"It is true that your critics in the media may cast doubt on your sincerity no matter what you say and no matter how hard you work, but your task is to deprive them of credibility."

Umm, many times they have no credibility yet they are still in important positions, reaching the masses on television, on the radio, in newspapers and magazines, every day. There are no repercussions for Hillary-hate in this country, no consequences. Hillary hopefully understands this now and doesn't care to play the game of giving them or "depriving them of credibility"---she knows it just doesn't matter in how they behave towards her. And hopefully that is why, if by some long shot she or anyone who advises her reads this sad article, she will laugh at this article too.

What will you guys do when the Clintons are finally gone?

You should be unmasked for the very reason that you ARE a fake. The reason that being? For the democratic party's own sanity and rest of us's sake.

Sen. Hillary Clinton will give you her full and undivided support, but don't count on all her voters doing the same. We're tired of people like Joe Conason's constantly sniping at us, focusing the conversation on our perceived disloyalty rather than on your qualifications.

What is to be gained by Clinton supporters not voting for you? A shakeup at the Democratic National Committee would be a good start. Perhaps a loss would send a message to the DNC that many of those who have been loyal party members for years are fed up with its actions to protect Iowa and New Hampshire's disproportionate role in the nominating process, its tinkering with the primary system so that not every vote is equal and its reliance on an arcane caucus system

Marc Ambinder:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/08/a_little_bit_more_exposition.php

This commentary is only a tad less hysterical than Maureen Dowd's last diatribe.

Salon must be desperate for click points.

Unless of course you wish to be relegated to the list of hystercial women scorned.

Is terribly dated

But clearly not in your case.

Thefakedoctor, she knows it doesn't matter because how they behave bears little relationship to reality. The vitriol she faces and faced throughout her campaign is so out-of-bounds to any possible cause that those teeth-gnashing lemmings are not worth commenting on, respecting, or even pissing on.

What people don't understand is that what let the genie out of the bottle as far as Hillary's supporters go was not anything that Hillary did but the indulgent sexism that was constantly directed towards her by the DNC, the media, and outline maniacs. She is not responsible for how many women feel. They are. They let the genie of retributive anger out of the bottle.

It is (whether he is responsible or not) up to Obama to heal those wounds and together with Clinton they seem to be making progress in that direction. Clinton was absolutely right. What her supporters are feeling cannot be overcome with appeals to mere party unity or threats of the overturn of Roe, or bullying, or even demands that Clinton's supporters behave logically. Wounds have nothing to do with logic.

It now turns out that it was never Clinton who was demanding that her name be put in nomination. That was just gossip. It turns out that Obama himself is more than willing for this to happen. So just who is it who doesn't have control of this supporters?

I really wonder if Conason has any women in his life and if he attempts to control them, because I cannot otherwise imagine why he thinks that they can be herded like sheep.

Like cats, more likely.

Here is something men (and some women) don't seem to understand. Clinton supporters have found a loyalty that goes way beyond loyalty to Clinton. We are loyal to the concept that women have the right to seek political power and still be treated decently.

Get used to it fellas. Many of us may end up voting for Obama, but we are not going back into the bottle.

To every man who ever called us cunts, bitches, whores, witches, to those who said that Clinton was shrill and calculating and criticized her for a simple moment of misty eyes, I thank you. You you have angered us and you have empowered us and we are using the backlash of that political power to change things for women.

And to you elitist feminists who will no doubt come in here and whine that these women, many moderate and working class, are really ruining feminism, I say this: Feminism doesn't belong to you anymore. It belongs to all of us so that each woman may individually shape her own destiny. We don't need our eyes on the guys and we don't need our us on you either. Feminism can be grown through grassroots beyond the intellectual influence of inbred women's studies programs.

Now get ready for the next struggle: Your classism is the next hill to charge.

There's something about this post that strikes me as, oh I don't know...divisive.

I certainly don't disagree with the sentiment or logic. Just... the tone, the reiteration of the recent leaked memos, the direct address...

It looks like you're hoping it's a letter-getter, Joe. I'm not biting.

the Obama campaign has been jeeringly tell her supporters to "hang it up" since Iowa (remember?).

Winning the nomination was seemingly not enough for them.

The punishment of the Clinton supporters must continue until full allegience is promised.

Unfortunately, hearts and minds are not won in this fashion.

[I am disturbed by the cadres who arrive at Salon each day -- from different sides -- "loaded for bear" -- anxious to "unload." I fear this represents a genuinely worrisome new sort of pathology. It accomplishes nothing that I can discern. It's as if we "liberal types" now have our own varieties of ditto-heads. No, I am not speaking ONLY of Obama supporters, but damn, there used to be some "exchange of ideas" here on Salon. Now it's just snipe-meets-snipe; not even amusing enough to be called snark. ]