Football: Navy and Notre Dame

No, this isn’t Navy vs. Notre Dame; it is Massachusetts vs. Rhode Island (won by Rhode Island 12-6); it does convey the type of game football is though.

Notre Dame leads 21-14 at the half; Navy is moving well but not stopping Notre Dame.
Navy has three possessions, two touchdowns and a fumble. One of Notre Dame’s drives came up empty (didn’t convert a fake field goal); the yards are all even 170-172.

In other action, Ohio State rallied from being down 17-10 in the third quarter to win 38-17.

Kansas scorched Nebraska in a 76-39 track meet (48-21 at the half)

Currently Navy is driving and has it first and goal at the Notre Dame 4 yard line. 7:31 is left in the half, and neither team has punted all day. Now it is second and goal at the 1 yard line.

Touchdown Navy!!!! But the extra point hits the upright, so Notre Dame still leads 21-20, with 6:30 left in the third quarter. This might be huge.

(photos from Yahoo NCAA football gallery)

Update: Navy is up 28-21 due to a sack and a fumble return; there is 7:00 left and ND is going for it on 4′th and 14 at its own 32! Dang, the quarterback evaded the sack and made a pass for 16 yards. I thought we had them stopped.

Navy is not a good defensive team; more than likely ND will score on this drive; Navy really blew its best chance.

ND is now down to the Navy 24, we can’t stop their running. 5:30 to go, second and 4 at our 18. Make it first and 10 at the 12.

Well, how much time will there be? Will ND go for two?

It is now down to third down and 1 at the Navy 3 yard line. Touchdown ND, with 3:25. Does ND kick or go for 2? There is 3:25 left. They kick it; tie game with 3:25 to go.

Unless Navy fumbles, I see overtime. First and 10 at the Navy 35. It appears that Navy is content to keep running the ball. Big fumble in the backfield, but Navy recovers. A huge loss, but complete disaster has been avoided.

Now, Notre Dame has taken a timeout with 2:31 to go and Navy at 3′rd and 18, and Navy doesn’t pass the ball well. Navy makes a short, safe pass, ND calls time out and Navy has to punt for the first time. 2:23 is left. Oh my.

37 yard punt, 32 yard return (by someone who returned a punt for a TD against USC two years ago). 2:06; Navy will have to actually get a stop. ND, first down at the 26. Now, it is 3′rd and 8 with 52 seconds to go; ball at the 24. Running play, no gain; ND was trying to set up a last play field goal attempt; time out Navy with 45 seconds left.

Just a couple of minutes ago, I was thinking that Navy would win in regulation; now I am hoping for overtime. But no, ND is going for it? ND is trying a pass…sacked!!!!!!!!!

But Navy tried to pass the ball…incomplete and ND still has a time out. Navy runs the ball, 18 seconds to go and ND calls a time out; ND will either go for the punt block or perhaps another return? I was surprised that Navy attempted a pass.

Punt; a rugby type punt, and this time the team covers the punt. 7 seconds to go; baring a Hail Mary (Hail Mary at Notre Dame? ) this one is going into over time. Screen pass; good gain but out of bounds, OVERTIME.

Navy starts with the ball, and throws a pass to get it to the 10. Then a couple of good runs, and Navy bangs it in from the 1 with the fullback; touchdown with extra point and Navy leads 35-28.

Notre Dame: big run on first down for 9 yards. We could sure use a fumble. First down at the 10 and goal to goal; actually not; it is a foot outside the 10.

Short run on first down, just inside the 9. Touchdown, ND on a pass (all day to throw); will ND kick or go for 2? Review of the play; did he have possession of the ball? Yes; it appeared that way to me the first time but they had to get it right. 35-35.

By the way, Texas is getting pasted 35-14, but Oklahoma State has had big leads on Texas before, only to lose them. And Texas has come back a couple of times this year (TCU, Nebraska).

ND now has the ball; short game. Another run, third and two. Third down, quarterback sneak; is he short? Maybe! 4′th down, ND is going for it. They make it; hit at the line of scrimmage but kept his feet moving. First down, Notre Dame.

First play, 9 to go; Navy defended the shot run well. Second down, they have 3 more yards so third and 6. Incomplete pass! Will Notre Dame kick the field goal, or go for it on 4′th and 6? Or maybe they fake the field goal? Good; Notre Dame now leads 38-35.

Now Navy will get the ball. First down, nice run of about 6. Triple option, picks up 5 yards and first down Navy.

First down play, quarterback keeps it for 6. Ball at the 10 with second down and 4. Big loss on the triple option; it is back at the 16. What will Navy do? Perhaps that fullback pass?

Option pass; it fails but fortunately wasn’t intercepted. Now a semi-long field goal try for a tie.

Good!!!! Barely. Whew!

Third overtime, long pass, touchdown, Navy!!!!!!!!! Now Navy has to go for two, by rule. Good! Navy leads 46-38. The pressure is now on ND.

They need both a touchdown and a two pointer.

Short run for Notre Dame. Notre Dame, pass, with the quarterback under heavy pressure. First down for the Irish at the Mid’s 14. Run to the 10. Second and 6. I can’t take this.

A run to the right; gain of 3, third and three at the 7. ND picks up 2; 4′th down and 1. The ball is short by about a foot. Ball at the 4 ad a half; time out Navy.

Dang it; ND scores a touchdown on a run; he got hit at the scrimmage line but no one came up to help out. But ND needs a two pointer.

Pass incomplete, but the referees gave a pass interference call, but they are saying that he went over the back; in slow motion…who knows but ND is going to get that call at home.

Running play….stopped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NAVY WINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On another note, Texas did indeed come from behind to beat Oklahoma State 38-35:

Texas did it to Oklahoma State again.

Ryan Bailey kicked a 40-yard field goal as time expired to lift the Longhorns to a 38-35 victory Saturday and cap another wild comeback by Texas against the Cowboys.

For the second straight week, Jamaal Charles led a late charge for the 14th-ranked Longhorns. He scored two of his three touchdowns in the fourth quarter as Texas outscored Oklahoma State 24-0 in the final 15 minutes.

The Longhorns twice trailed by 21 points, including a 35-14 deficit entering the fourth quarter. It’s the fourth time in five years Texas (8-2, 4-2 Big 12 Conference) has staged a big rally to beat Oklahoma State (5-4, 3-2).

In 2003, Oklahoma State led 16-7 in the first quarter but Texas won 55-16. That was nothing compared to what was to come in this rivalry.

In Austin in 2004, Oklahoma State sprinted to a 35-7 first-half lead before Texas roared back for a 56-35 win. In 2005 — the season Texas won the national title — the Longhorns trailed 28-9 in the first half in Stillwater, but rallied to win 47-28 behind Vince Young.

This time Charles, who scored three fourth-quarter touchdowns in a comeback win over Nebraska last week, was the star.

He scored on a 17-yard run with 11:40 left and reeled off a 75-yard touchdown jaunt with 7:30 left, pulling the Longhorns within 35-28. Charles finished with 16 carries for 180 yards.

A 60-yard pass from Colt McCoy to Jordan Shipley led to a 1-yard touchdown run by Vondrell McGee that tied the game with 3:22 left. Oklahoma State kicker Jason Ricks sent a 34-yard field-goal attempt wide right with 1:13 left.

McCoy, who finished 20 of 27 passing for 282 yards, guided the Longhorns into position for Bailey’s game-winner.

The Cowboys dropped to 2-23 against the Longhorns.

Marathoning. Olympic Trials and Oprah

Prior to my 10 mile walk, I watched the Men’s Olympic Trials (U. S.) Marathon in New York. It was an exciting race, with the leader pulling away at mile 15 and going on to win in 2:09:02; and frankly he could have been under 2:09 had he not savored his win during the last mile.

I was going to provide my own comments, but the USATF site does a better job:

All the chatter about the resurgence of American distance running came to fruition in powerful fashion Saturday, with Ryan Hall leading Dathan Ritzenhein and Brian Sell onto the 2008 Olympic Team. Competing at the 2008 U.S. Olympic Team Trials – Men’s Marathon in Central Park, Hall tamed what had been thought of as a slow and very difficult course, breaking the Olympic Trials record with his winning time of 2:09:02. Ritzenhein was second in a personal-best time of 2:11:06, with Sell third in 2:11:40. [...]

A lead pack of Hall, Olympic silver medalist Meb Keflezighi, Ritzenhein, two-time Olympian Abdi Abdirahman and, for a short time, 2006 USA marathon champ Fasil Bizuneh then began to click off sub-5:00 miles. After the 7-mile mark, mile splits were 4:56, 4:54 and 4:45 as Hall, Meb, Abdi, Ritz and Dan Browne came through 10 miles as the leaders in 51:04. 2004 Olympic Trials champion Alan Culpepper led the chase back, but he was to drop out a few miles later.

After a 4:55 11th mile, American record holder Khalid Khannouchi left the chase pack to take off after the leaders, but he never was to close the gap. After a 12th mile in 4:59, Hall began to up the pace. At the 20km mark, passed in 1:03:02, Hall doffed the cap he had been wearing for warmth on this cool, overcast day, and he began his stunning display of what looked like an easy run in the park.

Hall tamed a Central Park course that has virtually no flat stretch and is a constant stream of bends and curves. His mile splits tell the story once he left the pack. Starting with the 13th mile, they were 4:44, 4:53, 4:53, 4:59, 4:56, 4:32, 4:41, 4:34, 4:40, 4:51, 4:42, 4:52, 4:47 and 4:49, before he crossed the finish line in 2:09:02. He ran the first half of the race in 1:06:17 and the second half in 1:02:45. [...]

The race for second also was fairly quickly resolved after the break. A 2004 Olympian at 10,000m with just one marathon under his belt, 24-year-old Dathan Ritzenhein ran with Hall when he started to move at 13 miles. At 25km, just past 15 miles, Browne briefly took the lead. By 17 miles it was Hall’s race as he strode effortlessly through the 5-loop course. Rizenhein separated himself from Browne and moved permanently into second, leaving Browne and Keflezighi in an apparent battle for the coveted third spot.

Therein lay the drama. Keflezighi began to drop back, leaving Browne, a 2004 Olympian in the marathon and 10,000m, apparently alone and in control of third. But 1:42:05 into the race, Browne suddenly pulled up with an apparent calf cramp and stopped very briefly to stretch his leg. A little more than a minute later, Sell starting making his climb into third.

Sell was 40 seconds back of Browne, then 17, and then 15 seconds back, all in short order. The 2007 USA 25 km champion, 29-year-old Sell passed Browne 1:51:45 into the race, with Khannouchi also moving closer to the front.

Ritzenhein crossed the finish line second in a personal-best time of 2:11:06, followed by Sell in 2:11:40. Having boldly taken the lead at the 2004 Olympic Trials only to fall out of contention, Sell has always been known for his tenacity and guts. On Saturday, he also became known for making the 2008 Olympic Team.

Deep field

Khannouchi finished fourth in 2:12:33, with Jason Lehmkuhle 5th in 2:12:54PR, Browne sixth in 2:13:23, Nathaniel Jenkins seventh in 2:14:56PR, and Keflezighi eighth in 2:15:09. Josh Rohatinsky was ninth in his marathon debut in 2:15:22, with Jason Hartmann 10th in 2:15:27PR. It was the deepest top 10 in the Olympic Trials since 1980 and also the most sub-2:20 performances (39) in the race since 1980.

Unfortunately, one of the runners collapsed at mile 5 and died.

It put a terrible twist on the victory by Ryan Hall, who exulted in the emotion of winning the race and capturing an Olympic berth. But he had no idea that the ambulance that had passed him on the course earlier was carrying his good friend and occasional training partner, a man whose wedding he had just helped celebrate in July.

Shay collapsed at the five-and-a-half-mile mark near the Central Park boathouse, relatively early in the 26.2-mile race, and he was pronounced dead at 8:46 a.m., stunning the sport on a cool, crisp morning that seemed perfect for a marathon. The death was announced by Mary Wittenberg, president of the New York Road Runners, which staged the race. The medical examiner’s office said an autopsy would be performed today to determine the cause of death.

28 years old, conditioning beyond my comprehension (NCAA 10,000 meter champion, USA marathon champion), and he dies. This life is just full of uncertainties, and every day that we live is a bonus. We don’t know if there will be another, no matter how much we’ve done “right”.

Speaking of marathons, here is an interesting take on them; this person has something close to my point of view.

With all these runners, and all this technology, you’d think America would be turning out faster and faster marathoners. Instead, the opposite is happening. The more we run marathons, the slower we get — an average of 45 minutes slower over the last 25 years. Ryan Hall is the swiftest American-born marathoner ever. His best race isn’t in the top 250 of all time.

Hall is running in this weekend’s other New York marathon: Saturday’s Olympic Trials in Central Park. Don’t expect to see him on the victory stand in Beijing, though. Since Shorter retired, only one American man has won a medal in the marathon: Meb Keflezighi, who grew up in Eritrea, where he didn’t see a car until he was 10 years old. You can look at this as a triumph of the melting pot, or you can look at it as soft Americans relying on an immigrant to do their arduous running.

It makes me ask: Has this country’s marathoning spirit been trampled by hordes of joggers whose only goal is to stagger across the finish line? When I joined my high-school cross-country team, in 1982, American distance running was at its zenith. For the past decade, three Americans — Shorter, Bill Rodgers and Alberto Salazar — had dominated the marathon. I idolized Rodgers, the long-haired runner who’d dedicated himself to the sport after quitting smoking and losing his conscientious objector’s job as an orderly in a mental hospital. One Patriots’ Day, Rodgers showed up at the Boston Marathon wearing a hand-lettered T-shirt and a sweatband — and set a course record.

To schoolboys who raced three miles, the marathon was a rigorous, forbidding distance — an extreme sport, like mountaineering. The only marathoner I knew was a friend of my father’s. His narrow cheeks were bearded, he owned five pairs of cross-country skis, and he was president of the local Sierra Club. Eventually, running consumed him. He left his family and moved to Jackson, Wyo., where he could live among others of his kind.

The American runners of that era were propelled by a “double wave” of self-abnegating philosophies, theorizes Tom Derderian, who trained with Rodgers and Salazar at the Greater Boston Track Club. They were “heirs both to the warrior mentality of their World War II fathers and the new consciousness of the 60s and 70s,” he told author John Brant for the book “Duel in the Sun,” an account of the 1982 Boston Marathon, considered the last great American distance race.

After high school, I was a decent recreational runner — I could break 20 minutes in the 5K — but somehow, I got it in my mind that I wouldn’t be a real runner until I did a marathon. Too lazy, too cocky or too ignorant to do heavy mileage in training, I finished the Chicago Marathon in an ignominious 4 hours and 16 minutes, alternating between cramping and nausea the last four miles. Embarrassed, [...]

Yeah. Back in 1983, I showed up for the East Lyme marathon unprepared, fat and out of shape. It took me 4:25 to finish, and the sag wagon driver kept asking me if I wanted a ride in. I was almost in dead last place, and I was very embarrassed when I finished.

[...] When Oprah expanded the sport, she also lowered the bar for excellence. For the previous generation of marathoners, the goal had been qualifying for Boston. Now, it was beating Oprah. Her time of four hours and 29 minutes — the Oprah Line — became the new benchmark for a respectable race. (That was P. Diddy’s goal when he ran New York.)

Once the supreme test for hardened runners, the marathon became a gateway into the sport. Soon, gravel paths were crowded with 5-mile-an-hour joggers out to check “26.2 miles” off their life lists. Team in Training, which raises money for leukemia research, promised to turn loafers into marathoners in 20 weeks. I met a lawyer who started running because, “They say if you can run a marathon, you can do anything!” The marathon was no longer a competition. It was a self-improvement exercise.

The guru of these new runners was an ex-music professor named John Bingham, who writes a Runner’s World column under the handle “the Penguin.” At age 43, Bingham took the admirable step of throwing away his cigarettes and signing up for a race. Unlike Bill Rodgers, he was not headed for athletic glory. He finished dead last. Bingham did not respond by training harder. Instead, he embraced his God-given lack of talent — and urged readers to do the same. Absolving runners of the pressure to actually run was a brilliant feel-good message. Thanks to his book, “No Need for Speed,” Bingham became the most celebrated marathoner in America. (If you don’t believe me, go to the marathon starting chute and ask the runners if they’ve ever heard of Ryan Hall. Then ask about the Penguin.) [...]

A few years ago, I had a chance to jog with Bingham, on Chicago’s lakefront path. As we puttered along, a young man bounded past, with a kudu stride. “I call those ‘nylon shorts guys,’” Bingham said, with a touch of disdain. “I could run in under four hours. But I don’t want to. The price would be so high it’s not worth it.”

I just didn’t get it. After my knee injury, I’d returned to the 5K. I pushed myself into the pain zone, puked after races, and fought my way back down to 20 minutes — a far more satisfying feat than a four-hour marathon. I was doing all I could do, with what I still had. Yet here was a man whose legs would carry him 26 miles, and he was content to stop for walking breaks.

Like Oprah, Bingham deserves praise for luring insecure, overweight novices off their couches and into running shoes. He’s also terrific for business. In the last 15 years, the Chicago Marathon field has increased tenfold, to 45,000. But with this change in the running culture, the average finishing time for men has dropped from 3:32 to 4:15 — not far from the Oprah Line, or my own performance. Last month’s Chicago Marathon had to be shut down mid-race, because undertrained five- and six-hour marathoners couldn’t handle that much time in the 85-degree heat.

You can’t just blame the Penguin Brigade for messing up the curve. The last year an American-born man won a major marathon? 1983.

So, to me, this means that marathons are more or less urban hikes (remember, I actually WALK them these-a-days) with the club runners racing toward the front of the path.

Put another way: at the Lake Geneva Marathon in 2001, 3:40 got me 35 out of 167. At Indianapolis in 2000, 3:38 got me 99 out of 415. In 1980, 3:33 got me 1000 out of 2000 at the Maryland Marathon.

But, if the goal of finishing a marathon (even as a slow walker or as a walk-jogger) gets someone off of the couch and lowers their risk for a heart attack or other bad things, great!

So, where is the problem? The term “marathoner” really doesn’t mean all that much, but one can find races with good competitive spirits at some of the smaller races (Lake Geneva, Quad Cities, Indy, Park City) and some of the lesser known ultras (e. g., Chicago 50K, Ice Age, etc.)

Walking and Talking

Workout notes Slept in; managed to walk 10 miles on the East Peoria Fondulac Trail; 1:04:56, 1:04:12 for 2:09:06. In other words, I walked 10 miles in the time it took the U. S. Olympic Trials winner to run 26.2. But still, it was a pretty day, and the first half of the walk was easy! It was cool, but I wore short sleeves anyway.

Talking Well, not really talking, but I do have some photos to share.

First, my daughter Olivia, on Halloween:

Now for some selected photos of the East Peoria Trail (Fondulac Trail)
I’ve walked and run many a mile here; this year I’ve done walks of 21, 20, 21, 31 and 41 miles on it.

All of my photos are here.

This is across the street from where I start. Behind the caboose, you can see a mini-spur that is almost 1 mile long and terminates by a CVS pharmacy. There are plans to link this trail to one that will take you to the Bob Michael Bridge; much of the new trail is done and they were working on it when I drove home today.

The start, what I call mile zero.

Approaching the footbridge nearly half of a mile into it.

You’ve gained some elevation, but now the hill is about to get steeper. About mile 1.75.

Near mile 2. Very pretty, but you gain 165 feet in elevation between here and mile 3.

This is looking the other way; in this direction you have less than 2 miles to go and are through with the steepest downhill.

Still heading uphill; 2.75 miles or so.

Whew, you are over the steepest part of the uphill. In the distance (very faint) you can see mile 4; you are close to mile 3 here.

The truck is at about mile 4; on the left you can see an old railroad signal light. There is a bathroom there, and during the summer there is a water source (turned off for winter).

The signal light, facing the other way.

Democratic Horse Race: current state

Some disclaimers:

• I support Barack Obama
• This post is more about the politics of the race than about who is best qualified to be President
• Where I am a political junkie, I am no political expert. What the heck, when it comes to running a campaign and to what works, I don’t know what the heck I am talking about! I do know that candidates that appeal to me often are not successful.

So from the peanut gallery:

I think that you can tell who did well in a debate and who didn’t by reading what the various campaigns sent out afterward. I do note that the Biden and Obama campaigns had videos up right away, whereas the Clinton campaign didn’t put out nearly as much.

Joe Biden First, I’ll deal with his performance. At the time, I thought that he had a strong debate; he was the only candidate that taught me something (when he answered the question: “would you guarantee that Iran wouldn’t obtain nuclear weapons on your watch”.

Sure enough, his press release was swift, immediate and to the point:

veryone is talking about Joe Biden’s smackdown of Rudy Giuliani in Wednesday

night’s debate. More than 25,000 people have already viewed the YouTube video of

the event!

If you haven’t seen it yet, take a minute right now to watch, and then forward this

email to people who want to see how Democrats can stand up to Republicans in this

election.

Click here to watch the video more than 25,000 people have already seen and make a

contribution to the campaign so we can continue to fight back.

The comment must have struck a sensitive nerve, because the Giuliani campaign

released an ugly attack on Joe Biden within moments of the debate ending. The

smackdown made the New York Times this morning:

Biden-Giuliani Smackdown Enlivens Campaign Trail
By MICHAEL COOPER

In addition to the headline-grabbing Edwards-Obama-Dodd tag-team match with

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic debate Tuesday night in

Philadelphia had a pretty lively undercard: Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. vs. Rudolph

W. Giuliani.

It began when Mr. Biden, a Delaware Democrat, proclaimed Mr. Giuliani, a New

York Republican, “genuinely not qualified to be president” and declared, to some of

the biggest laughs of the night, that “there’s only three things he mentions in a

sentence: a noun and a verb and 9/11.”

The Giuliani campaign immediately fired back, and hard.

We are well aware that Rudy Giuliani will attempt to drag this race into the mud

where the Republicans like to wage their campaigns. It’s pretty obvious that Mr.

Giuliani can’t defend himself on the real charge that he walked away from the cops

and firefighters who were waiting for the 9/11 Commission recommendations to be

enacted and the Biden crime bill to be restored.

We know he’s going to resort to gutter politics rather than defend his record, but we’re

not going to back down. It was the COPS program in the Biden crime bill that funded

the police officers that helped reduce crime in New York, and Mayor Giuliani did

nothing when the Bush administration slashed its funding.

Please forward this video to everyone you know, and make a contribution to the

Biden campaign today so we can keep setting the record straight and fighting back.

This video shows why Joe Biden is the candidate to take on the Republican candidate

in the general election next year. He doesn’t back down from fights — he has the

courage and strength to take them on.

Thank you,
Luis Navarro
Campaign Manager

http://www.joebiden.com/

From the debate: (posted earlier)

Lest I forget, here is a bit more on Bill Richardson:

Oh yes, let us not forget Dennis Kucinich.
(yes, I know that he was being very literal; by UFO he really meant a flying object that he couldn’t identify).

Now for the dust-up!

Hillary Clinton Though her campaign did put out an effective video at the very start (the very night of the debate):

(which was one of her better moments)

They very quickly went into the whining mode. Here is something from a campaign e-mail:

Dear ollie,

If you saw the debate Tuesday night, or if you’ve seen the news coverage since, then

you know that this campaign has entered a new phase.

On that stage in Philadelphia, we saw six against one. Candidates who had pledged

the politics of hope practiced the politics of pile on instead. Her opponents tried a

whole host of attacks on Hillary.

She is one strong woman. She came through it well. But Hillary’s going to need your

help.

Her opponents, trying to boost their falling poll numbers, started attacking Hillary

weeks ago on the stump. Now they’re doing it in the debates. And soon they’ll begin a

barrage of negative TV ads and mailings in the early primary and caucus states.

But Hillary knows that voters want real change — not more negative attacks. And

with just 60 days left before the Iowa caucuses, now is the time to show her that you

are right there with her.

Will you help Hillary with your contribution today?

Thank you for standing with Hillary at this critical moment in the campaign.

Video:

Now, in my opinion, this was a bad response. She got hammered on the Daily Kos for trying to use this tactic (which did play well with some feminists (scroll to the comments)

She caught some heat from her competitors for trying to use this tactic:

Democrat Barack Obama accused rival Hillary Clinton on Friday of hiding behind her gender after her campaign complained six male candidates engaged in “the politics of pile on” at a debate.

Obama, the only black candidate in the U.S. presidential race, told NBC’s “Today” show that Clinton is widely viewed as a tough figure in national politics.

“So it doesn’t make sense for her, after having run that way for eight months, the first time that people start challenging her point of view, that suddenly she backs off and says: ‘Don’t pick on me,”‘ he said.

“That is not, obviously, how we would expect her to operate if she were president,” he said.

Clinton, the front-runner to be her party’s candidate in the November 2008 election, had a rocky performance at a debate on Tuesday in Philadelphia and her rivals pounced on what they called evasive answers.

In response, the Clinton campaign had put together a Web video after the debate entitled “The Politics of Pile On” that showed her male rivals singling her out.

On Thursday, New York Sen. Clinton told students at her alma mater, Wellesley College, outside Boston, that, “In so many ways, this all-women’s college prepared me to compete in the all-boys club of presidential politics.”

John Edwards brought some heat as well:

Chapel Hill, North Carolina – Today, Edwards for President communications

director Chris Kofinis released the following statement on Senator Clinton’s

post-debate damage control efforts:

“All the distractions in the world won’t undo the fact that on Tuesday night millions

of Americans saw John Edwards speak honestly and directly, while Senator Clinton

once again took multiple positions on multiple issues. We understand that the

Clinton campaign isn’t happy about that, but instead of smoke and mirrors, how

about some truth-telling? Forty-eight hours after the debate, we have lots of excuses,

but we still don’t have a yes or no answer to a yes or no question.

“That’s not the ‘politics of piling on,’ it’s the politics of parsing.

“After seven years of George Bush, the American people deserve better — they deserve

the truth.”

Today, Clinton returned to her “well, they are taking shots at me because I am the leader” stance, which frankly suits her better.

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton said on Friday her male rivals attacked her at a debate this week not because she is a woman but because she is winning the race to be the party’s presidential candidate.

As bickering among the rival camps intensified, Clinton denied hiding behind her gender even as she was accused of doing just that by rival Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

Campaigning in New Hampshire, Clinton was asked if she thought other Democrats were taking aim at her at Tuesday night’s debate because she is a woman.

“No, I don’t think they are piling on because I am a woman,” she said. “They are piling on because I am winning.”

Clinton was in Concord registering to run in the state’s political primary, traditionally one of the first nominating contests. [...]

Now THAT is more like it; though I am backing Obama, I don’t want a weakened Hillary Clinton, in case she wins the nomination (as she may well).

Also, Bill Clinton chimed in on the records issue:

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton on Friday called accusations that he and his wife Sen. Hillary Clinton are delaying the release of records from his administration as “breathtakingly misleading.”

In the most recent Democratic presidential candidate debate, Sen. Clinton’s rivals criticized the front-runner for a 2002 letter written by her husband to the National Archives requesting certain documents from his administration be withheld.

The former president said the letter was, in fact, asking the archives to speed up the release of his records with a provision that he be allowed to review any documents being released to ensure they do not disclose certain sensitive or private information.

Those parameters, according to Clinton, included information about national security, passed-over candidates for presidential appointments, private correspondence between him and his family and other personal conversations.

“I signed a routine letter to the archives five years ago to accelerate the release of my records, which five years later in a different context is misrepresented as an attempt to block information on my wife,” Clinton told reporters after a speech to Microsoft Corp employees.

“The whole thing was a total canard,” he said. “It was breathtakingly misleading.”

Clinton said the archives already have released more than 1 million documents from his presidency including many from his wife’s failed attempts at health-care reform.

Obama and Edwards
Now, of course, Edwards is starting to challenge Obama as the best “not-Hillary” alternative.

John Edwards is trying to build on his strong debate performance by shoving aside

Barack Obama as the Democrats’ top alternative to Hillary Clinton.

“For the better part of 10 months or so, the press has pretty much showcased this race

as a Clinton-Obama campaign,” Joe Trippi, a top Edwards adviser, told the Daily

News. “The clear choice really is Clinton and Edwards.”

At Tuesday night’s debate, Edwards hammered Clinton more aggressively than any

of her other rivals, portraying her as an evasive, double-speaking, waffling,

status-quo Washington insider.

In a debate scorecard circulated to reporters, the Edwards campaign touted the former

North Carolina senator as the “true heavyweight” on challenging his rivals “to tell the

truth on the issues that matter.”

“The rest of the contenders? Well, let’s just say that even the best hype machines can’t

disguise a real featherweight,” it said in a clear shot at Obama.

Asked about Obama’s performance at Tuesday’s debate, Trippi said sarcastically, “I

thought he whaled on her, didn’t he?”

Top Obama officials declined yesterday to comment. Edwards’ “aggression comes

with the risk of alienating voters,” said Fordham University political scientist Costas

Panagopoulos. And Obama “can free-ride on someone else being the attack dog.”

So, what to expect from the Republicans? This is a sample:

On February 27, 2001, two members of the American Gold Star Mothers, an organization of women who’ve lost sons or daughters in combat, dropped by the temporary basement offices of the new junior senator from New York, Hillary Clinton. They didn’t have an appointment, and the office, which had been up and running for barely a month, was a bit discombobulated. The two women wanted to talk to the senator about a bill pending in the Senate that would provide annuities for the parents of those killed, but they were told that Clinton wasn’t in the office and that the relevant staff members were otherwise engaged. The organization later submitted a formal request in writing for a meeting, which Clinton granted, meeting and posing for pictures with four members of the group.

But the story doesn’t end there. In May of that year, the right-wing website NewsMax, a clearinghouse for innuendo and rumor, ran a short item with the headline “Hillary Snubs Gold Star Mothers.” Reporting via hearsay–a comment relayed to someone who then recounted it to the column’s author–the article claimed that Clinton and her staff “simply refused” to meet with the Gold Star Mothers, making hers the “only office” in the Senate that snubbed the group.

At first the item didn’t attract much attention, but it quickly morphed into an e-mail that started ricocheting across the Internet. “Bet this never hits the TV news!” began one version. “According to NewsMax.com there was only one politician in DC who refused to meet with these ladies. Can you guess which politician that might be?… None other than the Queen herself–the Hildebeast, Hillary Clinton.” [...]