krisellyn

Well, if it's any consolation to you, we're not listening to you anymore, so don't bother trying to be nice. We won't believe it anyway. You've broken us of the habit of expecting intelligent discourse on the web after the last year of cruel and childish comments directed at our candidate. And just for the record, did it occur to you that people might not vote for Obama for legitimate reasons, rather than spite? Sometimes I wonder at the intelligence level of Obama supporters. It's sad, really. posted 06/09/2008 at 09:44:21

Don't worry. They don't really mean it. The pundits are only saying that to win over her supporters. And by the way, her supporters know that. Over the last 17 months we've been helpless to effect the coverage of Senator Clinton. We had one vote, and as it turned out, the majority of the vote. Now, we're back to that one vote. Obama or McCain. The Obama supporters in the media are just trying to convince the Clinton supporters not to hate them anymore. We know that. And we're enjoying it, so stop trying to rain on our parade. We're popping the popcorn and putting our feet up in anticipation for the big show in November and wondering how the Obama driven media will find a way to make his loss in November her fault. posted 06/09/2008 at 10:10:28

This article was headlined incorrectly. When I clicked on it, I fully intended to rip the author a new one. After reading it, I now believe it was one of the nicest articles I've read in a long time. Thank you. It's refreshing to read about the Clintons without getting angry at the writer. But about Terry McCaulliffe, I disagree. He was simply trying to keep everyone happy while they waited that three hours. Terry McCaulliffe has not had an easy life, and he is pure kindness when most would be bitter. posted 06/09/2008 at 09:55:47

Alex, please stop writing. You're painful to read. posted 04/02/2008 at 10:39:09

Are you on the Obama payroll? What a crock. posted 03/31/2008 at 11:48:36

Go Hillary! We're here for you! posted 03/31/2008 at 12:03:35

Ms. Ephron, I totally know how you feel. Reading your blog made me want to ask you to stop writing. Having read your insipid meanderings about nothing more than your "feelings" and declaring Senator Clinton a liar, which is a huge assumption and about as partisian a topic as you can find, I wanted to vomit. It's almost as if we're one in our feelings. posted 03/31/2008 at 11:42:09

Bravo! The voice of reason! But if Obama wins the nomination, I'm still voting for McCain. All those pundits that refer to the 28% of Hillary backers that claim they won't vote for Obama assume it is a loyalty issue. Meaning, we want our candidate to win, so in a fit of pique we vote across party lines. They also assume we'll come around come November. Think again.

Did it ever occur to these people that there is something fundamentally wrong with Obama? And that is why we won't vote for him? I can not vote for a man that sat in the pews of Wright's church for 20 years and when he had kids, thought it was appropriate to raise them around like-minded parishoners. This is not a black vs. white thing. There are plenty of black pundits that agree with me. There is something wrong with Obama, and I will not vote for him. posted 03/31/2008 at 11:56:32

You may not agree, but why is your voice more important than anyone elses. Your hubris is astounding. posted 03/29/2008 at 12:21:26

Do you even know what the word context means? Because you're using it incorrectly. Put US of KKK A in a sentence in any context and try to make it sound good. Because the only way that could happen is to say, "When Rev. Wright said the USA was the US of KKK A, I couldn't believe Senator Obama allowed his family to sit in the pews of that church, raising his kids in that environment." Now that, is context. posted 03/28/2008 at 14:03:40

What does it matter? The argument that his horrible statements were buried in beauty and light just means people are more likely to believe the horrible statements are true. If Wright is such a wonderful person, well then, maybe he's telling the truth. Tell these horrible statements to children, with thier parents sitting next to them, and why wouldn't they believe them? That is how racism is perpetuated. This Wright issue is malignant, and the US will not make Obama thier president. posted 03/28/2008 at 13:14:27

Because he was caught. Who cares if he leaves now? He was there, raising his children, for twenty years. Democrats might be wishy washy on this, but no one else is, and have you noticed the country is fifty/fifty? If you can only convince 52% of democrates you're not a schmuck, you're going to be creamed in November if you're the nominee. posted 03/28/2008 at 13:10:05

Hillary Clinton has had accolades showered on her from the moment she graduated from college. How many graduates are valedictorian at Wellsley, and get their speech published in Life Magazine? How many graduates from law school are immediately enlisted to be on the impeachment panel from President Nixon? She is smarter than most people in the world. Has more experience than most politicians (and yes, First Lady counts. She may not have been getting credit for a lot of stuff, but you and everyone else knows she had huge influence on what happened politically in the White House.) Then, six years in the Senate, where both sides of the aisle are impressed with her. The fact that Obama, with his slim record, and shady dealings in Chicago, et al, is this close to the Presidency has a lot more to do with those surrounding him. Politicians are jockying for position. If they think they could get a free ride from Obama, that's who they'll back. Every endorsement he gets has a string attached. Many of his endorsements were from people that knew Clinton had no plans to further thier ambitions and they knew Obama would more like help them along the way. Hillary Clinton has earned this race to the White House. What has Obama done? posted 03/28/2008 at 13:36:17

So, this is your rationalization. If Obama lose in November it will be Hillary Clinton's fault? That's nice. Really. Poor Senator Obama. He has no control over his destiny. Hillary Clinton is the puppet master and has omnipotence. She can make 49.99% of the democratic party vote for her and she made him sit in the pew listening to Wright's hate speak, anti-american rhetoric and then she made them record this stuff and pass it around to all news outlets, forcing the church to make money everytime they sold the DVDs. Then, with a wave of her magic wand, she created the Trumpet, the church's bulletin that Obama has had on his coffee table for the last twenty years, and forced the church to write anti-semetic, anti-Italian rhetoric, reprinting Hamas statements. She also forced him to run for President with only two years experience in the US Senate, making him subject to accussations that he isn't experienced enough. Oh, and that interview he gave in 2006, saying he wasn't experienced enough to run in 2008, well, Clinton must have been holding a gun to his head. Poor Obama. He is such a victim. Victim. Victim. Victim. Victim. Just what I want in a President. posted 03/28/2008 at 13:25:31

You don't own a home, do you. posted 03/28/2008 at 13:45:50

The Clinton donors used that letter to point out that Pelosi was not the neutral politician she's been saying she is. With the help of the media, Pelosi herself, and MoveOn.org, I think that objective was resoundly completed. Now Pelosi can't be involved in refereeing the Convention fight. Yippee! If this were a chess game, the Clinton donors have knocked Obama's Queen off the game board. posted 03/28/2008 at 14:08:11

Hillary Clinton will win the nomination because the DNC knows Obama will not win against McCain. McCain will carry Republicans, Independents, and the Regan Democrats if Obama is the candidate. It will be a massacre. The DNC is trying to find a way around this and is only waiting for the chance to fix it. Dean said today that the Michigan and FL delegates will be seated at the convention. The how, of course was vague. Michigan and FL are going to decide this election, and Clinton won them. You are counting out a Clinton. If you're going to use history as the basis for your argument, you should realize that Clintons always find a way. :) posted 03/28/2008 at 11:02:23

Yeah, this is exactly how the Republican machine is going to spin it if Obama is the nominee. posted 03/28/2008 at 13:54:55

Wright or wrong, Mr. Weber, you're missing the point. We need to win this November. Your strangely convoluted endorsement of Rev. Wright will do little to sway Republican cross overs and Regan Democrats in the fall. But as most of your ilk seem to project, that means less to you than being in the Wright. You might be able to weather another four years of Republican rule, but the most at risk part of the American population can not. We need a candidate that can win. Get over yourself. posted 03/29/2008 at 12:30:25

You wish. Clinton has more experience and knowledge than Obama. He's lost Republican cross overs because they don't like anti-American sentiment in thier candidates and McCain is the Independants' dream of a candidate. Clinton is a sure thing. Obama will be another Mondale crash. posted 03/27/2008 at 09:40:05

And yet her match up with Obama is 45 to 45. Which says, even people that don't like Clinton are willing to vote for her rather than Obama. Nominate Obama, and you're electing McCain. posted 03/27/2008 at 09:37:04

The more I learn about the Obama campaign the more angry I get. I am so mad right now. People keep saying, don't worry, if Obama wins, democrats will support him. He has no experience in anything but getting elected (hello, George Bush). He and his wife are anti-american, and quite probably simply tolerates whites-I won't call him a racist, but to have sat through 20 years of it, he has to somewhat believe parts of it. Why, I ask you, would I, and those I know, be willing to set this information aside? We're not the liberal elite who don't need a democratic president, but simply think it would be nice. We're not the college kids that don't know what they're talking about. We are the middle class that is disappearing. And that lack of a middle class is destroying our economy. Who do you think actually buys these houses? Middle class america. Who sends thier kids to Iraq? Middle and lower middle class families. We need Hillary Clinton. If we can't get her, we'll go to the next best candidate. The one who we know loves this country. The one who has 35 years in the senate. Who knows his foriegn policy. Who is the most liberal republican this country has seen in a long time. If you superdelegates are listening, listen to this. Don't screw with us. posted 03/27/2008 at 10:00:22

Where is Chris Wallace when Hillary needed her? Sounds like Wallace is just another Obamabot. posted 03/26/2008 at 10:39:06

Carville is right. Richardson is a slime bag. And you know it too. It just so happens his betrayal helps your candidate. So, stop complaining about Carville when he has an opinion about Obama's politics as usual. And anyway, we all know this is about padding your wallet. You should be thanking Carville for giving you a gig. posted 03/26/2008 at 10:47:02

Let's take a look at your resume. Let me guess. You drive a 15 year old car, live at home with your mother, and look forward to your monthly Victoria Secrets catelog to get some alone time in the only bathroom in the house. posted 03/26/2008 at 10:43:30

I'm assuming when you say Obama isn't only about hope you are talking about the democratic platform. Meaning, what the candidate is running on. Health care, etc. I ask you, how exactly is Obama going to get anything done in Congress when he says he's going to "change the way things are done" That's a reference, one can only assume, that means he's going to shift who has power in Congress. And how will he do that? He can't. He doesn't decide anything about Congress. How will he get any legislation passed if he doesn't have a network of associates that will do his bidding? He will have to create them. In the two to four months between the democratic primary and the November election? Or is he handing out IOUs to people like Richardson, Daschle, etc. I'm not saying this is wrong, I'm just wondering how effective this man will be as opposed to Clinton who has had two decades to garner IOUs. No matter who the democratic candidate is, the platform will go unchanged. The only difference will be where the candidates passion lay. If Clinton is elected president she will get health care passed. This is not Obamas passion. What is his passion? Changing the way politics are done in Washington. Something a president has absolutely no control over. posted 03/24/2008 at 15:59:37

You're right. Actions speak louder than words. She has devoted most of her life to the service of others. Look in the mirror. Can you say the same? posted 03/24/2008 at 15:51:09

And you drive a 15 year old car and flip burgers. Am I right? posted 03/24/2008 at 15:48:43

If you knew what the word nepotism meant, you would not have used it. Clinton clawed her way to the place she is at. No one ever gave her anything. Your scorn is misplaced and unearned. posted 03/24/2008 at 15:47:49

Every time this Bosnia thing is brought up and I see Hillary Clinton's picture getting off the plane, I can't help but thinking, has Obama even been to Bosnia? Articles like this try to make Clinton look bad, because everyone wants to tear down her foreign policy experience, but it does the exact opposite. You're showing her, surrounded by soldiers with guns, walking in a scary background with a smile. She looks like Patton, for heaven's sake. What exactly is the agenda of the Obama camp here? Because Clinton looks like a hero, and Obama looks like he's desperate. posted 03/24/2008 at 14:13:33

Rationality? You obviously are an obamabot. She sounded like a paid commercial. Same as Chris Matthews this morning on MSNBC Morning Joe. This is the same man that homoerotically announced in a broadcast that hearing Obama speak sent chills up his legs. This morning, Chris Matthews sounded like he was briefed this morning by David Axelrod and came out like an avenging angel against Clinton. It was so Obama friendly that Mica asked him (after an akward, tense moment) if Chris was finally coming out and endorsing Obama.

Noonan is just another example of how bias has taken over our airways. posted 03/24/2008 at 10:10:16

I will vote for Clinton. I will not put this country in the hands of an unqualified, untested candidate, for either party. Sometimes, it's not about high flying ideals. Sometimes, it's about a resume. posted 03/24/2008 at 10:00:19

An amazing speech about race is a non sequitor if the topic is "hate speech" and "unpatriotic sermons from the pulpit". He changed the subject for a few news cycles, but now people have read the speech and are putting it into context. Buchanan is right. Same old, same old. posted 03/24/2008 at 15:39:16

You are giving Wright a pass because you don't want Obama to be hurt by his words. Words matter. It was Obama's famous plaguristic speech that hit that one home. And he's eating them now. posted 03/24/2008 at 15:32:00

Bravo posted 03/24/2008 at 15:29:51