At this juncture, before the first caucus or primary votes are cast, the pundits tell us that Hillary is almost a lock for the Democratic Presidential nomination. And all the generic polls tell us, furthermore, that the Democrats have an excellent chance to recapture the White House in 2008. Ergo, the probability that Hillary Rodham Clinton will be the 44th President of these United States appears to be rather high.

This thought has women all over Americavery excited. Many women, regardless of their political proclivities, are moved by the possibility of a female President and it seems likely that a not inconsiderable number of female voters, who would normally vote Republican, will pull the lever for Hillary and then lie to the exit poll takers and to their husbands.

At the same time, there are probably plenty of men, including some that lean left and normally back Democratic candidates, who are so incensed by the prospect of a female Commander-in-chief, that their vote is going to whichever male the Republicans nominate.

Are there more female or male voters whose vote will be altered purely by the sex of the Democratic nominee? Who knows? I suggest that, whatever happens, the ‘authoritative’ polling numbers on this question that the pollsters and pundits will throw at us afterward will be completely without substance.

In fact I believe our country would be far better served if we all discounted Hillary’s gender and cast our ballots based on her (and all the candidates’) political beliefs, announced intentions and record of accomplishment. Among those who can get past Hillary’s sex, I see two schools of thought:

*Like her husband did, Hillary has placed herself toward the center of the political spectrum and is likely to adopt—again like her husband is reputed to have done—a center-left political agenda.

*Hillary is a life-long socialist, radicalized in her youth, camouflaged as a centrist by her handlers, but once in power will pursue a leftist agenda worthy of FDR or LBJ, and perhaps more radical than either.

We will be exceedingly fortunate if in the ensuing campaign we are exposed to enough evidence for the voters to decide which of these descriptions of Hillary’s political inclinations is more accurate. I doubt that will happen. For if the second is the more accurate description of Hillary’s political philosophy, then she and her advisors—knowing that its revelation would guarantee electoral defeat—will construct the camouflage so effectively as to mask the truth. Whether it is true or not—that is, Hillary is really a flaming leftist—her election is completely contingent on enough voters deciding that it is not true. Well, either it is not true and Hillary will be comfortable in her campaign shoes; or it is true, in which case we will witness one of the most duplicitous political campaigns in the history of our nation. Perhaps we are already witnessing it.

There is ample precedent for a President to govern to the left of his campaign position. Richard Nixon comes to mind, as does George W Bush. Incidentally, would someone please give me an example of the reverse phenomenon? I’m not sure it exists.

Anyway, my advice to the voters of America—especially to those men and women who are motivated by the fact that Hillary wears a brassiere—is the following: Please set that fact aside. Instead, ponder this question. Are your prepared to entrust the presidency to conceivably one of the most radical leftists ever to seek the office? That possibility cannot be ruled out; indeed I think it is at least 50-50 that it is true. If Hillary is the radical leftist that many assert, and more suspect, then when she occupies the Oval Office, you can expect: a weak andmeager defense of Western Civilization before the onslaught of Islamofascism; gargantuan government highlighted by socialized medicine, nationalized education and punitive taxation; loss of US sovereignty to the UN, the International Court of Justice and other multilateral organizations; business bashing, labor coddling, high tariffs and an overregulated economy; toadying to environmentalists, race baiters and media buffoons; amnesty for illegal aliens; Supreme Court justices as radical as Bader-Ginsburg; gun control, partial birth abortion and abolishment of capital punishment; and the conversion of our free market system into a European style welfare state susceptible to the same suicidal forces that are ravaging the continent. Are you willing to take that chance?