All Barack needs to do is remain presidential and let Sybil I mean Hillary self-destruct as she is almost certain to do. I predict a world witnessed, smoke from the ears, head implosion, tailor made for must see TV consumption. Sadly the woman is ill, as in one day she's honored to be on the stage with him and the next he is unworthy to carry her water. C-R-A-Z-Y! Barack should deal with issues and not enter The Twilight Zone where she has the advantage. That's the bad part. The good part is if he stays ahead she might let him be her VP.

Sklar is not to be taken seriously.

Rachel Sklar.
Is another bais so call reporter. I saw her on television. I thought she was very fair in her comments. It seems I was wrong.

What a sleazy post. The so-called NAFTA-gate has already been refuted. In fact, it's turning out it's Hillary's team that have been "making private reassurances" to Canadian officials. The Clintons really can't go low enough, can they?

What a terrible article. Where was this article when hilary was whining about the media's coverage of her? Just an awful, awful article. Why does hilary get to pick and choose when to play victim? Wasnt hilary the one crying and whining about alleged media unfairness. I think she's on her 10th strategy anyway and eventually her fearmongering and gutter politics will be exemplified and we'll rid her as a candidate.

Whew! Delusion, thy name is Rachel (and Hillary and Bill and Wolfson and Penn and Williams...) What a biased and desperate piece this was. From now on, MSNBC should require that she formally declare that she is 'in the tank' for Clinton(s) whenever she is called up to present her take on the campaigns.

Sklar, you are so ridiculous I can't finish reading the tripe you wrote.

This post has the same pathetic tone of the Clintons' campaign for a third term in the White House. Just a couple of points as example: The "NAFTA scandal" is not Obama's scandal, but Hillary's because it was her team that winked at the Canadians. Second point, since when did Hillary "win" Texas? Obama is coming out of the Lone Star state with more delegates than Hillary did, according to the caucus tallies (which are where the true Democrats, as opposed to Limbaugh's Republican cross-over voters, stood up for Obama over Hillary).

Don't scold Obama for getting flustered, if that is in fact what happened, after one press conference. On his worst day he has more poise and self-control than Hillary has ever exhibited on her best day.

tax returns and library donor list please.

Rachel Sklar's new pro-Hillary strategy: blame Obama for even trying to defend himself.

Irony? Since Rachel wrote this, about a half dozen Clinton questions and scandals have arisen and gotten heavy circulation. I guess we know why Hillary chose this strategy as a last resort.

What an absurdly biased article. Hillary and Bill Clinton have literally shut down the media coverage
of Hillary and now Bills stump speeches are becoming off limits. The media is falling all over themselves to praise Hillary on her empty attacks and politics of personal destruction as tough, good strategy. something that she has to do. It is turning my stomach. This kitchen sink tactic will drive people away as the media knows it will. It has happened before. This election is too important to be handled like the Paris, OJ and Brittany coverage. Egging on the "fight" is not serving the public well. Ratings, yes.

Rachel's appearances on MSNBC have been embarrassing. She can't even look the hosts or the camera in the eye as she spews out the Clinton talking points. She can't even believe what she's saying.

Rachel is a Hillary shill. I have seen her to the political shows and she's all smiles and sweetness until she opens her mouth.

I already know you're a Clinton supporter, but if I didn't, do you know what would give it away? And this is usually the sign of good journalism - LOTS of exclamation points.

Rachel- are you and Tina Fey dating?

The "media" is a business--profit is the primary objective. Getting the most viewers, readers and internet hits translates into bottom-line dollars. I am not aware of any newspeople who do their jobs for free. The battle for media consumers to "pay attention" will always be with us.
With profit in mind I believe the media will always do whatever it can to fuel debate, contention, rumors and any remotely questionable behavior of politicians, celebrities and the growing number of infamous people to gain market share.
The Obama and Clinton campaigns understand and use the news cycle to their best advantage. So do celebrities. Why else do we continue to hear about Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton? Is it because of their talent or their press agents? I think we know the answer to that one!
Unfair? Of course, but not for any other reason than getting the news that gets attention--not the news that is worthy.