Clinton has more baggage, but we haven't been through it all

In making her electability argument during last week's debate, Hillary Clinton asserted that she had lots of baggage, but everyone has already been through it.

Hillary Clinton thinks just because she endured years of Republican bashing in 1996 that she is vetted for 2008. She thinks because Barack Obama hasn't really gone after her, it means there is nothing negative there. Worse yet, she seems to believe that since she isn't now the recipient of the Republican-style assault she is waging, it must mean she is most electable.

It's a delusion even worse than her Bosnian tarmac experience.

Whether she realizes or acknowledges it, Barack Obama's unwillingness to go negative makes Clinton the beneficiary of his civility. She would not enjoy that benefit during the general election.

While she runs around Pennsylvania warning us of what the Republicans will do to Obama, we should also take into consideration what she would receive from Republicans.

First, she starts with a 50 percent disapproval rating. Literally half of the country doesn't like her. Now we learn that almost as many don't think she is honest and trustworthy. Half the country also doesn't trust her. It won't take much negative campaigning to raise those numbers by five points and effectively end her dream.

How could Republicans nudge her up five points? By raising issues Obama never would:

We could relive Travelgate, Vince Foster, Monica Llewinsky, the impeachment, and a host of other Clinton character issues we already know about. It will be old news repackaged, for sure, but it will have a cumulative effect for the part of the electorate already weary of Clinton scandals.

Then there are the records from her tenure as First Lady that don't seem to corroborate any of her claims of experience. Barack Obama didn't really poke at that 35 years of experience claim, but plan for it to get the full vetting from Republicans. There are the Clinton donors to his presidential library and the potential favors he might have granted in return. Speaking of favors, anyone remember the presidential pardons? Again, Barack didn't give those the full airing they deserved, but we can guarantee that the McCain agents won't be as restrained.

Then of course there is the Bosnia gaffe, which can be construed to pit her against the military while running against a war hero. All her time building up her military cred would be out the window with that obvious and blatant lie. (Yes, it was a lie. That's why half the country doesn't trust her.) Think national security will be an issue? Do you think John McCain would be able to contrast himself with someone who was caught in a lie on a military issue?

This is just a glancing look at the obvious stuff. This doesn't even begin to consider the results of any opposition research.

Any one of those issues in the hands of relentless Republican operatives could push Clinton's negatives up five percent or more. At that point, it's over for her and for Democrats.

We know for a fact that whoever the Democratic nominee might be, that person will take an onslaught of negative attacks. With Clinton starting at a 50 percent negative and distrustful ratings, she is a lot closer to eventual defeat. That doesn't strike me as being a more electable candidate.