I really couldn't believe how unhinged Walsh was. She seemed angry, foaming-at-the-mouth-angry, in fact. I think she was freaking rabid!

Joan seemed outraged that people would "misconstrue" Clinton's remark?? How could she not understand that SOME people might question Clinton's intent, or her motive? At the very least, the comment was profoundly idiotic and not even close to reality in terms of 1968 vs. 2008. Is Walsh really that stupid? I agree with the other guy who was on the same program with her that Clinton should have apologized to Obama, as that would have been the right thing to do. At the very least, she could have said, publicly, "I know the way it sounded, and some might take it that way, so I apologize to my dear colleague, Senator Obama." If Hillary truly cared about the party, or the Obama supporters, or his family, she just would have done a "mea culpa" and apologized.

Joan, this is simply adult behavior: taking responsibility for one's actions and one's comments. Your screeching on Hardball was "It's ALL OBAMA'S FAULT." This is five-year-old thinking, not an adult's.

I have the same feeling about '08 as you do. I hope we're both wrong. If the Dems lose the White House this year, I think I would have had enough of the Dems forever, and just simply leave the party for good. Nothing progressive will ever come out of the party if that's the case.

Her suggestion that McClellan could have found his voice sooner, or quit, is a good one. It would have shown some integrity. To my recollection, Christine Todd Whitman resigned because she couldn't toe the line, and found herself at odds with her boss. I don't agree with Ms. Whitman's position or her politics, but I give her credit for leaving.

Bob Dole's scathing criticism is pretty much on the mark.

YAWN

I did agree, Joan, that I share Dole's disgust for McClellan, and think he is a miserable creature, not because he wrote a tell-all book, but because he stayed in the White House, worked for Bush, and lied through his teeth. These lies, damn lies, killed people. May he rot in Hell.

However, I do find his book significant. And the vitriol against him from the Republicans is predicted.

I did watch your clip on Hardball (talking about Hillary's RFK gaffe with Madison(?)) and I'm happy that you see that you didn't make the point that her comment is/was extremely insensitive. I obviously prefer Obama (I wouldn't call myself a fan, as I preferred Kucinich's positions), but I too, agree with your point that it would have been better had the Obama campaign never even mentioned or referenced her remark. But, as you must know, and surely as Hillary must know, that Obama turning the tables on her is only fair play in these dirty politics. I mean, the Clinton campaign went on, and on, about Rev. Wright, and bittergate, so, I really don't understand your anger when turn-about is these circumstances is only fair play. I must confess, however, that Obama's statements about "Change" don't match the politics-as-usual, politics-as-dirty, mantra that he likes to invoke. He might be better served sticking exactly to the type of behavior he espouses. In other words, he should be the opposite of Clinton.

All the pissing and moaning and booing amounts to blowing smoke up the asses of the rules committee. Anyone with a third grade education or higher knows this is just bullshit.

The question isn't the primacy of Iowa or New Hampshire, that's irrevelant right now. The question is whether to honor the delegates. Any moron, again, knows that the elections in these states were bogus and illegitimate. The DNC owes nothing to these states. All the candidates agreed, and everyone knew the sanctions months ago. If I were the committee chair I would tell Clinton to shove it and stop her fucking whining (and then I would have to resign but I would feel better for having said in plain language).

Your comment about the need for a third party resonates with me. As I progressive I have been torn about whether to support the Democrats this year. I decided to give it one more shot in 2008.

Hillary doesn't represent progressive ideals, because her record is not progressive, it's reformist rather, maintaining the status quo (corporate power and lobbyists) and only tinkering around the edges to stave off an implosion (for example, healthcare needs fixing because the system is collapsing).

I'm skeptical that Obama is a vehicle of progressive change, precisely because he's a democrat. All progressive movements have died once they get sucked into the Democratic Party

Hillary knew that Michigan might be a real factor and encouraged the people to vote

That's just called hedging your bets, especially when you've refused to comply with the party rules. I am of the opinion that a person should keep her word, and honor an agreement. No amount of blogging, grandstanding, bitching, or moaning can change the history of what happened in MI and FL.

I do agree that the voters got royally screwed. In MI, Granholm, a HRC supporter, signed the bill into law. One of Hillary's supporters ended up screwing the voters (I don't blame Hillary for this, she doesn't have control over her supporters) but Hillary should have made a scene before the vote if she cared about the voters. Her actions and her reticence lead me to believe that she didn't give a rat's ass about the voters in MI, so I don't know they want to vote for her now.