Most people that I read here who say these things about Clinton do so without prefacing their comments with "I'm fine with a woman but..." They usually just spout their garbage directly.

On the other hand, people who object to Clinton for particular policy reasons often use the preface you have described. I think this is a reaction to the constant accusations of sexism from Clinton supporters.

So I think your example is somewhat bogus.

A woman I know told me about a year ago that she didn't want to sleep with me because "she liked me". Now, this is not what I usually expect as a result of being liked. But I accepted her reality, and we're still friends.

Sometimes you just have to accept what someone says without thinking about it too much.

Yes, my union supports Obama. We are health care workers, public service employees, and building services personnel/security officers.

Obama needs to emphasize his strengths with ALL demographics.

She knew herself well enough to know that sex would destroy the friendship.

I think you are exactly right...the problem is that I have trouble detaching my thinking from my penis, and I would bet that a lot of other men have the same problem.

The title of my post was a quote from the article, and I'm calling the quote a bogus argument. Maybe I wasn't very clear.

You'll probably spin that, too.

http://www.newsmax.com/politics/women_superdelegates/2008/04/17/88876.html

The superdelegates should be allowed to pick the more electable candidate...so let them!

You ought to get on the payroll of that spook who runs No Quarter...that might improve your bank account!

- the intro about Obama seems too long...rather than quickly setting up the comparison, it really seems like you're trying to cement the controversy in people's minds

- the video music is a lot better

to make sure that undecided readers think Wright = Obama come election day.

How about a feature article EVERY DAY about:

-McCain on abortion

-McCain on the war

-McCain on the economy

-McCain's associations

Too repetitious? Well what would you call all these Wright pieces???

If we follow Joan Walsh's logic, JFK should have denounced Catholicism and then dropped out of the race.

Every religion or social movement has it's bad aspects. We won't get anywhere by blacklisting the best and the brightest.

I'm more concerned about Clinton's statements on Iran, or McCain's position on abortion.

But "comfort level" is the key. Americans, Walsh implies, aren't "comfortable" with Wright.

Ouch!

The notion that foreign policy is more important than domestic policy is not a legitimate progressive position.

True. However we are also talking about the swing voters.

As far as electability vs nomination is concerned, I would like to see Obama nominated...I also have the opinion that he is electable. In the GE, I think he'll get most of the base that is going for Clinton in the primary, and get some of the independents. Think Gore + Nader. Of course, that could just be a pipe dream.

I don't see it as forsaking the more electable candidate. If Clinton was that strong, she would have done much better in the primary to date...she's only doing about 50/50 against a virtual unknown. I think Clinton would be Gore II in the GE.

Some time ago a person that I know told me that I write well. I was writing short stories at the time. Unfortunately, I decided that I have little to say about the important issues of our time. So, about a year ago, I decided to become a troll in the letters section at Salon.

If you go to the supermarket and pick up a novel you will discover that lack of talent is no great barrier to getting published. Ultimately, it's all about believing in yourself.

The stance Joan Walsh has taken regarding Rev. Wright shows how elites (and make no mistake: Walsh is an elite) are drawing lines in the sand over this issue.

Wright is outside their boundary; Hagee is not.

So he's being forced to do this ritual purging of a certain segment of his constituency, the one that scares white people.

Obama will not be allowed to move past a certain point. Yes, we have a high standard to live up to with our votes...8 years of Bush.

And really, HRC is no threat to that.

Not with a bullet...no blood will be spilled during the making of this major motion picture.

The Republican Party and the media will be co-producing.

Obama can

-WAKE THE FUCK UP!

-Hit back hard

-Form the third-largest political party in the US, and start arm-twisting

-Refuse to quit and go away

It's wide open!

I better buy one quick

If the last 8 years have taught us anything, it's that America is a country by elites, for elites. "Well what's wrong with that," you might say, "...after all, they run all those very important corporations that employ us."

True. It's also true that if you venture too far off Market Street you might bump into a person without health care, or a homeless weirdo, or maybe a crack baby in a dumpster. Yikes! Where did that come from???

Rev. Wright reminds us that there is an unreasonable world out there, full of unreasonable people. People who are really pissed about being poor. Some of these people have developed strange ideas. And we certainly don't want a President who is under the influence of strange ideas.

Better to elect a multi-multi-millionaire of any available gender. No crazy ideas ideas allowed, except for maybe "bomb-bomb Iran" or "annihilating Iran" or whatever.

Hey...no worries!!!

when I'm still reading about Wright in Salon seven months from now.

and Hillary still won't be able to put him away