cratliff wrote:

"One question I have: How many times does Hillary have to bring up "assassination" in this campaign before you say "enough"? I'd be curious to know how many times presidential candidates have brought up the topic in the last, say, seven or eight presidential campaigns. I don't recall anyone EVER bringing the topic up in 2004. Or 2000. Or 1996. Or 1992. Or 1988.... It's curious, to say the least, and it's worth at least asking the question: Why Now, if Not Then?

nicole p wrote:

"Hillary's apology on Friday annoyed me. Since she made the statement several times over the last few months, it certainly can't be characterized as an unfortunate misstatement brought on by Ted Kennedy's illness."

I KNOW! I like Walsch. I can't help it. But she really sets up conversations that are NOT possible. You can't have a real talk with her. Any type of comment that doesn't accept her entrenched premise is ignored or minimized beyond repair.

Joan simply only sees criticism of Hillary one way. That's it. So it makes sense that Joan's comment sections are fairly weak. You will find intelligent and respectful comments, but you hardly find Joan responding to those. It's impossible. And there is no reason to expect her to see the media coverage in any other way. I'm frustrated, but I don't know why, really. If you had asked me to write a fake Joan blog about the Hillary comments, I would have nailed it. Many of us would have and that is NOT including those who hate Joan or Hillary. Unfortunately, Joan only uses the crassest comments for her research and she refuses to call the media (and herself) on it real sins. She refuses.

It is possible to bring up sexism in this primary. It can be done. It can be done in a manner that would inspire a much more interesting and useful conversation. But Joan won't (can't?) do it. She cuts it into two tiny black/white chuncks, scratches her head and gets mad. It is impossible. I wonder what kind of conversation she imagines will result from her framing of this issue? Impossible.

exactly: there is no way that many of those who disagree strongly with Joan are doing so for the same reasons she is upset at the media. That would be stupid. And it wouldn't make sense.

How could there be smart (and basically good) people who would apply Joan's logic on Joan's arguments and get frustrated at Joan? You are spot on when you suggest that those who disagree with Joan prove she is certainly correct.

It's impossible.

What should we do? Hmmmmmmmmmmm. I'm really worried about the issues you bring up. Ok, we know there are awful men who hate women. And we know there are awful white people who hate black people. We know that some of those racists are republican...hmmmmmmmmmm...........

It seems to so hard to know what do to do. Obama people are sexist and bad (very very many of them; i mean, look at Joan's blog as PROOF). Awful republicans are recist and awful. Hillary can be awful, but not because of her gender. That is SO sexist to attribute her flaws to her sex. It seems impossible!!!!!

Hi,

What do you think we are learning from Obama's obvious enjoyment of negative attention on Hillary? I think one thing everybody can agree on is that you could actually tell that Hillary was upset when the press spent 14 days on Barack's Wright problem. Didn't Hillary spend most of that time defending Obama? Or...It's so hard to remember all the selfless acts she has engaged in on this election.

And to those of you who keep harping on Bosnia: She misspoke!!!! She admits it. She admits that she just said the wrong words a few different times. You act that that is soooooooo important.

And to those of you who keep harping on the fact that Hillary has mentioned the word "assassination" 4 times in this primary and that this might be unprecedented...well.....yea...Hillary has used that word, BUT ONLY when she wanted to point out that there was a death AT A CERTAIN TIME.

It is NOT fair to bring up that she was totally inaccurate about the rest of the quote. That implies that she has a pattern of inaccuracies that she then doesn't explain well.

Barack said he actually cared about Wright!!! Hillary misspeaks.

That is not impossible.

???????????how??????????

The Clinton campaign was very upset that Barack's comments were twisted. You could see in their faces that they wished the media had treated him fairly. Forget what Hillary said, look in her eyes and you'll see what I mean. Her words were in line with Fox and the rest, but her eyes said something very different. It was amazing!