I hope, in her "desperation," she wounds Obama beyond repair, setting him up for the McCain kill. Lash out, Hillary, slash, burn!

of the attacks. Such as this:

"My opponent says that he'll take on the special interests. Well, he told people he stood up to the nuclear industry and passed a bill against them. But he actually let the nuclear industry water down his bill -- the bill never actually passed. On top of that, the same company that watered down that bill lobbied for Dick Cheney's energy bill. And my opponent voted for the energy bill, with its billions of dollars of breaks for the oil industry. I voted against it."

Whining about Clinton's desperation or attacking her in turn do nothing to rebut the claims here. Any ideas? Is Obama in the pocket of the nuclear industry, for example? Or do you even care? Are you just in this to be inspired and feel all squishy inside?

in even trying to respond to the substance of Clinton's charges is very telling. They want to change the subject or attack the messenger. Obama has a glass jaw--and McCain will shatter it in the general.

That doesn't even BEGIN to respond to the charges. Try harder. Your candidate needs you!

Did he actually do anything to help the Maytag workers in Illinois?

Chirp chirp chirp.

Wow, the silence on the substance of the charges is freaking deafening. Not a good sign.

Quick, who has David Axelrod on speed dial. I need my talking points, fast!

but you're going to have to do better than that. Or maybe you just can't and all these charges are true?

you better get used to it if your empty suit of a candidate gets the nomination. Judging by how pathetic your efforts are to defend him against Clinton's charges, it's pretty clear McCain and his minions will TEAR YOUR BOY APART!

More charges, Obamabots. Deal with them swiftly!

http://thefeldmanblog.com/2008/02/03/barack-obama-lies-about-legislative-recordbacked-nuclear-industry-but-claims-he-didnt/

Your guy is in the pocket of the nuclear industry, but at least he pays his vendors! LMAO.

Though at least you admit your candidate isn't perfect. This might get you drummed out of the cult. But tell us what you actually THINK about Obama's negatives. What are your views about his stance on nuclear power? his relationship with Rezko?

What an empty suit Obama is.

beggars description.

Latinos won't vote for Obama.

It's always convenient when you don't have to explain yourself, isn't it--given that your candidate is a hollow bag of wind. I understand your reluctance to defend him, believe me.

Why should he debate? He is terrified of being exposed for what he is--an inexperienced clown. I can perfectly understand that.

I will say out loud what pleases me, thanks. And what pleases me is to tell you the truth: Obama is an empty suit. If it didn't bother you, you would just ignore it. But you know it is true.

It was cowardly, and Wisconsin voters will perceive that. There has only been ONE head-to-head debate. Apparently Obama thinks Wisconsin isn't good enough for another one. We all know why, don't we? (Hint: empty suit.)

What an empty suit.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/report_obama_far_outpacing_hil.php

Loses New Mexico caucus.

Has to explain, in a whining and defensive ad, why Wisconsin voters don't deserve a debate.

Is exposed for his lies about Clinton and NAFTA:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/14/did-hillary-clinton-reall_n_86674.html?view=print

New polls emerge showing him down by 20+ in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

All hail the empty suit!

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/14/225232/180

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,0,1843097.story?page=1

Words of hope and unity from the cynical Obamabots. Your man is still walking, talking slime.

but Cythera45 and Brian - Seattle are horrible and should be banned.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/is-obama-using.html?cid=102479914#comment-102479914

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/16/103052/528

This is what we call changing politics.

Pubius maximus? By the way, your comments on this topic deserve a lot of respect given your classy screen name!

http://influencepeddler.blogspot.com/2006/11/barack-obama-sexist-rorschach-test.html

blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/obamas-cup-of-t.html

This guy is truly, truly repulsive.

But Pubius Maximus? Come on! Overcompensate much? How about Dickius Lackius?

You're the one with the stupid name, Incontinentia Buttocks. And like you've been addressing the issues! LMAO!

How many premature coronations can one candidate survive?

No coronation, not tonight. A humiliating loss instead.

Dems need to know that NOW. McCain won't pull his punches in the general, why should Hillary do that now?

Though I understand you'd rather talk about anything besides the evisceration your candidate is receiving tonight.

I went away and came back on a night when things are HOPPING and Barack is getting stomped. Folded, spindled, and mutilated. You pick the metaphor, sweetie.

But he is suffering now, and lashing out. So sad.

But he is suffering now, and lashing out. So sad.

and Obama lost, badly. If you claim he'd have won if he's campaigned there--well, he campaigned, hard, in Texas and Ohio, outspent Clinton 2-1, and lost. He just doesn't have what it takes to put her away.

and Democrats should be angry at her for that? Better to have waited and seen the Republicans expose him for the lightweight he is in the Fall? That worked so well in 2004.

is meaningless if you can't convince the superdelegates you have a true killer instinct and can close the deal by winning the big swing states. For Obama to keep chattering on about the delegate totals, after he just got clobbered in Ohio, makes him sound a little silly. I mean, there is no rule anywhere that says you win the nomination if you have more pledged delegates. If I were a superdelegate who just watched Obama flail around for a week looking lost and scared, I'd think twice before casting a vote for him.

Winning matters.