CRAP!!!! Hillary was just on SNL. Anything for free air time . . .

I thought the NYT piece was pretty harmless. Hillary supporters may be salivating at the prospect of the Rezko trial damaging Obama, and his supporters may be squirming in their chairs, but I didn't think the NYT had anything new to say.

I voted for Obama and would like to see him nominated knowing he has shown questionable judgment in the past in associating with Rezko. I would be surprised if this trial and these articles caused a significant number of voters to choose Clinton. She has had her fair share of questionable relationships, and the McCain story I think has helped paint politicians in general as being incapable of having entirely clean hands. Obama himself admitted that none of their hands were clean.

Senator Clinton might seem to be the better choice to some. She knows how the current game is played and comes well equipped to fight. Unfortunately the current game in Washington is and will continue to be rigged against change. We need someone who will move the players to a new game board with new rules. FDR did that as did Reagan. FDR made people believe government was the answer and then proceeded to create new and powerful programs never before seen or tried. Then several decades later Reagan turned everything around and convinced Americans that government was not the solution but rather the problem. He then proceeded with the steady dismantling of many of the government agencies that have helped foster economic justice and fairness. Both of these men came to office when American was vulnerable and down. They brought hope and a new vision of how to make Americans believe in their country's potential again. We are at another watershed period. We need a new vision.

Senator Obama has not only the gift of oratory as did FDR and Reagan, but like them a “first class temperament” which can be used to draw Americans into his vision. He has the strong potential to craft a new game board and convince Americans to try to play by its new rules of economic justice and fairness. Hillary for all her skills cannot do this.

These ads are an example. This is why as an older woman I support Barack Obama.

I agree with AliceG: These are great ads for Obama. I was getting nervous seeing headlines to the effect of "Candidates Slug It Out Over National Security in Final Push." But these ads play to Barack's strength as an inspiring, forward-looking, natural-seeming person.

The Hillary ad I cannot objectively judge. I know this is personal, but I just can't look at something like this without thinking how hard she is pandering. That's probably unfair -- for all I know, she probably does have a sincere and long-standing concern for issues affecting Latinos. I still want to like Hillary -- and I'd certainly support her if she somehow won the nomination -- but I just find her hard to take these days.

Listened to HRC on CNN's "Ballot Box" yesterday. She's now affecting a Texas accent. It just adds to my impression that she's an energetic and intelligent lady sitting hard on eccentric and unstable tendencies.

Its useless to blame Mark Penn and company for her shortcomings. They could be the greatest team in history, but you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, and that is that.

Excellent

Terrific ads. Well done!