... that when a media figure does something "bad" ... many to claim stake in the "badness" use the same "badness" manual. i like rebecca, but john edwards didn't call anyone names. you did, ma'am. if your cause is to enlighten, i recommend putting aside the vitriol. or maybe that was just man-bashing humor. how drool.

i drooled on my keyboard. i meant droll.

Orc-like??? Excuse me? Yeah, right. Like Hillary's NEVER tried to put down her opponents. She's just SO polite and keeps away from any negative comments.

You people really are taking the Hillary worship way too far. Edwards is right - politics is tough business, and if you folks at Salon are going to get all huffy and girly and simpery just because a candidate points out a hard truth about the business he's in, I don't know what.

You want orcs? How is it Edwards wins this award, but none of the Republicans, who make a CAREER out of being rude, nasty and derisive about their opponents have never been called such? You want orcs? How about pointing this little award at people who say that gays should be punished for being who they are, or that immigrants looking for work should be rounded uplike cattle, or that poor people deserve to die because they can't pay for health insurance?

What a childish, pathetic bunch of children you are. Here's an award for you, Traister - you win my Lobelia Sackville-Baggins Award of the Year, for pettiness, mean-spirited finger-pointing, and overreaction to the point of inanity. And if you don't get the reference, look it up.

Feh.

Is this really any worse than Hillary saying that terrorists might attack during the election and that we'll need a leader (like her) who is strong enough during that time?

John Edwards was our best chance for real change but The Obama has killed that..

All we have now is hope and change, hope Obama changes and actually says something..!

I'm voting for Kucinich in the NY primary..then who knows..

Obama is a politician and we need a leader after these years of hell under the Bush family tyranny..

Hillary Clinton teared up after a grueling campaign, and John Edwards got snippy after the same damn thing. That shows one thing: they're both human. Find somebody else to demonize who really deserves it (hint: the entire goddamn GOP).

What award does HRC get for pulling out Obama's kindergarten essays? What award does she get for letting her staff call Obama a drug dealer? Or is racism beyond the purview of Broadsheet?

Personally, I thought Edwards' comment was stupid and self-defeating, but to call him an Orc? If that comment makes a person an Orc, then Hillary Clinton is more fragile than I thought.

In fairness, HRC didn't "let her staff call Obama a drug dealer." She immediately fired the guy who said that.

This post is pretty ridiculous. Edwards is very civil by the standards of contemporary attack politics. He didn't do anything wrong -- today, or in the debates.

To the Kucinich booster above: I like Kucinich too, but he's still a politician. (If he's not a politician, then what is he? And why is it bad, per se, to be a politician? We NEED some skillful politicians working for the progressive cause right now.)

He really acted like a little bitch today. Please, Obama, don't pick Edwards as a running mate.

joan walsh: hey rebecca, i'm in new hampshire and i'm really busy hangin' out with hill and bill ... devising super-secret ways to trick salon readers with our new mind control laser. will you write a funny blurb about that man edwards, and the mean things he said about our supreme leader, hillary?

rebecca traister: yes, mother. i will obey.

Stay classy Rebecca Traister. Was that your own homophobia speaking about his shiny hair? As can be seen by the posts around here, what you did was to greenlight other people's homophobic remarks.

Always classy Becky, always classy.

First, they're so oppressive.

Then, they have the nerve to actually try to win elections. Everyone knows Hilary should win this -- she's a woman after all, and she went to Wellesley, and she worked so hard and learned so much and was so nice to all those dreary old Senators. She's supposed to win! You PROMISED! This isn't FAIR!

After all you guys lined up behind her, and all her sleaziness (whitewater? Running for the Senate in a state she'd never lived in.) was, of course, forgiven, because after all, she has ovaries, she then gets all weepy because -- oh my gosh! -- she got her ass kicked in Iowa and it looks very much like she's going to get stomped in New Hampshire, too.

She's going to LOSE. She's going to lose early, and badly, and that is going to be the end of her whole stupid presidential game.

And because Edwards actually acts like a guy who wants to win the campaign, and points out that someone who starts weeping in front of a crowd at something like this maybe isn't the ideal candidate to be, you know, the leader of the free world, you pillory him.

Grow up. This is real politics, with real issues at stake, and at the end of the day, voters don't give a shit what you think about Hilary. They don't like her.

I mean flick the switch and watch them die? I have. That's my standard. What's yours?

Probably on both sides, Hillary's got to look more human (though I don't doubt the sentiment is actually true) and Edwards has to seem tougher. He'll get more votes than he'll lose from this comment. However, I think they are both scoring points with demographics that they are otherwise weak in, or at least weaker than Obama.

Cynical, yes, but frankly I'd rather a crafty president than... well you know.

I'm sorry, but, during the Manchester debate, didn't Senator Clinton basically accuse John Edwards of killing Natalie Sarkisyan because he failed to pass the Patients' Bill of Rights?

Didn't Jay Carson, the following day, say "the references in Senator Clinton's speeches are about people she has actually helped and changes she has actually made, not stories she's pulled from the newspaper and included in her stump," thus basically accusing Edwards of being a complete phony?

I wonder, did Senator Clinton merit an Orc award after Election Day in 2000, when she said killing Ralph Nader "might not be a bad idea?" (This is not a wing-nut Vince Fosterism...look it up.)

And how dare bring orcs into this anyway, when Clinton's been trying to Boromir her way to the White House from Day 1?

Rebecca, I don't begrudge you using your media platform to support Hillary Clinton. I'm doing the same over where I live with Barack Obama. Nevertheless, your piece is clearly overreacting due to the heat of the moment.

Edwards was maybe snippier than he should have been, just as Obama could've been nicer during the "likability" moment in the Manchester debate. But, given the obvious low-balls the Clinton camp is throwing at both of them, I can see why neither candidate is feeling all that gentlemanly when the Senator suddenly decides emotion will work better for her. (I already mentioned the Edwards side. For his part, since Iowa, Obama has had to contend with false abortion mailers and subtle invoking of Willie Hortonish drug hysteria, by way of "mandatory minimums.")

I don't know how shook up Senator Clinton was in today's much-discussed moment -- The fact that I have to think about whether it was genuine or not suggests the problem here. In the wake of Mark Penn's disastrous, poll-driven campaign thus far, it seems all too likely that Clinton's recent displays of emotion are clearly an attempt by the "White Boys" to rebrand the candidate, just before embarking on a scorched-earth negative campaign after NH that'll make the world tremble. (And, given that I worked for them for three years, I know of what I speak.)