I haven't seen it mentioned in the letters anywhere but the Rodhams apparently had some roots in a working class neighborhood in Scranton, and I'm sure she'll try to play it up. She never lived there herself but supposedly older residents of the neighborhood recall her visiting her grandparents there as a child. I'm not sure how much it will help her statewide. Most people in western Pa., while they probably have heard of Scranton, likely don't know where it is. Pa. is probably the most sectionalized state in the union.

you have my sympathies. people don't realize NY has its hillbillies, folks who came over on the Mayflower - and never made it. an inbred freakshow. Deliverance without the music. making bullets, drinking beer, hating jews and blacks. yes THAT'S Hillary's demographic!

Sorry, but this is all BS. Why do politicians need to pretend to be what they are not? It's impossible for a mere mortal to be everything to everybody. You are who you are -- don't apologize to anybody else because of it. Trying to do something (such as bowl, hunt or drive a tank) -- and failing at it -- just so you can attract the sympathies of this or that voting group is a political tactic concocted by Madison-avenue types whose stock-in-trade is manipulating people's baser instincts. If a politician really wants to "change" our politics and "elevate" the discourse he should eschew that tactic and present himself/herself as himself/herself. That is honesty.

Not to mention that your average voter (who, even though not college-educated) most probably sees through the whole facade, anyway. Honesty, however, is something we all know about. And they will recognize it when they see it.

But, again, he's just another pol. So I guess honesty was thrown out the window a long time ago.

(i skipped the last ten pages of this food fight)

Not upstate, Yonkers. But thank you!

You scribbled: "to anahadwolves: The South Side of Chicago is pretty down to earth.You ought to get out of the house now and then. Maybe then you might figure out your constant negative stereotyping is not only erroneous it's not close to witty.-- peeps"

South side of Chi-town was never a part of the discussion; we were talking about Obama campaigning in blue-collar Pennsylvania like one of the locals...which he isn't.

As for "negative stereotyping", I have you pegged as a snot-nosed 20-something pseudo-intellectual; if I have any of that wrong...I'd be surprised.

Now...be a good boy and crawl back into your can of RedBull and leave the adult conversation to adults.

Working Catholic "beer drinkers" make up the bulk of those who serve and die in the military. Talking to them about ending the war and still supporting their patriotism should be the point of Obama's visit to Penn. Aren't there at least a few things he wants to say to clear up the matter?

Yet the article does not make the point, either because Mike Madden doesn't get it or Obama fails to do so. Maybe there is nothing to "report". Apparently, it's all about "him" and whether or not the brilliant Harvard grad can knock back a few with the people who actually fight for the country.

This is a long standing problem. Not coming from the "class" (or trying desperately to get away from it) for the most part themselves the press has no better idea of the thinking of these folks than the candidates. To be kind, it sounds like he isn't doing much more than running against Hillary using the local media. How stupid does he think these people are?

Before he get out of the state, hopefully, somebody will call him on it and the press will see the significance rather than pretend the issue doesn't exist. The Republicans love to send Pennsylvanians to war. Barack has now been crippled with these worthy Americans more than has been divulged in my estimation.

A pin in your lapel means more to someone who has had a child die in another futile war than it does to someone scoring points with protected folks who live in glass houses. The worst are the ones who have found their way out but forgotten where they come from.

To elaborate, I came up in the 1980s during which bussing was a bitterly divisive issue, breeding deep animosities and violence all around. Yonkers was basically an outer-borough type place, working class, segregated (balkanized, even), extremely diverse. Irish, Italian, Jewish, black, hispanic, Polish, etc.

I've experienced enough racial and economic tension and strife to last me a lifetime, thank you very much.

This is why Obama's message appeals to me.

maureenodonnell: "John Kerry was being interviewed on South Coast Today.Com (HTP:/www.YouTube.com/watch?v..)"

Wait -- is that your idea of providing people with a link? You do realize that link is, ummm, incomplete?

maureen: "This expression "taken out of context" seems to be a favourite in the English-speaking world..."

And yet I used it accurately.

maureenodonnell: "The context in which John Kerry was speaking was Obama's "cachet" in the Muslim world, as Kerry perceived it, because he is "a black man" (direct quote)."

You're really jumping on something that is not worthy of criticism. Kerry's statement is correct and supported by independent surveys. It is likely that some of it has to do with Obama being a darker-skinned person.

maureen: "Despite your thinly-veiled hostility, Xrandadu Hutman, the whole world has an interest in the American election in an unprecedented way, for obvious reasons."

My hostility is not veiled. Believe me, it is not directed at you personally, it is directed at what I see as the carelessness of your communication here. You've brought in a subject out of the blue (John Kerry) and referred to a video (without providing us a helpful link) in which you misquote and oversimplify somebody's statements (without actually providing them), and then level prolonged criticism at him (most of which seems to be half-baked), all the while never telling us what your point is (do you think Obama's ethnic background is an asset or not?). Sure, you can have an opinion, but I'd like to have a better sense how you arrived at it.