Now that I have read a number of reactions, and quotes, and have seen a few seconds of the debate in Bill Schneider's CNN report, it seems to me that Hillary is just giving herself political cover for not charging strongly on this issue.  That cutesy classicizing remark, about how she does not want us to be "fiddling while the world warms," is a bit feeble.  Do we really need her to resort to a "divide and conquer" tactic, by sounding wise and realistic when she warns us that the current proposed legislation will seem "too incremental" to please us, and that whatever legislation actually passes, everyone is going to find something wrong with it?

That does not sound at all to me like she is interested in leading a committed constituency on the related global warming and energy issues.  No wonder she shrewdly hides behind her popular in-law, Barbara Boxer.  (Boxer's daughter is married to Hillary's brother, no?)

By contrast, it is brilliant of John Edwards to find an entree into these issues through his older and plainly sincere interest in social justice, and his opposition to wealthy business interests.  IMHO, Edwards comes away looking like a much more trustworthy leader.

Chickens are our cousins! So are fish! So are other sentient animals! Let us learn to be kind.