Especially from Obama supporters, how they are gonna go republican if SHE is nominated.

You like Alito? Roberts? War? Giving the bird to the world?

Get over it. I would suggest that if nominated, you hold your nose (Like you probably always do, like a three year old) and vote for her. If my head was where yours is, I would to.

as a potential SC nominee in an Obama administration.

But, aside from that, what does this have to do with...anything?

All campaigns, and above all others, the media, has reduced the "Black Vote" to some monolith, an Oscar, to be awarded at the whim of pollsters and pundits.

Hardly so.

This reminds me of the discussion during the Nevada Caucases, where much was made of the "Latino Vote", and who's gonna get it. Comparing Nevada Latinos to, say, Florida Latinos or SF latinos is ludicris. I haven't done extensive research on this, but I'd be willing to be that SC blacks don't vote the same way that big city blacks vote. And further analysis might reveal that, *gasp*, Blacks in different areas of the country have different interests. I'm sure this has been done, but extrapolation across socio-economic lines is tricky and complicated, I guess. Might just as well reduce it to race.

We Whites, being the single biggest voting block, get to get subdivided in male and female, etc, but no one would assume that a white male in Boston will vote the same way as a white male in Houston. And yet, we are force fed this storyline about "Who's gonna get the Black vote? Is it the Black guy? Is is the Wife of the "First black president"? "

I remember how Bush and Rove went after the "Black vote" under the auspices of religion, reducing god fearin' black folk to so much quivering jellied masses of faith. I guess that works, because they did, in fact, siphon off some of this "Black vote" from Gore. And then disenfranchised the rest.

I think that Obama, in his person, does transcend race. That don't mean squat until the rest of us do, also.

"As for their effectiveness, I agree with a Copyranter commenter who said that "no kid on the street is going to stop and say, 'Wow, they're so right. They're not bitches. They're women.'"

Per your comments, THE TARGET IS NOT THE KID. It's the Dad. Not that Dads can't be as oblivious to this problem as their kids, but they shouldn't be. I think the ad is meant to grad Dads attention, like he was looking at his own kid in the ad.

"And it is a little odd to put the command "Respect women" in a to-do list that also includes "Eat your vegetables" and "Do your homework."

Why is this odd? These are the things we must all do to operate, and operate well in society. That's the very point. Should they have equated it with "Play your ipod" or "Smoke some crack"

The Democratic candidate should be the one who gets the most votes.

It's. That. Simple.

Is this weeks champion!!!

The only reason he has gotten this far is the mediocraty of Right Field, and the nature of the states voting first.

COme election day, if he is the (R) nominee, I think he will get trounced, despite what the polls say now. HRC would roll right over him, and Obama would make him look so so so old, and part of the problem.

I'm sure tha McCain is happy about the endorsement, but he shouldn't be. The Terminator is not welcome in many conservative circles, and at the same time, I don't think this mere endorsement would make many Democrats vote for McCain over the Democratic nominee.

There are many many conservatives, especially in the Religious Wrong, who will not go to the polls, even if HRC is the nominee. This is why GHWB and Dole (in part) lost, and why GWB won. And after 8 years with relatively little to show from their support for GWB, they will be more reluctant to go to the polls again

We have enemies in Iraq

But not in Saudi Arabia

The debate did, it seems, is lower the antagonistic rhetoric, it seems. Judging from the posts on this thread, and others, more people, especially Obama supports who previously threatened to hold their breath and turn blue before voting for HRC, are more willing to vote Democratic, regardless.

Clinton/Obama is a natural, unbeatable ticket, and would, I think, create an aura of inevitability for Democratic rule for the next 16 years. I think 8 years as VP would confer on Obama the mantel of experience that some perceive he lacks now (deserved or not)

Now that spells HOPE

I think that WES misses the point with the "afraid of FOX" comments, but I don't think that we should be boycotting FOX News. In the past, I might have said differently, but now, I don't know. Ratings, and respect, are both down for Fox right now, and putting our articulate, smart candidates there might not be such a bad thing. It might be their crib, but Howard Dean and Bill CLinton each went on FOX, and kicked ass.

No sense in preaching to the converted. To address the "KKK" comment in a previous letter - Yes, we should go there, to make our voice louder.

I find it hard to believe that their rating are down because of a stampeding exodus of democratic viewers. It's loss of credibility, even on the right. I think that a democratic presence is not a bad thing. I don't think that it hurts the left, and it could convert doubters on the right. Simply shunning Fox alienates those voters, and gives them even more excuse to dismiss the left.

Candidates make appearances in all kinds of weird, biased places. Fox is no different, and no, I don't necessarity think that by simply appearing they are "legitamizing" FOX.