Actually, the question was:

"Can you see yourself working to support Hillary Clinton should she get the nomination?"

Not as harsh, when you hear the actual question, instead of the one you made up, Greg.

Enough with the sensationalized bs., please.

WHAT!!???

I'm an Edwards supporter who's planning to vote for him tomorrow. I want to cast at least one vote this year that I'm truly excited about.

But I'll proudly vote for whomever gets the Democratic nomination and work tirelessly on behalf of the ticket.

If the Obama family doesn't feel the same way, they have no business campaigning as Democrats.

What is Michelle THINKING?

You can't put too much weight behind this. Michelle Obama isn't running for anything and holds no public office, so any speculation as to whom she might support or not support is pure gossip. This story is meaningless. Considering the things the Clinton campaign has said about her husband, I'm not surprised that she'd be hesitant. But that's her personal decision, and she's entitled to it.

Hey, I feel her. I'm disgusted with both of the Clintons because of their lies and dirty campaign tricks, I think their conduct has been below even the lowest standards of decency, and basically reflect what I'd expect from Republicans. I'm infuriated with their conduct, and it wasn't even directed at me or my significant other. So hell yes, her support in no way needs to be a given. I'll go much further and say that I could never vote for Hillary in good conscience, because I'm ashamed of her conduct, and I'm ashamed to be in the same party as her and Bill at this point, not to mention my disgust with her support of the Iraq war, her embrace of lobbyists and her opposition to banning landmines and clusterbombs, to name a few policy issues.

And wait, Paul Krugman says they are closer to each other than Republicans? I thought Obama was Hitler, or Stalin, or GW Bush or the Boogeyman, or whatever else Hillary wants Krugman to say about Obama. Krugman can go to hell. That Clinton tool lost any credibility in my eyes a long time ago. His vendetta against Obama has been shameless, from his constant and unfair attacks about health care, to his attacks over the Reagan comments. I couldn't care less about what Paul Krugman says about anything anymore.

Wassup, Michelle. Are you gonna take home your marbles if your guy doesn't get to play? Who are you looking out for? Not the American people. You would rather suffer for more of the same?

I heartily agree with the first comment. Greg misrepresents her quote. I don't expect that kind of stuff from TPM. You disappoint me...

Yeah! Paul Rosenberg, writing as Big Tent Democrat, was spreading the vapors about this earlier. The truth is: she said everyone would support the nominee of the party. She failed to say she would campaign for the nominee, which is understandable given the Clintons' behavior post-Iowa through South Carolina. I don't even know if I can vote for HRC. And I know all you TPM people will say that's immature, but they weren't talking about you. Were they?

As DanR2 said, it was "working to support" not supporting. There were no mixed signals about who she'd "back" or "support," just who she'd "work" to support. There is a big difference.

Oh come on. I interpreted this as her saying she would have to think about whether she would "work" to support her, or actively campaign. I think you have to listen to the whole statement, she might be a tad imprecise, but she was just saying her husband is the one who can do the best.
And are you quoting Krugman as a neutral observer? Of course there is not much daylight between their policy positions, but then that doesn't jive with many of Krugman's recent columns/blogs.

Do you think that it has occurred to Michele that if Barak wins the nomination that he might just need the votes of HRC supporters like me? Does she think her sulky pettiness, her version of the Obama Whine, is going to garner support?
Such a g fabulous notion of entitlement she has...
You go girl!
For the rest of us, DANGER! WARNING WILL ROBINSON! WARNING!

I don't like Hillary Clinton at all. I don't like her bullshit smear tactics that's about the equiv of Rove. If they can't stop talking stupid then they won't get my support or the support of people that will not register to vote because they have been sick of it for a long time.

I see a lot of difference between Obama and Hillary. If there were no similarities, I wouldn't vote at all since my candidate is out.

I was an Edwards supporter and people that criticize other people for not supporting Hillary if she wins the nomination are making me that much closer to voting for McCain. I don't like either of them but at least I've have my protest vote saying that once liberals and Democrats had their chance for real change, they reverted back to the same corporate, political machine, that promotes war, censorship, and anything that will get them elected.

Oh well... I'm more of a Naderite anyways.

So if Michelle Obama doesn't vote for the Democratic nominee, I guess that means she'll vote for McCain. Lovely.

Seriously, when I read posts like this, I begin to think that the blogosphere has become as shoddy in it's reporting as the "MSM" it loves to attack. Obama didn't say she wouldn't "back" or "support" HRC, she said she wasn't sure she'd "work to support" her.

On to substance: if she wants to sit home and twiddle her thumbs, that's fine. But maybe she just wants to end her time on the campaign trail? Spend more time with her kids? Go back to work?

And, really? Given the things Bill Clinton has said about Obama, you find Michelle Obama's comments "harsh?"

Wow,

I can't imagine the cacophony of crying by the MSM if Bill had made such a statement. Maybe Michelle should shut up and bake some cookies.

Imagine the howls of outrage if either of the Clintons responded exactly the same way to that exact same question.

Personally, I vote for people over parties. After 15 years as a liberal independent I changed my voter registration to Democrat for the sole purpose of caucusing for Obama tomorrow. If he gets the nomination I will remain a Democrat because if Barack Obama represents the future face of the Democratic Party I most definately want to be a part of it.

After the Clinton's and their surrogates treated Obama like complete crap why would anyone expect less? I'm surprised she didn't just laugh.

Imagine the howls of outrage if either of the Clintons responded exactly the same way to that exact same question. Posted by pjsauter

Took the thought right out of my mind! I was thinking precisely that if Obama prevails in the end, he'll have the press to thank for it. His "hot air" rhetoric would have fallen flat had the press turned its lens on him for just a quarter of the time that it has been turned it on Hillary. If Obama wins, it will be because of the media's negative onslaught on Hillary and not because Obama is such stellar candidate. His suit is as full as his resume. Image if Bill Clinton had come out and said that "he'd have to think about supporting Obama" if he wwon the nomination... The media would have had a field day with it, no doubt about it. The double standard is so appalling I wonder how the media could recover from it, especially if Hillary wins...

This is the second expression of this theme--the other is Obama's skepticism that "she would get the people who voted for me" if she were the nominee--so I don't think she gets a pass on this. This is Michelle Obama on message.

Obama is not Neo, and I hope folks will stop with the soft treatment in the press. It won't be this nice in the General.

Obama said in his SC victory speech that there would be mistakes made.

Certainly this comment by Mrs. Obama falls into that category.

What is amazing and dissappointing to me is how much venom is instantly spewed in the progressive blogosphere. The first comments I read on one of the most recognized sites just flat out called her a "bitch". This is so dissapointing and just increases my overall cynicism. I am just as discouraged when I see the same term used to describe Senator Clinton.

Taken even further, it is extremely disrespectful to use the familiar "Hillary" vs. the more proper last name of Clinton or Senator Clinton. How many times do you see Obama referred to as Barack?
Even in this TPM post and all of the comments so far I see one use of the Obama's first name vs. countless references to Hillary.

I hope that Mrs. Obama accepts responsibility (or stands by her comment), but I also hope we all can find a little more civility and respect (at least within our own progressive community). Probably a pipe dream...

Why spin what she said? We all understand what she meant and the message she is trying to send. Why do the Obamas feel they have to be so rude? She's already acting like a sore loser. I'm really tired of hearing people insinuate that Black voters will get depressed and stay home in November if Obama is not the candidate. My friends used to call that "selling wolf tickets." I guess she's not part of the 80% of Blacks who still approve of the Clintons. Sadly, we'll have to make our way forward without her.

Someone help me understand what the Obama and Clinton people are so mad about, the Obama folk maybe a tad more so. Is it style? An amorphous theme? What?

Cute. Her 15 minutes of fame and time with Oprah and all is almost over. She's welcome to be a sore loser, who cares? Obama's team is already conceding defeat tomorrow and trying to spin it.

that's some interesting hubris, matthew weaver.

distinction WITH a difference.

"Working to support" sounds like: will you work on the campaign. She's not sure.

That does not mean she will not VOTE for Hillary.

Will Bill and Hillary work on Obama's campaign?

On the other hand, Michelle does back out though in her later comment (" You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. ") which suggests it was a boo-boo.

If Obama loses and McCain wins, I'll be voting for McCain in November.

The issues that are most important to me are Iraq and America's moral standing in the world, particularly torture and illegal detention. McCain and Obama have taken principled, albeit widely divergent, stands on these issues. Clinton has shaped her position to maximize her chances of being elected, and then refused to discuss her reasoning. She is a moral coward and as she has requested I won't be voting for her.

Anyone who thinks that Michelle Obama has to vote for Clinton just because she is the Democratic nominee is part of the problem. This is just stupid groupthink of the sort that Republican criminals like Bush, Rove and Cheney excel at promoting. It is no way to govern a nation or to be a responsible citizen.

So after Michele tells the AA community that they should "wake" up and vote for Obama,

After Barack won't say whether he would support Clinton,

After the second coming's campaign calls Clinton the Senator from Punjab,

After Barack tells Clinton she's "likable enough,"

After "he who must be named's" campaign put together a list of there own interpreted "race" card junk (ie: fairy tale),

Miss princess (who believes the Barck idolatry press clips) now says she won't campaign for the nominee,

Imagine if Bill said the same thing ...

Oh the nashing of teeth and tearing of garments from all the bambibots and their minions in the msm.

She meant what she said, end of story.

This doesn't even rank as a fake controversy.

er... "Hillary" and "Obama" are what they put on their signs... I am confused as to why calling them the names they promote themselves under is disrespectful.

Michelle Obama never said she have to think about supporting the nominee. Greg is misrepresenting what she said. She was asked by the reporter if she would 'work to support' Hillary Clinton and Michelle replied that she'd have to think about it but that she would support the democratic nominee and that everyone would work together for towards that end.
Go to Good Morning America and listen to the whole clip.
I'm surprised at Greg Sargeant for misrepresenting this.

Give the poor woman a break! Can you even imagine how tired they are? how much they miss their home and life and kids? I'm sure that they are working flat out for the nomination, as are the Clintons, but don't envision keep up this sort of rat race and pace if in the end they lose it. Now, the Clintons are more seasoned and politic and less candid and would probably have responded "Well, sure - I'll be out on the hustings every day" whether they meant to do so or not. --- Mrs. Obama is still sort of normal (as was her husband when he was asked about his greatest fault). I'm sure she envisions "working for" a candidate to be precisely what she's doing now and answered, honestly, that she'd have to think about it before making this sort of life-disrupting committment to someone who isn't her husband. -- Geesh! We'd like to have normal, honest people in positions of power and then we shred them when they *are* normal and honest!

Michelle as first lady. Now that's really something. Finally the comedy writers can file away caricatures of preteens Amy Carter and Chelsea Clinton. "Her Thighness" references to HRC might even finally get tired and overused. Now we have an heiress-in-waiting for the national butt of jokes (pun intended). Will she bring back the -fro? Will medicare now cover perms? Will her hometown Chicago Bulls draft her to replace Ben Wallace who cannot clear as much space in the lane as much as she does?

Moravia said:
.."Will her hometown Chicago Bulls draft her to replace Ben Wallace who cannot clear as much space in the lane as much as she does?.."

Sorry, moravia, I'm not sure to whom you are referring. Would that be Hillary Rodham Clinton who was born in Chicago?

Jesse Jackson Jr implied that Hillary didn't care what happened to people in Katrina. That is both false and outright race-baiting.

When Bill Clinton gives a correct demographic description of what happened in South Carolina similar to Cokie Roberts uncontroversial suggestion that New Hampshire voters were was 97% white and57% female discounts Hillary's win there and then because he mentions Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s father won in South Carolina the pundocracy declares that this is racist? This makes just as much sense as suggesting that Obama chose Jesse Jackson Jr to remind people that he was black so they wouldn't vote for him. People accusing the Clintons of running a racist campaign need to get a grip. The African-American community already has and continues to hold the Clintons in high regard.

If you read The Audacity of Hope closely it becomes apparent that Obama is irritated by Alan Keyes because many of the policies that Keyes promotes are logical deductions from beliefs that Obama claims to have. In short, Obama's belief structure would lead him to Keyes' positions -- and you can see this in Obama's dismissive attitude towards some liberal defenses of choice. Obama does not have a belief structure which makes being pro-choice a matter of instinct. Page 224 " When I read the Bible, I do so with the belief that it is not a static text but the Living Word and that I must be continually open to new revelations -- whether they come from a lesbian friend or a doctor opposed to abortion."

If you wish to leave the fate of your female relatives to someone that uncertain about why choice is the recognition of a woman's right to make her own moral choices, feel free but do not tell me that you are doing so because Obama is a liberal.

The NYTimes Feb 3 Nuclear Leak piece illustrates Obama's ability to mouth the pieties while working with the powers that be (Exelon - a major source of contributions for him).

When you add to this Obama's support for the war-mongering Joe Lieberman in the Connecticut primary at a point when Obama was supposedly anti-war it begins to mount up.

For those who, like me, believe that Obama would move the Democratic Party profoundly to the right it becomes an interesting question as to whether we can best advance the cause of moving the country to the left by voting for Obama or by voting for McCain which would have the advantage of moving the Republican party to the left of where it is now counting on a Democratic Congress that would constrain him but would truckle to Obama.

Hillary Clinton will be out there working for the Democratic ticket as she always has. Michelle Obama is well within her rights to step back from active campaigning but her generally scornful attitude towards the Clintons keeps leaking through in various snide comments. Already 15% of the Hillary voters have concluded that they will vote for McCain if Obama is nominated. And it is not about race since 20% of the Obama voters say they will vote for McCain if Hillary is nominated..

Imagine if Bill said the same thing ...

Oh the nashing of teeth and tearing of garments from all the bambibots and their minions in the msm.

There's a difference: Obama doesn't really need the Clintons, particularly not Hillary, to campaign for him. Bill Clinton has besmirched himself so in this campaign, I don't know if he really needs him either.

If you think any of those reactions to Clinton provocation are as bad as what the Clintons did, well maybe you should just go back to smoking that Clinton crack.

Incredible. And Obama's supporters are following along like lemmings.

Ms. Obama's remarks are not surprising considering what Barack Obama said a couple of weeks ago when he said that if he isn't nominated many of his supporters wouldn't support Clinton.

Obama was, in effect, releasing his supporters to go elsewhere.

He backpeddled slightly after making the remarks just as his wife did in the video.

It's not surprising. The entire Obama campaign from his basic premise, to the style of his pitch to independents, to his assaults on core Democratic Party values, his portrayal of himself as a messianic figure and his strident arrogance should indicate to any thoughtful observer that extortion is part of his campaign.

The Obama campaign has the feel of a parasite that's attached itself to the Democratic party.

God help us.

Your comment has the feel of a pimple that needs to be squeezed,

ohhhh please people,,,, This is the woman who said...if you cant run your own house...how can you run the white house. Now who do you think she was talking about? Michelle Obama was the first to inject race into this campaign when she said...."Blacks are going to get it" She is the one sitting on a company board who is the main supplier to Wal Mart. As a hospital administrator...she knows in her heart the only way changes in health care are going to work are with mandates. No mandates...we are going to be right where we are now. This woman has no political skills. I think her words have been quite harsh...and certainly dont demonstrate any unity of party. I am appalled at her "poor language"...which I find patronizing to the black community. It certainly is a put down. Frankly....this woman would do her husband more service if she didnt talk.

Ok...so this is what I've noticed, unscientifically mind you, that on most of the Lib sites I go on the comments the OB supporters more often, by a large margin, implicitly or explicitly state that they won't mind not voting for HRC if she is the Dem nominee, but rarely did I see HRC supporters saying they won't vote for OB if he is the nominee. I've seen that the common theme among HRC supporters is their support for the Dem. Party as their reasoning for supporting HRC or OB. The OB supporters common theme seems to be more centered around OB, himself, as the embodiment of whatever ideas he is expressing, whether it's positive, "I'll cross the aisle more easily and win a coalition of support", "No health care mandates" or negative, 'likable enough'..." I don't know" in regards to helping HRC if she wins the nomination'. My own pop-pshcy take is that if an OB supporter is mainly involved because of the personal connection they feel to HIM and they feel for he has for THEM, but not for the Dem party in terms of opposing the Rep. Party, they would not have any qualms about the fate of the Dem. party's chance to regain the WH. I think it kinda hints at why any challenge to OB nominations is responded to from that group of his supporters with personal attacks and discussion of the issues, topic, etc.. He, and in this thread's example, his wife's views have been clearly expressed. His supporters, although for supporters in this vein 'followers' would be more accurate, don't respond the same way by ironic coincidence but by his explicit support.

An example is the in how the respective spouses answered the same question. If I remember correctly Bill response was like.."I don't know if..wait let me think..Yeah, of course I'll do whatever I can to help him win the WH." Could somebody with better surfing skills check, Pls? The point is that when OB was at the Dem Conv. he was there to rep. the Dem Party, regardless of whatever else he wants, feels, or thinks. The Dem Party is what he is going to lead, as well as the nation, not just his supporters. The argument that Bill/Hill was mean to him so that is why they should not completely go to bat for the Democratic Party if Hillary is the nominee says what? Is it in anyway helpful to his party that someone who wants to lead same said party and nation should exhibit that example of leadership, Lieberman style? I don't see how that helps the party at all and don't have any reason to think that's what the point of his/michelle/obama supporters intentions are. I concur with other concerns expressed here that if he is the POTUS how is he gonna comfortably and effectively reach across the aisle to embrace folks who are trying their damndest to destroy him (i.e. Clinton's entire term) if he is so personally shaken in primary political mudslinging? Not shake hands, not vote for someone's small thing out of spite so they end up not voting for his big thing? It's something to consider because that is how DC and this nations politics seem to work. That's enough, huh? Would do you think?

Michelle's heartfelt comments just confirm my suspicions from all along. That Obama is mainly playing for No. 1. He has been getting a free ride from the media, he's their darling, has not had to work for this, and if we don't keep handing it to him on a platter, he'll turn his back on the Democratic Party.

Like the dude who's been crashing at your place for months, and when he finally decides to get a job and you timidly ask if now he might offer to share rent... he throws it back in your face and splits.

A distinction without a difference, David? Seems like most folks think there's a substantial difference. Suck it up and admit that you posted a misleading headline and made much ado about nothing.

I agree with Michelle... I'd have to hold my nose too to vote for Clinton 2.0.

Mr. Purple
www.mrpurple2008.com

Well, I think Obama is brilliant and President worthy...after another 4-8 years. I think his charisma and oratory excellence has given him and obviously many in this country the impression that he is qualified to handle the job now. I disagree. Hillary will be a huge change in the Presidency of this country, should be considered on her own merits, regardless of her last name and the history of it, and knows how to handle the kind of political pressure and maneuvering both parties are going to attempt on the new Pres. Barack is already in Ted Kennedy's back pocket. He is arrogant to think that 2 years in the US Senate is enough to make him effective. Plus, if he were to put in another 4-8 years of the Senate (where we really need his talents now), just think of the kind of President he could be with that experience? I'm afraid we're going to lose his future talent if he peaks too soon in his political career. Think about it...if he gets in, and the Republicans go after him, and the Dems start trying to manipulate him, his lack of experience in this could be devastating to his political career. Then we lose him forever to anything meaningful.

Sorry people, but the same ones who have been whining and bitching that media has given bush a pass, are now giving the SAME media a pass for their tripping over themselves in support of Obama.

WHY is the media pushing Obama?

Obama raises 7.2 million since February 1st; HOORAY all over the news! Hillary loans 5 mil to her campaign, all over the news..Hillary puts out an email to her supporters asking for donations, and she outdoes Obama in 30 hours..7.5 million, and...nothing.

WHY is the media pushing Obama?

The SAME media you all far left liberals were bashing for passes on Bush's policies..

I'm going in the opposite direction, and um Obama supporters, Michelle and Obama's ambitions are waaaaay more obvious than Clintons' ever were, and I'd say to the whiny and sense of entitlement duo to stay in Chicago!