We've got to remember; Joan says she thinks he would be a populist president. She says that she sort of places him above her in her mind; she gets the feeling that he thinks he is better than her or other people. I understand that it is important to look at how people are percieved. Joan feels that way about how he appears to her, but she THINKS very differently about him. Joan hasn't said as much about how Hillary is perceived. Most of us agree that sexism plays a role, but I'm sure Joan would agree that there are huge aspects of how Hillary can be percieved that aren't a function of sexism. It's fine with me to hear what Joan is worried about in terms of Obama perception. I guess if Hillary was winning we'd be hearing consistently from her about how badly Hillary can come across to Joan. I'm sure it has more to do with the fact that Obama is winning than anything else?

I wonder if Joan would be willing to share what she considers to be the way Hillary comes across. Nobody will accuse Joan of being sexist if she gives us such a list.

Hi,

I agree with much of your post, but....

What do you think it says about Obama that some of his supporters are really, really sexist and are not afraid to say awful things all the time to nice and reasonable Hillary supporters? Do you think that just because Hillary has awful supporters we should ignore how mean and inappropriate Obama supporters can be?

Don't you want to know there is a website where you can always be reminded that Obama has some people who support him who really are vocal and ignorant and awful? Joan will consistently point out this about his supporters. I'm not sure what she thinks about the awful Hillary supporters, but I'm sure she knows they are there.

Do you really think that Joan isn't fully aware of Hillary's shadow, how she hits many false notes and makes some awful decisions about how she campaigns? Yes, Joan does often point out Barack's mistakes and his potential character flaws, but do you really think she couldn't say the same types of things about Hillary?

Ok, sexism may be helping Barack, but you don't think Joan isn't very aware of all the other reasons that many many people prefer him over Hillary, do you?

Wait everybody.

AKA Smith applies this same sort of nitpic to Hillary as well. Go back and see how he treats her when she says the wrong type of word. He sees meaning in it both ways. Give him credit. This just happened to be Obama's mistake that he finds meaning in...

And, he has trouble finding meaning in most of my comments. He's not alone! But he is consistent.

you are missing it:

Joan won't be upset of Obama does well in PA. She is worried that something like bittergate might hurt Barack. She clearly was impressed by the content of his response to bittergate. It is understadable that she would be a bit worried about the effect it might have on his image.

AKA was only kidding. Read his other posts. He would be the ultimate hypocrite if he actually thought Barack's choice of words is all that meaningful. Just go back and see the stuff he says about Hillary's mistatements.

Thanks for your words!

Joan is awesome, but unfortunately (for me) she simply does not respond to the kind of comments you made. She will pick a really awful Obama supporter and respond or correct him/her.

I can't believe you responded as I was saying you wouldn't respond to Taritac. But it shows why I really do respect you!

Ok, I need to look at your reasons for highlighting the worst of Obama supporters and suggesting they are meaningful in way that Hillary's are not.

You said you would think further on this topic and so will I. I am going to look at your reasoning, put my feelings in check and respond to you. I want to be open to the idea that there is something different about awful Obama supporters. I see that you made a statement about the Obama supporters that are being respectful (I think you suggested that even they must be distinguished from Hillary suppoters). I swear: I'll think about what you say. But first I must READ it. But, more than anything. I appreciate what you're doing, even if I disagree, and, yes, even if you had not responded to my question. Thanks.

Thanks. I thanked you more in your latest blog.

I think Salon can't be accused of being in Obama trance, and, to that extent, I think that is balanced. But I am I big supporter of Salon (this is the first year in many that i haven't given my precious money, but that is not forever) AND I want Salon to be intelligently balanced. I don't mind if we look under the Obama rock, but it needs to be done fairly and intelligently. I don't think he or Hillary or McCain have been treated fairly by the mainstream press, but Glenn Greenwald and many others explain why they simply can't be treated fairly by mainstream press.

I'm not comfortable that your critiques basically often simply amplify the mainstream narrative. This isn't elitist of me because I honestly believe that it doesn't take a sophisticated education to address the core (and real) issues that are affecting the average (struggling) American. I want fair articles that focus on the real issues and that do not unconsciously absorb the habitual mentality that shapes our tired social discourse. It's not a snobby or intellectual conversation I'm looking for. Thanks, Joan.