that inspire me to support a candidate, and not the superficial wrapping they come in. This is why I, a 30-year old Hispanic woman, am supporting Ron Paul, a 72-year old white man, because his message of a government based on the Constitution, of sound fiscal and monetary policy, and of social freedom are the governing principles I believe in.

Politics has been so damaged by the public's and media's obsession with personality and charisma; when will we return to our senses and remember that it is not so much a person we're electing, but rather a style of government? Which, incidentally, is something that can certainly not be determined by race, color or gender.

Tiffany B., Austin, Texas

no alice, you are no entitled to voice your opinion-
the americans won't allow it

orla, limerick,

This article was very interesting. How else will we (Americans) know how the world views are political process. And, the world's view IS important.

The only comments/speeches I want to hear from presidential candidates (and their campaigns) is their design for the future of our country. All the energy used in negative ads and complaining could be used constructively. I'm tired of the racist, sexist, etc. comments and claims. Just once, could we be the UNITED States of America and work together to keep our country strong.

PLB, Hillsdale, Michigan

Give me a break, Hillary and what was that guy's name??, haven't exactly played it straight! They have dropped the ball as they were aiming at Obama's youthful alledged offenses and his skin tone. How in the world do you think race got into the race. I'm not a Dem but one is just to listen to the Dem debate last evening and you can rest assured, Obama is no man/woman's fool. He is bright, young, and from where I'm perched, going places. tomthumb-N.C.

tom Seamone, Taylorsville , N.C.

Ms Miles needs to understand exactly what is going on here. Blaming Obama for the criticisms of Clinton's speech is ludicrous and falls into exactly what the Clintons want. Obama is smart enough to know not to play the race card and was the first person to call the 'truce'.

He has nothing to gain and everything to lose as evident by the kind of criticism Ms Miles is willing to throw on him.

Omar Grant, Kingston, Jamaica

How can you blame Obama for Mrs. Clinton mistake of making stupid statements that was not called for. You must
ask yourself why did she make these remarks. She is experience as she say all the time. So she knew what result that they would bring. Obama has stayed above the fray and
has not been using dirty tricks as you say. You need to pay closer attention to what is really going on and not what the media says. Ms. Miles your prejudice is showing or Clinton.

Gloria Lee, Shreveport, LA/USA

I liked the article very much as I think it sheds much needed light on the campaign and the unfair approach Mr. Obama has chosen. I hope Ms. Clinton gets the nomination and becomes the President as I am confident she will rule with fairness, good heart and brains - and the support of her husband!

Magda , Montevideo, Uruguay

Unless you are in a person's shoes, you shouldn't make comments on the fit !! The race card as you have said isn't being played by the Obama camp, but by the Clintons. The mud slinging has been started by Bill...and for that matter, the process of Dr. King's sacrifice during equality for all was be-little by the mere suggestion that it took LBJ's handwriting on a piece of paper to project Africian-Americans into substaining equal rights that was supposed to be law dictated by the United States consitution. So unless you somehow can change your skin color and become an Africian-American, and understand, then stick with the shoes you're wearing, because if it doesn't, don't wear it!!!

Alan Smith, Hampton,

Are you kidding me? This race problem is trying to be forgotten for the best of the democratic party. If anything this article is trying to bring this problem back into the light. Shame on you Ms. Miles for trying to divide democrats. Obama and Clinton both accepted responsibility for their campaigns. Maybe you should choose your words more carefully.

Juan, High Point, NC

I think most of the United States is in denial. I'm sure if you took a survey, most of the Obama-bashing comments including the article, would be made by people who are not African-Americans. It would be a complete fabrication to think that white America is ready for an African-American President. So please, don't continue to feign suprise over the race issue. Also, Obama never called Clinton a "racist".

Brenda Hampton, Tyler,

this is a very valid article, and even though obama cannot be blammed for the media hype surrounding clintons comments, he could at least come out, be brave and tell everyone that there is nothing rasist about clintons coments, as could clinton if it were of similar circumstances. i feel that obama is riding on the wave of the rasim claims overhyped by the media, and therefore it is not a direct issue concerning obama.

at this rate if the dirt keeps coming out about these two neither of them will get into office, which would be a disaster for everyone.

john sprunt, barcelona,

Cllinton and Obama center Left? Ms Miles has to be kidding!Both are way Left and there is little if anything centrist about either of them. Anything that might hint of centrist is for the moment and in hopes of fooling most of the people for the moment--until they get elected if that is how it t urns out.

M.G. Stevenson, Oshkosh, WI U.S.A.

You're out of your mind for suggesting a leftist politician could play a more sinister game than a Clinton! After all, this is the same super couple who gifted us the immortal "...it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." With the Clintons it's the same old game of obfuscations, spins, and propaganda. Obama is just not letting them get away with it and that's why the Democratic establishment is so piping mad at him. This campaign is not about race but feminism, and the old feminist gaurd is up in arms over how Obama's not letting Hillary take a cake walk to the White House.

Zaheer, Omaha, NE, USA

What delicious irony it is to see the party of "diversity" caught up in such unseemly behavior.

Steven, Montreal, Canada

Who said what "DOES MATTER" because the truth matters. When the Obama campaign stands before the cameras and declares that their candidate can bring a change to the tone in Washington and bring the country together, all while dividing the Democrat party along racial lines, then the TRUTH about who said what does matter.

The truth is this is not the first time that Obama or his supporters have played the race card. Remember, the manufactured outrage that Obama's campaign expressed when Joe Bidden COMPLIMENTED Obama as been fresh, clean, and articulate? It was the Obama camp which turned those complimentary words into a supposed racial attack.

The writer is absolutely dead on in this matter. Obama with the help of the media has turned clearly non-racial attacks on his character and his record into racial issues. Drug use is not racial, false claims of non-support for the Iraq war are not racial. Obama succeeded in scaring his opponents away from his drug past... TRUTH

Rod, Houston, Texas

Are you kidding, Alice? Obama is not playing dirty. That would be the Clintons, over and over again. We here in America can see right through the Clintons. We won't be fooled again!

Susan, katonah, NY/USA

This is an awful comment, determined to tar Obama. He never said Hillary's comments were racist. They certainly weren't. But they were overreaching and demeaning to King's legacy.

Aaron Jette, Arlington, Ma

I am sure that the "Clintons" are very well aware of what is at stake here, as well how any comments will be construed. They are now desperate, and desperate people do desperate things. They have said what they wanted to say without saying it. This is why the U.S. cannot elect a president that represents our diverse population, which includes a minority. Isn't anyone tired of seeing old white men sitting behind the desk in the oval office? I know I am, especially the one we have sitting there now. Obama and Clinton better realize that their actions jeopardize the success of the democratic party and what it stands for, instead of bickering over nonsense like school children. Race is not an issue here, and I hope that it does not become one, for all of our sakes. If it were up to me, I would let Bill Clinton be president again. But his wife? No thank you.

Kelly, SPRINGFIELD, IL

Bill O. Rights, New England. If ours is a small world, what can you tell us about the democratic process in the UK, Iraq, Afghanistan, or anywhere else outside the USA. You may have a big country, but our small world encompasses most of the world, whereas your big world encompasses just one country.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

"The bottom line is that the UK is not as advanced as the U.S. in cultural integration. Most of the press there is very skeptical towards a black U.S. president. Wise up. " (John, New York)

John, can you make that statement any more ambiguous?

SB, Truro, Cornwall

Ha, that's hilarious. Thank you John from New York for your insight into global politics. We'll sit here in our cultural integration back-water and wait to be shown the way by American policies...

Neil, Swindon,

your article is one sided and disappointing.
why call Obama, a black man, when he has mixed blood, why not call him a white man, -people like you , who are supposed to know better because you write articles, should think better, here is someone who has a white mother, and a black father, yet you refer to him as a black man, why not a white man, or are you saying the mother (woman) is inferior? or is it to say, white is superior ,hence he can not be white.
think straight.

kunle bewaji, dublin, ireland

Mrs. Clinton's stifled attempt at giving all Americans an equanimous national health service and Mr. Clinton's hunch that the US had the potential to become the world's laboratory testify to their vision of a country where race is not an issue.

Roberto, Roma, Italy

John of New York, If you are so patriotic and don't like people of other countries to have an opinion on your countries politics, and indeed think that we are not as advanced as you then why don't you read one of your countries papers. Probably because American journalism is rubbish.

Laura, Derby, England

I totally agree with John from New York. As a Canadian living in London, I realise that North America is far more advanced in terms of cultural integration and tolerance than Europe. And Yes, Mrs Miles' "analysis" is completely one-sided and unfair!

Tony, London, UK

To the oh-so-amusingly named "Bill O. Rights" (perhaps Americans do understand irony...) - bit touchy, aren't you? And what on Earth makes you think that nobody outside of your own self-obsessed natin has the right to comment on your political processes? Wise up man, we can say what we like about your country. If you disagree, then use a counter-argument. Just don't act all petulant.

Matt, Brighton, UK

My comment also goes directly to Bill O Rights, stop reading a british paper if you think we are so insignificant. Read your own damn papers and spew your stupid comments on that instead.

Laura, Derby, England

Hillary Clinton made the derogatory comment about Martin Luther King, Jr. saying all of his speeches didn't do anything for civil rights and that Lyndon B. Johnson (who sent tens of thousands of black folk to their deaths in Vietnam) was the real civil rights hero.

Missy, Berlin via Missouri, Germany

Melissa. Hillary Clinton was born in October 1947 so in 1964 she was barely 17 at the time of the election. Hardly an age when a person's political convictions should still be held against them 43 years on.

M.E. Fairman, Basingstoke,

Regardless of who said what, this whole scene is pure Clintonesque political fighting. The Obama camp should be very careful. The Clinton's want the Whithouse again, and they will fight every inch of the way. They are very shrewd and tough.The Clinton's are not going to go away, though I wish they would. I wll cast my vote for Ron Paul - he respects the Constitution and strictly interprets it. It's the best way to go for all of us.

Don, Silver Spring, MD.

I think you're a supporter of the Clintons - clearly shows keep on campaigning but truth is Clinton has more to gain with the race card than Obama - do your research.

Peter King, Dallas, US

If everyone in the world was more secure about themselves it wouldn't really matter what anybody or anyone said about them as they would know in themselves that what was being said about them wasn't true....think about it people!
All this mudslinging and accusations....pathetic and ridiculous, it just shows what an insecure little lot we all are.

Look at your beliefs about everything and ask where they came from and are they true....it's an interesting project believe me, instead of attacking everything else around you in your fear.

Then maybe we can stop all this crap and actually start having respect for each other and our 'differences'

mark, barcelona,

To all those who have commented that this article is skewed - of course it is, its a column, it doesn't have to be balanced! Not everything on a news website is actual news.

And to all those Americans who have told Ms Miles that she knows nothing about American politics, "politics" is the art or science of governing. Whether it be a town, State or country, politics is what happens once you are in power, not what happens while you are trying to attain it.

Campaigning, in any sense of the word, is not politics. So I ask, who is ignorant?

And if you don't like a writer from across the pond commenting on the Democratic campaigns and you think the Brits should keep their opinions to themselves, why are you reading a British news website? You've got plenty of "news" websites of your own.

Its brilliant the way some of you guys post comments in an attempt to laud your supposed superiority over the writers and end up shooting yourselves in the foot, gives me plenty to laugh at.

Gareth Morgan, Guernsey, C.I., UK

"the UK is not as advanced as the US in cultural integration". Don´t make me laugh!

Mike Burkinshaw , Vilagarcia de Arousa, Galicia/Spain

Funny how a few commentators admonish Alice for her lack of knowledge about US politics yet seem to understand little of the subtleties of British affairs.

daniel, madrid, spain

I am incensed by this ridiculous article, which spectacularly overlooks the dirty tricks of the Clinton camp in October 2007 (well before this writer's journalistic clock for the US elections began ticking).

The Clinton camp has repeatedly smeared Obama as a "muslim" trained in "madrassas", distorted his words about the type of foreign policy action he would take in Pakistan, and often taken the high ground despite their deluge of condescension about his apparent lack of experience.

This writer is not a US studies scholar, and would do well to consult a proper expert about the matters at hand.

Barack Obama has easily run the most positive, unifying campaign of the primaries to date, and it began in February last year.

Kaleem Ashraf, University of Sheffield, Dept of Lit, Lang & Linguistics

Well, Mrs. Miles I sure am glad that you don't get to vote in the elections of my country. I, on the other hand, do. Your analisys is completely one sided. There is no 'race' card being played. It is very clear that the comment from Hillary made it seem like the actions of Pres. Johnson were far more valuable than those from MLK. I don't know if that was rasist,, but certainly dumb. If anybody has 'detestable dirty tricks' it's the Clintons. Analyse their political history. The bottom line is that the UK is not as advanced as the U.S. in cultural integration. Most of the press there is very skeptical towards a black U.S. president. Wise up.

John, New York,

Has anyone noticed that it seems to be the norm to attribute ANY criticism of a coloured person as racist.

You may say whatever you please about a white politician or public figure, but don't even think about it if the person is non-white.

About time they all accepted that we bent over backwards in many areas and it they who play the race card as often as they can.

Aren't we all getting a little tired of it ?

Keith Southall, Oxford, England

In 1776, we had a revolution overthrowing colonial rule. Since then, UK has been timid enough to stay out of our affairs. Nobody cares for your pompous perspective. Follow your own, small, small world.

Bill O. Rights, New England, ME

Ms Miles decries playing the racial card from the bottom of the deck. Yet she betrays a staggering bigotry whilst doing so.

She writes of 'Five old white men' and Do they [Republican Party] really have no one to represent women, or young people, or ethnic minorities'. Is this not sexism, ageism and racism all rolled up in a big ugly ball of bigotry? Politics should be about ideas, not racial, sexual or generational identities. Who is to say that one of the 'old white men' might not represent the best ideas for women, young people or an ethnic minority? Let's drop the diversity jihad unless it is one for a diversity of ideas.

Keith, Indianapolis In

Keith Dosch, Indianapolis, USA

The article hits the nail on the head. It highlights another concern about Obama - those of us who think he is a nightmare disguised as a dream are further vindicated.

Dominic Stockford, Teddington, UK

The writer is ignorant or ill-informed. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd say the writer is a Clinton surrogate.

She clearly has not watched events unfold. When Hillary Clinton tried to attack Barack Obama's message of hope by alluding that dreamers never accomplish anything, and in the same breath comparing LBJ (who, by the way, Hillary Rodham did not campaign for. If you check your facts, in '64 she was campaigning for Goldwater, the only Republican to vote against the Civil Rights Act) to MLK, it was her own supporters who questioned her choice of words. Her remark was so knee-jerk and so downright WRONG (I was in Mississippi in '64 and can tell you a few things about who did what and what went down - where were you?), it turned off even many of her core supporters - middle aged white women like me. So what does she do? Accused Obama of starting it, then unleashed her hit squad of character assassins. Obama extended the olive branch an hour before Clinton accepted it.

Melissa Roy, Los Angeles, CA

There was an interesting article in the WSJ about a year ago. Political "scientists" i n the US now claim to have experimental proof, that contrary to normal human experience, negative campaigning not only works but is in fact the most effective means for any politician to mobilise support. You can't expect that campaign managers will either ignore or even question such an oracle.

This is only the beginning....

Ian Kemmish, Biggleswade, UK

Whatever the validity of Alice Mile's analysis; it is interesting to note the hostility of American commenters here to its non-American origin. How dare a foreigner hold an opinion - keep your nose out of our politics. A policy conspicuously ignored by the US when it comes to its own international dealings.

Alan Tayler, Wivelsfield, Little England

Finally, a sane article from the media. Clearly the Clinton camp had no intention of being racist. That Obama uses race as a shield any time a legitimate criticism is leveled against him speaks volumes. Let's not forget, the Obama camp actually released memos with talking points outlining ways to make the Clintons seem racist. It really is disgusting, and I can only hope that this backfires.

Dan, Milwaukee, WI

I think both candidates offer a brighter future for a better AMerica and they both got sidetracked by the mud slinging but maybe now they can stick to their platforms and ideas about how we all can move this country in a better position. Obama/Clinton for President.

tjarrett, memphis, tn

Hi Alice, from what I can tell from here in Australia Obama has not brought race into the debate at all.
Also whats wrong with old white men, what kind sexist remark is that in this day and age its not the 60s anymore, also their is nothing strange about Christianity
But I agree with one of the other comments above what else can you expect from the hypocrites of the godless false moralists of the centre left.
Gee I really hope the moral dregs that are the Clintons lose.

Peter Hodkinson, Adelaide, South Australia

Good grief....what election are you watching? This all started when Clinton tried to undercut Obama's message of hope by saying 'you're a talker, not a doer'.....he mentioned MLK in response....then she had to undercut MLK too. Obama never commented on it -- it was some of Clinton's own supporters who started the rumble. Get real. Please.

Michael Sellers, Burbank, CA

Sorry to have to state the obvious, but the point of an election is to choose somebody qualified, not to choose somebody who because of their race or sex will ' transform' anyone's view of the US. That's last on my list, to be perfectly frank.

Yes, yes, I know, my view is the problem! How silly of me to overlook that.

What this column missed is that the Democratic campaign is the ultimate episode of the Seinfeld Show: a debate about nothing, unless you count talking about how other people (not you, of course!) are talking about race and pretending not to.

Diane, New York ,

Ms. Miles, your analysis of the events happening here could not be more skewed. Ms. Clinton's comments minimzed the impact of Dr. King's accomplishments during the Civil Rights Era. The issue of Sen. Obama's drug use was not seen as a racist remark, but rather as a cheapshot by a surrugate of Clinton, whom might I add is married to a man who also did drugs. The point of the exchange is that past drug use is a distraction from the issues that face us today.
I don't quite understand your disappointment with Sen. Obama, we are quite excited about him over here. He has not made his campaign about race or gender, that has been done by Sen. Clinton. He represents hope, good judgement, and good character, and I pity that you can't see that. Hillary Clinton is the extension of a dynasty, something we do not do here in America fortunately. I take great comfort in the fact that you will not be voting in our elections!

DC, New York, NY

You couldn't be further from the real story. Obama's camp had absolutely NOTHING to do with the race controversy. He has, from day one, steered very far from the issue. Hillary, her husband, and her surrogates all made these comments and Obama had nothing to do with what came out of their mouths. Their remarks were incredibly insensitive and the fact that she is trying to blame it on Obama's camp is laughable. The American public is not that stupid - but apparently some of the British journalists are. Perhaps you should refrain from commenting on American politics until you are capable of fully comprehending what is going on.

Justin, Houston, Texas, USA

Ms. Miles, since when does having a female leader equate to representing all women? It doesn't.. women can and have been vile when in power. Just based on Hillary Clinton's voting record she would be a lousy president, neither I or my daughter would ever vote for her. Obama is no better, he is a corporatist, every bit as much as Clinton.

I base my decision on who to vote for based on the issues, their standing on them and their record. Unlike Ms. Miles, I place importance on substance... not on swilling blind ideology. Ms Miles rants about "old white men", she should stop her hateful stereotyping. Perhaps it's the reason Britain is being turned into a fascistic state, because the radical left and the corporate elite have reduced everything to a fashion statement.

I'm voting for John Edwards, he walks the walk.

Marie, Boston, MA, US

Surprise! I had not realized the Clinton Machine had crossed over the Atlantic!! You must be one of the Drivers, Ms. Miles!

Cherrypicker, Boston,

Perhaps everyone has missed the fact that senator Obama have AVOIDED playing the race card. It is the Clintons who keep bringing it up with phrases like "he's no Dr. King" or Latinos wouldn't vote for a black president". I am amazed people aren't paying close attention to the Clintons constantly changing stance. Why yesterday they filed a lawsuit challenging a Las Vegas structure they put in place when they though Hillary would win. Obama is dammned if he fights back and dammned if he doesn't. As a young American I am tired of the Clintons. Mr. Obama has more elected experiance than Ms. Clinton. I believe strongly in His dream for America. Down with entitlement and up with hope.,

Clara, Virginia Beach, VA

How refreshing to have an outsiders objective view. Loyal Democrats have chosen up sides and now emotionally refuse to listen to what other candidates have to say. So sad, for when emotion rules, reason disappears.

What we are seeing here, and which Ms. Miles could not understand from across the sea, is the new face of the cut throat, deep seated, political hatred that has swept America since 2000. Partisanship is quite different today than in the past. Throughout American history, candidates, legislators and the people could express themselves and agree to disagree. They could then would get on with the job, socialize together, dine together, play golf together. Today there is a lingering hatred on the part of the lose camp that seriously undermines the American body politic.

And what of the vast middle ground? They are increasingly echoing the Bard's Mercuitio, "A plague on both your houses."

Bob Evans, Anaheim, California

Ms. Miles,

I agree wholeheartedly with your take on the Clinton-Obama race furor. Obama's camp's playing of the race card is unseemly and opportunistic, and, inasmuch as it suggests that the voting public cannot see the situation for what it really is, insulting to the American people.

But I take exception to your characterization of the Republican race, as I feel you are being almost as unfair to these candidates as Mr. Obama has been to Mrs. Clinton. You say that there are no minorities among the Republican contenders, but you fail to mention that Mitt Romney is a Mormon, running for the nomination of a party the base of which has at best a mixed attitude towards religious minorities, and an often hostile attitude towards Mormons.

And so what if the Republican candidates are older, white men? The candidates for both parties generally are. A less diverse (but still exciting, to Americans!) Republican field does not automatically consign the party to future irrelevance.

J. Fowler, Chicago, IL

Rather than attempting to analyze the presidential race in the U.S., why don't you anlyze the coming of sharia law to your country?
We can handle our own matters, thank you.

thomas sedwick, Erie, pennsylvania USA

Calling B. Hussein Obama Center-left is not in keeping with fact. He is far left! The people rushing to defend him in the comments have their own agenda and do not seek truth.

Ray, Gurnee, USA

I guess there is some kind of confused life form on another planet. Whats the name of that planet your from alice?

Rob, San Juan Capistrano, USA

Did you consider informing yourself of the facts before you wrote this article? Obviously not. The past few weeks have been filled with filth from the Clinton Camp. Setting aside that the republicans utilized the same tactics against her husband, Clinton did not simply raise the drug issue. She and her surrogates suggested that he sold them. They then passed emails suggesting he was secretly as muslim (by heritage). They have introduced tactics that are decried although expected of republicans. Quite frankly, this race has become shameful. Additionally, OBAMA called for the truce (know your facts ms!) OBAMA never commented on the situation! Hillary supporters were angered, and did commented. I suppose you could fault him for not volunteering to remove the foot from her/her husbands mouths! At any rate, please refrain from passing on such ill-informed nonsense, in the future.

andre, Gainesville,

Oh dear. Having become disillusioned with the hoary old British centre-left establishment of Blair and then Brown, Alice Miles is doing her little bit to prop up its equivalent on the other side of the Atlantic. Sorry Alice, I suspect Mrs Clinton will be as big a disappointment as Tony (though of course no one could be a huge a flop as Gordon).

J. Harding, Windsor, England

Prove it.
According to your article, Obama is doing these things, but you offer no proof.

Hillary mispoke, and she should have clarified her point and moved on.

In my opinion, the media has been fueling the fire more than anyone else. This is a juicy story , and they have been fanning the flames as much as possible.

preatorius, Seatt, WA

Alice Miles you must be flying your Hillary Clinton flag high and proud. Her comments about LBJ were a barely disguised comment that a black man cannot win the presidency - that MLK Jnr might have come up with the ideas, but it took a white man to implement them.

Then to add insult to injury you have Bill Clinton calling Obama's campaign 'the greatest fairytale ever'...and not in a good way.

These two will stop at nothing to reach the White House.

I predict a GOP victory in November - whoever stands. America will not stand another 4 years of the hideous Clintons.

Andy, New York, NY

Shame on you, Alice; you haven't got a clue.

LMD, Florida, USA

Alice you need to stick to British politics because it's evident that you have no clue about what going on in America.

Ian , Bloomfield, NJ

A well thought of and well written piece. This is the most sensible view into a charmingly sly racial provocations from the Obama campaign I've read so far. Any negative reaction to this article (its author or substance) can be outrightly dismissed as stemming from irrational hate or envy and should be taken with a grain of salt - a child's play.

MaryG, Spartanburgh, SA

Perhaps you should live in America before you go around speaking about our politics and history as if you really know what you're talking about. The Clintons have ALWAYS run dirty, lying, nasty campaigns and then turned around and played the victim card. To blame Hillary's comments on Obama is disgusting and shows your obvious lack of knowledge about American politics.

Layla, Dallas,

Your title says it all! Blame it on Obama without knowing the facts... What a waste of bandwidth and time!

Bass, los angeles, california

YOU MUST BE JOKING!!!!... Please I live in the States and have followed this whole thing. The Clintons remarks were insensitive and ill advised. I am a republican and the Clinton machine is all out to attack Obama on every angle. So far, he had been very nice and the only time he responds to two vicious attacks by both Hillary and Bill Clinton, he gets criticized. I am very offended that you have taken a very one sided view without looking at the whole picture. Very disappointed!! Please leave American politics to the Americans. You are clearly not well informed or educated to report on this election.

Maureen, San Diego, USA

Ok, you say that its pathetic that "race" has become an issue in this Democratic contest......but in the first paragraph of your article you say "stunning choice between, potentially, the first female and the first black president" so in your mind "race" as well as "gender" are very important attributes of a President. Typical leftwing hypocrisy.

Sedgwick Morrison, London,

The first comment came from Donna brazile on CNN and went like wild fire .

Dave, Colombus,

"Five old white men”? Hitllery is the same age or older than at least two of the Republican candidates. "Men just get older, women get old" as the saying goes Ms Miles

Frank M, Redlands, California, USA

You got to be kidding. Clinton have always used race baiting to win their campaigns. And all this junk they have been spewing, is an attempt to inflame white passion against Obama. Obama did not start this and was the first one to call a truce. If Obama wanted to start something he could of said women aren't capable of being president. The Clintons are slime. Get your American politics right or stay home

sonya, atlanta, ga

This coming from the campaign that claimed he didn't inhale. Oh please move on and explain why Hillary voted for the war. Humina humina humina.

Denise, High Point, USA/NC

The writer certainly has not been following the debate. It was Clinton's own supporters that question her remarks and not Obama. However, Clinton chose to blame obama for her supporter's uneasiness with her comments. So Obama is responsible either way accourding to the writer. If he says nothing, he is guilty. If he does, he is responsible for twisting Clinton's words. To be honest, as an African-American I didn't have any problems with Clinton's remarks. In fact, I thought she made a very valid point. What I was disappointed with was her suggestion that somehow because Rep. Clyborne (not an Obama supporter) and others expressed uneasiness with her remarks, it must have been Obama's fault.

The Clintons are known to blame others for their problems. We all remember the "vast right-wing conspiracy". I would have fully agreed with her had she just pointed out that her remarks were misconstrued by those raising unease with her remark rather than blame Obama who did not comment on it

James Meadow, Atlanta, USA