Can we just call her Hillary Clieberman? It will be easier and no one will be disillusioned as to who she is or what she represents.

And one of my favorite comments from Obama on this arugment:

Susan Rice, a foreign policy advisor to Obama, mocked Clinton for her claim of having made a corkscrew landing into Bosnia under the threat of sniper fire, when, as Rice pointed out, she made the trip with Chelsea, Sheryl Crow and Sinbad.

"In fact, it was a meet-and-greet and concert with the troops," said Rice. "So it's hard to understand exactly what she is referring to when she says she has unparalleled crisis management experience."

I look forward to the Sinbad endorsement!

Greg:

Did anyone ask her what her CIC credentials were?

This strategy is very troubling. It smells like an attempt at sabotage.

I have two theories: (1) she wants to sink Obama's chances in the Fall so that she can run against McCain in 2012; and/or (2) she wants to ratchet up the pressure for Obama to put her on the ticket.

It is possible she is trying to persuade superdelegates, but I doubt she thinks they will go for her.

As an argument for HRC, it seems likely to backfire. She has no foreign policy experience. In that respect, HRC and Obama are both green.

Strikes me that Clinton is angling to be McCain's running mate. She is certainly not any longer running as a Democrat.

I've been one of the people around here suggesting that some of the Obama people cool their jets when attacking Clinton, but I'm ready to say now that I just won't be able to vote for her if she's nominated. She has indeed crossed a line, though it hasn't got anything to do with being ready to assume the mantle of commander-in-chief.

It's not just "an awfully risky gamble," it's stupid. In terms of traditional commander-in-chief credentials, McCain has them both beat. Why on earth would you highlight that?

Not to mention I just wish Clinton would stop poisoning the damn well. I'd prefer her to just actually take her ball and go home if she's going to pull crap like that.

This just underscores something that I think has gotten lost in all of this: Clinton is a terrible politician/campaigner.

The definition of a traitor is to give aid and comfort to the enemy.
Most certainly this statement will give McCain aid in his battle against Obama as well as herself since he has better security credentials than she does and I am absolutely sure his sense of comfort about the general election has been raised knowing Hillary is attempting to take out Obama as well as herself.

For shame Hillary Clinton! You have truly crossed a threshold.

If it comes down to a contest between Hillary versus John McCain, in November, then it will be a choice of voting for one Rovian Republican versus another. A Case of Rove V. Rove, if you will pardon the pun.

In that case I will opt for the one that does not hide the fact that he is a Republican. At least he is not two faced liked Hillary. Since there will be no Democrat in the contest, then I will vote for the lesser of two Republican evils, and vote for McCain.

interesting strategy, this: claim over and over and over again (and have the press repeat over and over and over again) that you've got "experience"--35 years; Commander in Chief--and people come to believe you

but it really is a crock ...

repulsiveness IS EXCELLENT NEWS!!! FOR HILLARY!!!

Hillary strategy v. 1.0. Raise enormous amount of money, cozy up to Dem hierarchy, actively seek to generate press buzz stressing my inevitability and generally create the impression that voters might as well vote for me because I'm going to win anyway . . .

Then she got outraised, lost Iowa but came back in N.H., so, they came up with . . .

Hillary strategy v. 1.5 Win big in Nevada, stay close in S.C. by getting endorsements from name African American and then playing for votes of whites who were assumed to be racist, spend vast amount of money in the half dozen Super Tuesday states that matter, blow off the rest, and wrap the whole thing up that day . . .

Then she tied Nevada, got crushed in S.C. tied on Superduper Tuesday, lost eleven straight that she hadn't even bothered to prepare for, so they came up with . . .

Hillary strategy v. 3.0Win Ohio and Texas by crushing margins that brings her pledged delegate totals within 20 or 20, enabling her to convince the superdelegates to let her steal it "for the good of the party."

Then the party leaders said "nyet" to the steal and she pissed many of them off with her campaign's dispicable conduct in S.C., her little secondary scheme to pull in Michigan and Florida's non-delegates failed, and her planned for big wins in Texas and Ohio failed to close the delegate gap, so, finally, here we are at . . .

Hillary strategy v. 4.0. Give up on the win this year but take it to the convention with the most brutal, divisive, ugly campaign possible and damage Obama to the point that McCain beats him. Praise McCain obliquely to give him a hand in the win. McCain has basically promised to only serve one term and, anyway, just look at him. In 2012 the party will have forgiven and forgotten all the crap she pulled this year, be forced to turn to her and, at last, give her her just due. The important thing is that she must be president. Must. She's owed, dammit.

And hey, why not? It worked for Reagan in '76.

Fawning groupies, reserve the hillis45.org domain name now, while it is still available!

It's even broader than an endorsement of McCain. It's an endorsement of Bush's neo-con foreign policy. I've never particularly cared one way or the other about Obama himself but to me his "change" offered a chance to change that direction. I believe she really endorses the Bush direction. She's never made any meaningful change of course away from it. She's so mired in conventional foreign policy thinking that I don't for one minute believe she will do anything measurably different than the Bush administration. Can you imagine Billary reversing the "unitary executive"?

I'm terrified at 3 am all right. I have nightmares about the end of our democracy and its replacement by militaristic oligarchy.

When will we be rid of this rat-bastard quisling? Had enough? I have. I am sick of making excuses for Clinton and her husband. They no longer deserve the respect or support of the rank and file.

Clearly, I understand the need for Clinton to campaign against Obama, no one argues against that. But at this point she's just being a complete bitch. And no, that is not a sexist comment. If Obama was campaigning in the manner Clinton is I would be the first to call him a complete dick. But he's not...

Good! Hillary needs to prove to everyone that she belongs on a unity ticket as the VP. She is well on her way to doing exactly that.

And, GD it, Obama, get off your a$$ and start proving yourself. Get in FRONT of the Rezko mess and don't be dragged around by the nose by the nosy media. What is up with that? And fire your GD ad agency and your GD Latino outreach head--they failed to deliver a memorable ad like Hillary's 3AM and they failed to get the Latino vote in Texas (I gave them California as a test case, but they failed yet again in Texas).

Obama, you need to step up to the plate on all of this crap. And, BTW, step up to a blow-out in Pennsylvania. No holds barred. Find out what females and older voters want and see if you can deliver that gd message if it doesn't violate something you hold near and dear.

I'm tired and cranky. I'm tired of donating money, time, phone calls and all of the rest of the crap and having you deliver delegates instead of what I really want--a gd KNOCKOUT PUNCH to Hillary. When, exactly, are you planning on delivering that?

If she's going to make the experience argument, then McCain will win. She slept with Bill Clinton while he was commander-in-chief, but McCain actually served his country. And, last I checked, he has his name on a lot more legislation than she does. Where's the big, important Clinton-Republican legislation? What has she done in her time in the Senate except triangulate so that she could run for president?

Keep it up Hillary. If you get the nomination, you could force me to hold my nose and vote for a Republican for president for the first time in my life.

"And I think it’s imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold,”

And she's demonstrated this... how exactly?

“I think that since we now know Sen. (John) McCain will be the nominee for the Republican Party, national security will be front and center in this election..."

So HRC plans to let McCain set the agenda for the general election and play to his strengths? In Hill World it will be all fear all the time, even if it means her own rear gets kicked in the GE.

This is a good and fair comparison. Too bad for Obama that he comes up short in this comparison. Even his own staff clearly admitted this earlier today on MSNBC.

I'm an independent, lifelong Democrat, and occasional Republican. For me, my vote is for Clinton, then McCain. Obama is simply not competitive. For me now, I want to help and I suggest you all do the same to help Clinton win. I'll rest easy knowing that if she loses and its McCain and Obama, then fine, McCain is our next president. It doesn't matter what today's polls suggest, with or without my or your support or opposition, Obama will lose in the general election should he make this far. And, before some of the Obama Cult goes off the deep end, I mean this on experience, readiness, and all, and NOT on race or other factors that have absolutely no place in the election.

Now, how about a good discussion on how to help Clinton win?

w exactly has Hillary crossed the Commander in Chief "threshold"? There are but 2 "explanations" that I can think of . . .

(1) That she is taking credit for her husband's experience or, to state in somewhat differently, acknowledging that her campaign is about the reelection of Bill as (co-)President.

(2) The more hawkish you are, the more prepared you are to be Commander in Chief. Those who have proven themselves to be less eager or quick to send the troops into active conflict must, apparently, be too weak to lead them.

Hillary may have used up the last of her 9 lives with that comment...the logic is clear now, Hillary=McCain=Bush. If I were a Democratic Super-delegate I would consider coming out for Obama immediately to put an end to Hillary before she abandons everything the Democratic party is supposed to stand for.....McCain is ready to be President, but Obama isn't???? I guess if he wins he nomination we better bend over and kiss our asses goodbye! What a disgrace.

What threshold had a governor from Arkansas crossed when he became "CIC" in 1992? I think the whole argument is stupid. I want a president, not a military leader.

"Obama, you need to step up to the plate on all of this crap. And, BTW, step up to a blow-out in Pennsylvania. No holds barred."

Right on.

I think he has our permission to knee cap her. We know you're an honorable guy and like to be positive. We get it. Now take her out!

If she wins the nomination (and that's an enormous if--I simply don't see how she can) she'll win back a goodly portion of disenfranchised Democrats with two simple words: Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, for a majority of our newly inspired voters, I think these current tactics --these spasms, these death throes of her campaign-- will serve to sufficiently quench any desire to participate in the process.

Again, that is if she can secure the nomination. Which I just don't see happening. Now or in 2012 or ever, for that matter. That ship has sailed, and she is the one who launched it on it's fatal voyage.

It's been pointed out on here before, but it's horribly ironic that Hillary's greatest foreign policy experience is a speech she gave in China.

I'm confused, I thought speeches don't count.

If she wins the nomination (and that's an enormous if--I simply don't see how she can) she'll win back a goodly portion of disenfranchised Democrats with two simple words: Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, for a majority of our newly inspired voters, I think these current tactics --these spasms, these death throes of her campaign-- will serve to sufficiently quench any desire to participate in the process.

Again, that is if she can secure the nomination. Which I just don't see happening. Now or in 2012 or ever, for that matter. That ship has sailed, and she is the one who launched it on it's fatal voyage.

We need man-bear-pig to step in. ; )

As of today, "Clinton-McCain" sounds less like a contest and more like a ticket. The Goldwater Girl comes home.

Latino society is a matriarchal society. He never had a chance to make inroads with insular Latinos in the south. With integrated Latinos in northern states, he has done very well. If he makes it to the general; I think she'll create such an echo chamber that he'll be too damaged for superdelegates to back him, but anyway, in the general it won't be an issue.

I hate the Shillary Rove.

I know I'm voting more war if she's the nominee. She does not have the requisite character for the Oval Office.

It sounds like Hillary went to tea parties not foreign policy meetings.

Why does Hillary have such an incredible hunger for power? What is it with the Clinton family and their needs that they are willing to destroy a whole party from the inside to achieve them. It cannot be that it all about that red phone that goes off at 3 AM which she is so preparing for to finally answer. Or is it all about gigantic egos and boosting rights to the only double presidency within one family. More and more it sounds and looks like that. More and more if feels like we are thrown back in time, a bad time.

Hillary Clintons Resume:

In a Nutshell
.

I married a guy who became governor of a small state.

He went on to become President.

That allowed me to jump to the head of the line, without having to work my way up through the elected ranks, like that Senator Obama fellow who wasted his time doing. If he really were smart, he would have married his way to the head of the line, where he too could start pretending that being married to a leader is the same as being a leader.

I married Bill...... Experience Experience Experience.

Eat your heart out Obama. I bet you wish you could have married yourself to the head of the line, instead of having to work your way to the top.

I am Hillary Rodham Clinton, and I approve of this message.

She's right and she's ready to me commander in chief from day one. This country is at world on two fronts people, wake up, put the kool-aid down and smell the coffee.

And I think it’s imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold...

Does anyone know what this is, the "commander-in-chief threshold?"

How would we know if someone crossed it...or didn't?

It sounds like make-believe to me.

[What she's doing is setting up the argument that McCain is strong on security, as is she, so lets now talk about every other issue where he's wrong, and the Democrats are right (foreign policy, health care).]

So the best spin you can put on it is that she's just ceding the National Security issue to the Republicans?

I don't buy it, but even if you're right, the Republicans have STUNK on National Security - they couldn't have done WORSE - and we need a candidate who stops pretending that it's their issue.

"5) Just to re-iterate, she is NOT endorsing him for president, and there's no way she will if she loses the nomination. on almost every policy issue, her and obama are more or less agreed. She's making the point that he is *qualified* to do the job, and if obama is viewed lacking, he's going to have a helluvalot of trouble in the election."

Clearly if so many people take it like that, something is wrong with her tone or phrasing. Nobody thought Obama was praising McCain when he mentioned his "half century of service". Why not? Because he didn't give the wrong impression.

Hillary managed to outrage many people with her
repeated praise of McCain recently. Why is that? And don't blame Obamans for this. Many fairminded people saw it that way too.

Her absolute condescension towards Obama ("just gave a speech") is ugly and unforgivable, and possibly racist. This is an extraordinairly talented and accomplished candidate, the best of the best, a rising star who has breathed new life in the Democratic party. Dismissing him as a "kid" and a "fairy tale" seems borderline calling him "boy". I have never seen John Edwards
dismissed in this way by anyone. Yet I have seen HRC, WJC, George Bush and McCain all use a very dismissive and disrespectful tone towards Obama, and one that he has no reciprocated.

Her tone is extremely troubling, to say the least. And in politics, tone matters.

POISONING THE WELL

She's Bush. She's Cheney. She's scum.

I guess she'll take a VP spot behind Obama OR McCain.

Seriously, how else are we supposed to interpret this? It really seems like she'd endorse McCain over Obama and that is really, really, really bad.

I thought the fighting amongst Obama and Clinton supporters was bad, but this? I have been slow to accept that she'd really jeopardize our party for her own chance at the presidency...but it is getting harder to believe in her. :O( I hate that.

What on earth is happening?? Our society seems more and more mean spirited, selfish and hungry for controversy with every passing year.

Obama is a ray of light...but I am starting to fear that our country is too mean and stupid to believe in him and the optimistic, intelligent, NEW vision he has for the future.

There is no time to ponder why she is doing this. Whatever the reason, it's inexcusable.

I made a big donation to Obama today. I even did something unprecedented, I gave him the e-mails of some of my friends. I started looking for Obama groups on-line. I am making plans to take a week off in advance of the Pennsylvania primary to stay with my mother and GOTV Obama voters. I will be calling my relatives over the next week to make sure they are registered and try to convince them to vote for Obama.

Hillary Clinton needs enemies. She just made one.

She just crossed the line. If she gets the nomination I'll hold my nose and vote for her, but this was the stupidest thing I've seen from any Democrat in a long time. And this on top of Woolfson comparing Obama to Ken Starr. She should quit now before she makes a bigger fool of herself.

Before today I was thrilled to have her as a second choice.

She has passed the CiC threshold by voting for the biggest foreign policy disaster in American history? Or was it her attempt to ban flag burning? Oh, must have been her equivocation on torture.

If it isn't that stuff, what is she referring to here?

I just saw the clip on this - OMG. Up to this point, I have not been a Hillary-hater, more of an Obama supporter but geez! I blurted out what a f-ing b-tch! Honestly I was shocked. This is bad. Really bad. I think good for Obama actually in the long run but talk about showing your true colors.
Fortunately the press as far as I can tell are as shocked as anyone and really not giving her a pass.

I think she knows she can't win and is trying to sabotage the election for a 2012 run.

This bizarre accusation is another page out of HRC's "Obama is an uppity little boy who doesn't want to wait his turn" playbook. "Only grown-ups can be Commander-in-Chief," she says, going on to assert that Obama is not a grown-up -- but she is; and so too, she asserts, is John McCain.

Obama's being swiftboated. If he ignores HRC on this, or attempts to brush it off with an "Ah, shucks, there she goes again" riposte, he'll prove her point. He needs to make a major speech on judgement, on the differences between experience and leadership, and on the abysmal judgment displayed by HRC on health care, the war in Iraq, and her conflation of mastering issue details with exercising leadership. He needs to make the case that McCain is still a decent, happy-go-lucky flyboy, who shoots from the hip and shouldn't ever be allowed to use a red telephone at any time of day.

And he needs to do these things now, or he's toast. Yes, the voters want change. And yes, the voters prefer an affable optimist to a dour grouch. But above all, they prefer a fighter to a wussy who turns the other cheek when swiftboated, rightly reasoning that candidates who won't fight for themselves won't fight for their constituents. Candidates who turn the other cheek get two black eyes -- and they get to deliver a concession speech on election night.

HILLARY IS DOING AN EXCELLENT JOB!!! ... of guaranteeing that millions of Obama supporters will sit on their hands or vote for McCain or Nader in the general election. She is burning her bridges and guaranteeing that her good friend John McCain gets elected this fall. So much for her legacy.

It is time -- right now! -- for Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Al Gore, John Edwards and whoever else might pass as a party elder statesman to hold an intervention with her and say, "stick to the issues and stop helping McCain or we're going to wring those Superdelegates around your neck and stop your campaign once and for all.

If they don't, shame on them.

Moose49 and others: I don't think Obama needs The Elders to step in and fight his battles. The guy is smarter than hell and great with words. He is being forced to go negative, but I think he'll find a way to do it with facts and a relative amount of class. It will leave Sen. Clinton and her entourage sputtering with rage, making themselves look even worse than they do already.

My path was different. I voted independent in '76 and '80. Reagan taught me there is a difference between the parties. Party does make a difference when it comes to governance, even when the top of ticket says/does something drop-dead stupid. I'm so disappointed in Hillary Clinton at this moment.

"Where this "anti-Hillary" MSM?
Where the **** are you?
How about the DNC "leadership"??
Where the **** are you?"
Posted by observer2

Keith Olbermann covered ALL of her antics on his show tonight, including the latest NAFTRA revelation. He seemed to be in a state of utter disbelief, much like many of us.
I hope this sentiment takes off like wildfire. Clinton is so far gone......she needs to be put out of her misery...quickly, for the betterment of all mankind. Holy moly!

What she is doing is called in Britspeak "willy wagging." It's silly enough when a guy does it and usually completely unconvincing coming from a woman.

I guess the U.S. equivalent might be something like, "a woman trying to out-macho the guys and looking insecure doing it, when in fact the guys weren't perceived as macho in the first place." Not as elegant.

As thankful as I am to women of her generation for blazing the trail and taking a lot of the chit, I still wish she would just stop trying so hard. I don't care who is the first woman, black, Latino, Native American or Klingon-American president, I just want one who does not actively suck.

By the same logic, if McCain announces Laura Bush as Secretary of Defense then we are really going to be outgunned.

There shouldn't be any mystery to what Clinton's doing with this.

First, obviously she's trying to scare up votes in the remaining contests. But that's not the important goal. The real goal is simply to damage Obama as much as she possibly can.

Her campaign has been very clear that the only real way she can win is if the superdelegates decide she's the stronger candidate at the Convention. The more Obama is hurt, the more she's likely to seem the stronger of the two.

Very simple.

Apparently Ms. Clinton has confused ambition with qualification. And as to her "lisfetime of experience", who among us cannot make the same claim? My dogs have a lifetime of experience for heaven's sake.

Well, count David Kurtz in on the media slime machine enablers: the latest post on TPM's homepage links to a Scotsman article which replays the Canadian-Obama misinformation. Does anyone notice David Kurtz is with the Hillary program? It certainly seems so to me.

"Her campaign has been very clear that the only real way she can win is if the superdelegates decide she's the stronger candidate at the Convention. The more Obama is hurt, the more she's likely to seem the stronger of the two. "

And how does endorsing McCain do this?

I've heard a lot of angry responses to her shameless and shameful pro-McCain blather.

Why on earth would this make him look bad?

She looks like a scummy traitorous McCain-wannabe.

Beginning Day One: the Joint Chiefs will be calling her OLD IRON PANTS!

Let's talk about the 4,000 American death threshold we're about to cross in Iraq. Hillary, how do you sleep at night knowing you ok'ed this venture?

"Well..... Anderson Cooper if offering up a fluff piece on Chelsea Clinton tonight?!...."

He's taking a break from his fawning pro-McCain fluff pieces.

"Is Cindy McCain too perfect?"

I'm not making that up either!!

go hillary go. she is right on the money. what i do not understand is that a lots of people in this blog who perhaps are progressive and democrats, hare biased against hillary. be independent minded. i would like to ask anybody who openly support obama, how are you sure he is going to do what he has been making wonderfully speech about? do you know him on any executive job? how long he has had experience in national scene? he is not even finish his one term senate for god sake. do not tell me he is agent of change. anybody who runs for office talking about change and historically has been proved that does not mean anything. believe me if it was not for his likable appearance, his motivational speakership ability and most of all his love affair with media plus for his tremendous money advantage, he would had won perhaps a couple of state in primary.

Is Hillary angling for McCain's VP slot?

Lieberman better watch his back!

God, I wish Gore would step into this and swat her horseshit down.

Calmed down a bit and trying to be positive here...
Obama will certainly have to deal with this line of criticism in the general election, so maybe it is good for him to show that he can step up now, with these more subtle attacks from HRC? I mean, as much as I like him, we do need to see that he will be able to stand up to the GOP machine when the time comes. He seems to be a very smart, fair, kind person and I suspect it is difficult to get "nasty," but it must be done at some level these days.

Since she's linked herself to McCain, Obama should link her to McCain. Keep linking her to the war. Relentlessly pound home the cost of the the Hillary-McCain war.

Monica also crossed Bill's threshhold, and I don't want her answering the phone at 3 AM, either.

The threshold occurs at year 5 in the Senate. HRC and McCain have clearly crossed the threshold. Obama has not. This also explains her AUMF vote, which occured before she had crossed the threshold. Do we really want Obama in office making decisions like THAT? Come on, people.

Note to Penn - feel free to use this.

Hillary's main claim of experience is her time as First Lady, where her foreign policy experience consisted of a few meet and greets in N. Ireland, China, Kosovo, etc., when she carried NO OFFICIAL PORTFOLIO. And once she got to the Senate, where she really earned her foreign policy stripes: she voted for the war, enabling future attacks on Iran and waffled on torture. I'm impressed.

All Democrats should be incensed about the "threshold" comment, while also noting the absurd and comic sound to the phrase, "COMMANDER IN CHIEF THRESHOLD"....like some cosmic barrier the AMAZING SUPERDELEGATES must cross before vanquishing the demon-robot HILLARY08. It just sounds so frigging manufactured and meaningless. Can you picture Hillary answering that 3:00AM call, and asking, "General, has the situation crossed the Commander in Chief Threshold?....I see....It's a good thing the American people had the good sense to elect someone tested, vetted, and ready on day 1."

There is no way Hillary can back away from that comment. She just validated McCain and Bush and 8 screwed up years, including, oh yeah, the Iraq war (remember, that ugly mess you were supposed to be running against?). She must be getting some new polling data, because I'm pretty sure the Democratic primary electorate is anti-war, and isn't looking for another watered down alternative to Bush. We already have Bush Lite, is she trying to be Bush Ultra??? Hillary has lost all her sense on this, I can only hope tomorrow brings news of massive superdelegate support heading toward Barack and away from this trainwreck.

Good night.

Is anyone else getting sick of the Clinton campaign's artificial corporatized English?

First it's "solutions business"
Now it's talk about "crossing the commander-in-chief threshold"--there's a lot of emptiness in that phrase.

Rjpjr, you may accept the absurd notion to any Democrat should legitimize McCain as qualified to be commander in chief.

What they should be doing, on the contrary, is using his longstanding cheerleading of the worst foreign policy disaster in the history of this country to question his wisdom and judgment.

What they should be doing is underlining the 3 trillion dollars the war as cost (see the Steiglitz story), the massive damage it's down to our standing in the world, and the thousands of lives it's either claimed or maimed.

We won the congress because of the war. It should be huge asset for the Democratic party - regardless of the surge no political solution in sight and Bush is trying to sign a deal to keep us in Iraq forever.

The American people don't want that. And McCain has to run on it.

But you and Hillary are carrying his water because, I suppose, Hillary voted for the war.

If you're a progressive and support progressive ideas, you're literally insane if you can't see that , short term and long term, this is toxic for the progressives and music to the neocons.

Okay, I used to like this woman but I think I have had quite enough of her petty bullshit. You know if you can't win an election without resorting to grade school tactics you need to get out of the race.

I sincerely hope that Americans will see through this crap and shut her up. Her desperation is pathetic. Someone needs to tell the bitch it's over already. Get out the calculator and add it up. You lost. Get over it and quit whining.

This is also my first comment. Although I'm an Obama supporter, I've been very concerned about the reactions of a number of both Clinton and Obama supporters. I know this race is very personal, but my feeling has been that since we really need to win in the Fall, it would be better if both sides dialed it back a little bit. But ohmygawd! Obama is Kenneth Starr for suggesting we get a look at the Clinton's tax returns, but Hillary is fine with Obama-basing and McCain butt-kissing? Give me a break! Hillary, do you care at all about the Fall election, the Democratic party, or all the people in this country who would rather not have two more Alitos on the Supreme Court or waste another trillion dollars and thousands of lives and limbs in Iraq.

Others have above have been more eloquent and witty, and it time for me to get some sleep. I'm hoping that by tomorrow there will be more Clinton supporters who are willing to take a stand.

I do hope that Obama will use this as an opportunity to show his metal and to make his case. If Hillary wants to use McCain as the Commander-in-Chief gold standard, let the debate begin! Experience-wise, her "credentials" aren't much different from Obama's. Judgement-wise, apparently she isn't much different from McCain and Bush. Not a good combination.

Wake up superdelegates! Paging Al, Nancy, and Bill! This year is our best opportunity in 40 years! No more drifting along, dreaming of future working majorities. Do what needs to be done, and do it now!

HRC's recent tactic is to rank the candidates Self > McCain > Obama. To see how destructive this is, remove "Self" from the order, as could easily happen, and look at what you have left.

Imagine now the Democrats at campaign time. If Obama is regarded as less able than McCain by the HRC crowd, how can they possibly (much less enthusiastically) support him? And, should the nomination go the other way, how can the Obama people possibly line up behind the person who belittled him as inferior to a sclerotic, unstable Republican?

HRC has fallen into a strategy of mutually assured destruction. It has a pretty good chance of success.

She talks of being there at 3 a.m. when the red phone rings. Monica L was probably there on some occasions also. Has Monica crossed the threshold to be CIC?

hquain - HRC may be trying to argue that it's HRC>McCain>Obama, but if she keeps pushing this mythical "CIC Threshold" stuff, it's pretty obvious voters will see it as McCain>>>>>>>HRC&Obama. He's been there forever.

Look, this is just a horrible argument for Hillary. Let's do a 10 point scale on this mythical scale of who has crossed the "CIC Threshold", with Cheney being a 10 (best resume in DC) and someone like Romney, Huckabee, or Guliani being a zero (no federal experience), then Hillary is about a 2.5, and Obama is a 2.4. I'll give her the slight edge since she'd been in the Senate 4 more years. Unfortunately, McCain is about an 8.

What we should be talking about is judgement, not experience, since both Hillary and Obama have much better judgement than McCain. But Hillary can't talk about judgement because of her horrible AUMF & Lieberman-Kyl votes, so she talks about experience, which will kill her in the general, since McCain is clearly ahead of her on that one.

She chose a strategy that may result in a very small short term gain against Obama, but will hurt either democrat in the general. Sad.

hrebendorf -- It might be a good idea to read more than the first three words of a post before resorting to juvenile insults. For the record, I'm an Obama supporter, and an informed one at that. But - IF you are also - I suddenly feel ashamed of the company I'm apparently keeping.

(I do have to wonder, however. You've certainly developed a great way to make sure that those who - you believe - support Clinton will never consider joining those who support Obama.)

Bitch is the new Lieberman: http://someofnothing.blogspot.com/2008/03/bitch-is-new-lieberman.html. Just sayin.

People in the MSM need to start doing their jobs. An Obama advisor calling Hillary a monster is not a headline - Hillary advocating for John McCain is. The majority of us on this board share in the hopes of getting a Democrat in the White House; apparently Hillary does not.

the Obama people have a useful response to this nonsense which they are apparently unaware of. we had a President in the 19th century whose CIC resume was as follows: 90 days non-combat service as a militia captain in the Black Hawk War, no executive experience, a long run as an Illinois state legislator, a short stint in Congress, and a successful legal career. before being elected President he was more noted as an orator than as a pragmatic politician. however, he was to prove that good judgement, not experience, is the crucial attribute in leading a nation in war. yes, Obama's resume is quite similar to that of arguably our greatest wartime President: Abraham Lincoln.

if the Obama camp can't come up with some talking points out of that one, they are a lot dumber than I think they are.

"Do we truly have to wait that long? Puh-leeze let it be over sooner. If you had a child who was wrecking your home and attacking the other family members, wouldn't you do something to stop it -- now! -- rather than waiting until they completed the destruction?"

Why would the DNC let this go on like this?

This is crazy!

If they had some cajones, they would warn HRC, any more below the belt personal attacks, and we'll round up the supers to jump your ship and end this.

http://tablets-rx.com