Glad you're back... I've missed your presence here today.

...of Billie Jean King v Bobby Riggs:

I also do think that if Obama had decisively won New Hampshire, a state in which Clinton had an almost unparalleled campaign apparatus for a long time, this would have made him nearly unstoppable for the nomination.

Before the match, the coverage was all about what a superior tennis player Riggs was, given his age and experience, I guess. After the match, it was all about how much stronger King was, more muscular and more fit. The press performed similarly yesterday.

I agree with you about the condescension behind that "reasoning."

However, I do think it's possible that Hillary's expression of emotion did make a difference to late-deciders, and maybe even to some who changed their minds.

But it would have been because in that moment she exposed the press's cynicism for what it was, by saying that the election is not just a game, that it's about people's lives. You'd never know that from reading any of the coverage.

What else could any thinking, sentient person, comparing her heartfelt statement with the jaded press coverage, think? Or do? If they had still been undecided, perhaps they were still comparing Hillary with the other candidates, trying to decide where to stand in history. By itself, Hillary's emotional moment might not have meant much, but contrasted with the coverage, it did. I know I was moved by it, and I'm not even a primary Hillary supporter. But I'm still pleased that her wake overturned the press's dinghy.

...that all of Edwards' support is from anti-Clinton voters, who would vote for Obama, if Edwards were not in the race.

Not true. Since Dodd has dropped out, Edwards is my next choice. Then Clinton. Then Obama. I don't think I'm particularly unique, either.

...your infection-fighting comment for future reference, hopefully unneeded... but thank you just the same.

bystander, I love your anecdote about the TA who was a non-native English speaker.

Because I don't have cable, I don't watch MSNBC, et al. Of course, that also means that I have not been able to see any of the debates, but have had to keep up with snippets and clips on the internet. Perhaps that's enough... but I really do think there's something wrong with a "Democracy" that expects its citizens to pay for cable in order to view the debates... such as they are. Much more expensive than a poll tax.

Anyway, I watch the Lehrer NewsHour on weeknights, listen to BBC Radio, sometimes NPR, and live for Sunday mornings with the McLaughlin Group (and sometimes some of the other talking heads, but no more MTP, since HuffPo covers him).

I love John McLaughlin's way of running his group. Eccentric, I know, but their collective wisdom beats any of the mainstream folks, hands down. In fact, Pat Buchanan is also a regular there, and several people here have expressed surprise that he was the only other voice than Brokaw's to admit that the Media was wrong yesterday. Admittedly, I rarely agree with Buchanan, but I do recognize that he can play fair, something I don't think anyone can say right now about Matthews. It might have something to do with his (Buchanan) being a regular on McLaughlin's program.

(I've only ever emailed to complain about one person on that show and it was Mort Zuckerman, and I notice that he's not there as regularly any more.)

While you're on this 'roll', please grab your crayon and whip off a note to the NYT about Junior, and MSNBC about Tweety.

Who knows. We might get lucky.

"I'll take it under advisement." ;~)

FYI... Zuckerman has still been there on occasion...

Crayon?

I won't venture to postulate here why open expressions of sexism, in my opinion, have been able to survive more than open racism. --DCLaw1

Because such expressions are still tolerated on the Left, unlike expressions of racism. I more or less quit reading Broadsheet ages ago, because of the misogyny resident there. (My stomach couldn't take it any more.) But that's just one very near example. There was also the Kathy Sierra case that really revealed how prevalent sexism and misogyny are all over the web, including the Left.

The reason that its tolerance by the Left matters is because the Right and Left are held to different ethical standards: anything goes, i.e., ends justify means vs. put people first, and political correctness.

If the public sphere's "conscience" will tolerate something like sexism, why shouldn't anyone else-- who wants to-- feel free to express themselves the same way?

...that Glenn's comment threads are among the least sexist anywhere, and especially among the regulars.