I found Clinton herself very likable and warm in this speech, despite the fact that it was one of the worst I've heard her or anyone give lately. It felt like a laundry list; it lacked vision and inspiration; it was dry. I listened to it wondering, "Is this the best she/her speechwriters can do?" She came across as a technocrat or wonk through what she said, while how she said it belied all that and made me feel we would be safe with her as president in many ways. Yet I longed for a spark of poetry. Maybe she'll find it, though I'm not hopeful. Anyone who can claim to have 35 years of experience and then say she found her voice in New Hampshire (what took you so long, Senator?) only to sound exactly as she had before, may not ever be an uplifting speaker. Despite her and her husband's claims, we need inspiring rhetoric as well as deeds: look at what FDR accomplished at both levels.

But she's going to hand him his arrogant butt in a debate too.

Obamites, you are going to have a bad week, so you just sit there and be vulgar.

Go Hillary!!!!!!!!!!!

It's taken a while to identify what is unsettling to me about Sen. Obama. To put it simply: its there substance behind the rhetoric? There may be - but I have no doubt about it when I listen to Sen. Clinton. Charisma and great oratorical skills are helpful in campaigns, but it's the ability to work with Congress and be familiar with foreign issues and have the experience to understand the complex issues that matters to me.

Agreed. Obama has a blank resume compared to most serious presidential contenders, has a very very shady history in Chicago (taking kickbacks from Rezzo and then blackmailing him when he was indited, screwing poor blacks by siding with the slumlord, etc). He also HAS been all rhetoric and no substance just like the GOP funding and helping him.

Notice too we saw no sign of this "cross appeal" he had last night - nor in the 3 years he's been in the Senate.

Funniest of all is the latte liberals fawning over him. He's far more religous than Hillary, far more of an extremist, far more likely to cave into the Republicans, etc.

I believe he would implode once the GOP started their mudslinging (with Hillary out of the way).

She on the other hand is tested. Nobody is going to have an easy time beating McCain, he's the GOP's strongest contester in the important western states for sure. However shes our best shot by far.

You're lies make me sick.

Please Salon... disallow the anonymous posting.

I think a lot of media types were expecting a Clinton defeat. The polls in California looked like they were being manufactured: Zogby's was misleading, to put it politely. They are at it again this morning. Nary a word about how the much touted Kennedy,Kerry and Dewal endorsements meant squat in Mass. It is going to be tough. Both candidates have their work cut out for them. But not to worry: our pundits will spin last night as an Obama victory: they are never wrong!

Wow!

Both Clinton and Obama are lawyers. But the Editor of the Harvard Law Review (Obama) those 15 or so years ago is a heavyweight legislator. By contrast we see a lightweight legislator in Hillary Rodham Clinton.

My God, what a contrast!

but she still wasn't funny!

Those comments by Ms. Goldfeder are a perfect illustration of why Obama has mounted a credible insurgency. Is Ms. Goldfeder sending her children or grandchildren to fight unending wars in the Middle East? I doubt it. That's for rural white trash and colored kids from the inner city.

This country ought not to be, as right-leaning Jews and certain Christian fundamentalists have tried their best to make it, a hyper-powerful auxiliary of Mossad and Likud.

To anybody who has a brain to think with, our Israel-right-or-wrong policies have been disastrous both for this country and the Middle East. It makes me incredibly depressed that so many of my fellow Democrats persist in this way of thinking.

Nice racist claptrap - Hillary would be a complete unknown without Bill Clinton - would NEVER have made it in New York without the name Clinton, would never have been a partner at Rose or sat on Walmart's board without the name Clinton.

What a great feminist icon - riding to the top on Bill's dick!

That is the main reason why Hillary is NOT dominating amongst the educated and higher income groups while Obama is.

He has more substance to him.

Bullshit.

Hillary may not have made political office, but she would have made partner at the Rose law firm on her own, and would have sat on the Wal-Mart board.

I don't like her, but as union-busting Republicans go she is one of the more competent ones and one should not write off all of her achievements just because she married well.

List of states won by Obama so far the mickey mouse club or what..........The populations of states won so far is Hillary 120 million, Obama 60.

I don't have time to investigate every claim right now, but I notice his list doesn't include Hillary's legislation to tie the minumum wage to congressional pay raises. I have a feeling that's a list for the credulous St. Obama supporters and not for people who care about the facts.

So you think the woman from Illinois would've strolled in from Harvard and got a top position one one of the oldest law firms in the state? After failing the DC bar?

You're dreaming.

And Walmart? One of Arkansas' biggest industries is gonna make an unknown a board memeber?

"Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., served on the board of the Arkansas-based company from 1986 to 1992 while her husband was governor of the state..."

Coincidence?

Sure...

You have to ask, are the cable news media pundits trying to skew America's perception on Hillary's prospects? I watched ABC coverage last night rather than CNN or MSNBC, and it was such a relief to not be bombarded with Obama mania and why HRC ultimately can't win when she clearly won almost all of the states she set out to win in. What is the deal? Also, I hope John Edwards is taking note that Obama is skewering the idea of mandated coverage for insurance....which means we'll never ever get to Universal health care.