I am not an expert on the internal politics of Iran, by any means. But even I — merely an interested news consumer — knew that Iran is a theocracy, and that its real rulers are not elected officials like Pres. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but rather the unelected mullahs, whose head guy is Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Based on this story from Joe Klein, either John McCain is lying to give political cover to his attacks on Barack Obama — or he is as ignorant about our adversaries as the current president:

KLEIN: I’ve done some research, and um –

MCCAIN: I have too.

KLEIN: Also checked, also checked with the Obama campaign and he never, he’s never sai — mentioned Ahmadinejad directly by name. He did say he would negotiate with the leaders, but as you know – Ayatollah,

MCCAIN: (Laughing) Ahmadinejad is, was the leader.

KLEIN: But if –

MCCAIN: Maybe I’m mistaken.

KLEIN: Maybe you are, because –

MCCAIN: Maybe. I don’t think so though.

KLEIN: The Supreme, you know, according to most diplomatic experts, the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is the guy who’s in charge of Iranian foreign policy and also in charge of the nuclear program, but you never mention him. Do you, you know, um, why do you always keep talking about Ahmadinejad since he doesn’t have power in that, in that realm?

MCCAIN: Oh I thin-Again, I respectfully disagree. When he’s the person that comes to the United Nations and declares his country’s policy is the extermination of the state of Israel, quote, in his words, wipe them off of the map, then I know that he is speaking for the Iranian government and articulating their policy and he was elected and is running for reelection as the leader of that country. Yes sir, go ahead.

NEW REPORTER: One more quest-

MCCAIN: I mean, the fact is he’s the acknowledged leader of that country and you may disagree, but that’s a uh, that’s your right to do so, but I think if you asked any average American who the leader of Iran is, I think they’d know. Go ahead. Or anyone who’s well-versed in the issue.

Earlier this year, McCain confused Sunnis and Shia five times — once even suggesting that the Shiite government of Iran was giving aid and comfort to al Qaeda, which is a Sunni terror group.

I’d drink too if I said some of the stuff you do, Hillary.

Hillary Clinton and her supporters have finally done it. They’ve really, really, really pissed me off.

Their newest excuse for why Clinton’s campaign — one of the poorest run in my memory, with the possible exception of Gary Hart’s — failed is because people like me, who now favor Obama, are sexists.

Clinton launched one lowbrow tactic after another, each a little smarmier. Remember after Bill took to the trail in full attack mode, and Obama said he wasn’t sure which Clinton he was running against? That was probably a highpoint for Hillary’s campaign.

First there was a string of Clinton surrogates claiming to play devil’s advocate for Republicans by bringing up Obama’s admitted drug use in college, and the fact that his Kenyan father was Muslim. After that we were subjected to Geraldine Ferraro saying the only reason Obama got where he was, is because he’s black. Next Clinton morphed herself into a gun nut and knocked back a beer and a bump while calling Obama elitist.

Then she jumped on the rightwing bandwagon that went from asking early in Obama’s campaign if he was black enough to, in the wake of the brouhaha manufactured over past sermons from Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whether he wasn’t way too black. “Hardworking Americans, white Americans” could never vote him, according to Clinton.

As a Floridian, one of the most ridiculous assertions by a candidate who supported 100 percent Howard Dean’s censure of our state during the primaries, is that now Clinton finds it imperative that our votes be counted. She questioned the party not at all last January when it might have mattered. Now she says she is battling for us. Actually, Clinton is just battling.

And today we are being told that none of Clinton’s own malfeasance or hypocrisy, or her policy that nothing is too low or ridiculous to claim if it gets even one vote is the problem. No, the sole trouble is: her critics are sexist.

Clinton told the Washington Post that sexism has played a larger role in the campaign than racism and that it has cost her and her supporters.

“It’s been deeply offensive to millions of women. I believe this campaign has been a groundbreaker in a lot of ways,” Clinton said. “But it certainly has been challenging given some of the attitudes in the press.”

Clinton, the first woman to make a serious bid for a major party’s presidential nomination, said she did not think that racism was a factor in her bruising battle with Sen. Barack Obama…

She added, “It does seem as though the press at least is not as bothered by the incredible vitriol that has been engendered by the comments by people who are nothing but misogynists.”

Vitriol is a subject of which Clinton evinces a working knowledge. But if she honestly thinks the reason that women like me went from having a fairly positive view of her early on to losing all respect for her now is because we are misogynists, then it’s time for some training in the mechanics of personal responsibility.