She made up, out of whole cloth, a fantastic story about how her life was in danger on a USO tour she went on with Sinbad and her fifteen year old daughter. It wasn't a slip of the tongue or a 'brain fart', it was freakin' weird. Bizarre. Deeply troubling to anyone who isn't in the tank for her (HI W.E.S!) Add to that some at-best questionable statements about her positions on NAFTA, S-CHIP, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Northern Ireland peace process, and she had kind of set herself up for skepticism, doncha think?

Your candidate and her surrogates (Begala, Wolfson and the usual suspects) are pressing the "San Francisco" button every chance they get.

And Dan "Lieberman" Gerstein may have endorsed Obama, but Ned Lamont is actually an official part of the Obama campaign.

Both of those facts ought to tell you something

I meant that Lamont may be a better indicator of what's good for the party and the country than, say Ed Koch, Mark Pryor or Evan Bayh, but in both cases, you may have Bill Clinton doing his passive aggressive peeing-in-the-pool that leads to a pathological warmonger into office over the better, progressive candidate.

Has Krugman noticed that Obama has won the nomination? That the Dems are just going through an elaborate, self-destructive dance in the hope that she'll tell her diehard supporters (like Krugman and Joan Walsh) that beating McCain is more important than her (or their) hurt feelings? Are we gonna be grown-ups about this? Or get all Nadery and self-indulgent at the expense of the country?

Something's "gone wrong" with Obama's campaign because he only cut HRC's lead in PA from 20 to 10 points? Because she's pretending that North Carolina or Indiana can somehow save her candidacy? (They can't).

And nacazo: I read Edith Hamilton's "Mythology". Does that make me a Greek pagan? Though I will admit to worshipping Dionysis regularly.

What's gone wrong is that working class voters can smell bullshit quicker and more accurately than starry-eyed kids and rich liberal idiots.

That aside, I'm not sure how you see Hillary's campaign as being bullshit-free. Sniper fire ring a bell?

To say nothing of her ever-evolving positions on NAFTA and other trade agreements.

There's a reason she's losing big to McCain in Michigan (where Obama leads McCain by a solid margin).

I think this is partly true: It isn't the Jews.

It is the stupid crazy warmongering idiots who support the warbuckers. They use Israel and the our Judeo-Christian-Islamic mythology to sell war.

They also make a lot of money providing the "enemy" with weapons and wherewithal also.

It isn't just about Jewish votes. Saying "Hamas" is like saying "al Qaeda". To most Americans, and apparently to John McCain and Ken Pollack, these words, and "terrorist" and "Islamofascist" are 'acceptable catchall terms' (I think that was Pollack's phrase) to say "scary brown people who want to kill you".

Not that there isn't an element of Jewish pandering in McCain's campaign, not that Joe Lieberman won't be going to every retirement home in Florida harping on the "McCain's better for Israel" line, just like he did for Bush in '04. But if you want to see divisive, lowest-common-denominator, scare-mongering and pandering for Jewsih votes, Hillary Clinton ("Farrakhan! Farrakhan!") could give McCain lessons. In fact, didn't she start the Hamas stuff a week or so before McCain?

If Hillary Clinton were a man, would we all be walking on eggshells not offend her? I'm trying to remember if we were all on pins-and-needles, watching every word to make sure Clinton supporters didn't offend the delicate sensibilities of Tsongas supporters in '92; the Kerry campaign never talked about paying off Howard Dean's campaign debts in '04, to my recollection.

H. Clinton and Obama don't like each other, the Veep slot is a demotion for her, her husband can't stay out of the way of her campaign, how the hell does anyone expect him to stay out of the way an administration that he thinks should be his wife's (and by extention, his validation)? And how many people really believe that there isn't at least a fifty-fifty chance that some GOP sleaze-artist is just waiting to go public with a post-2000 zipper story, that would do just as much damage to an Obama-Clinton ticket as it would to Clinton-Whoever ticket.

She gave it her best shot. It wasn't good enough, because she voted for Bush's war. It's not sexism; it's foreign policy.

You're going to have to explain how pointing out the simple electoral reality is "bashing" Hillary. Much less her supporters.

In your mind, is the only acceptable slogan for the Obama campaign: "I'm sorry--please vote for me anyway"?

Hillary Clinton is responsible for her own political and campaign decisions--from the AUMF to Kyl-Lieberman to Mark Penn to the demagoguery and pandering of the last two month--and their consequences.

How, exactly, is that "bashing"? Or sexist? Or anything other than a simple fact?

LMAO........For the last 4 months 75 percent of them have sounded exactly like the right wing during the Starr investigation.

Funny. I keep hearing Clinton supporters trying to pimp (used advisedly) a shady but innocuous land deal and a lot of guilt by association.

I almost wish we could play out a McCain-Clinton race just so we, and the Clinton campaign, could see how pathetic this "You're being mean to us!" strategy is outside the hothouse of the Democratic Party (actually, to a lot of us, it looks pretty sad from this side too).

Ya beat me to it. I can't believe Lieberman was dumb enough to lead with his chin like that. I hope Obama is blast-faxing his surrogates right now with an "I wanna talk to Tehran, not send Ollie North with a face-cake, a bible and a planeload of stinger missiles".