An anonymous poster, quoting anonymous posters. Now here's an anonymous poster commenting on it. So very meta.

Salon, are we done with this option yet?

Do we really want to take away anonymous postings? What's next, no more anonymous letters, anonymous screeds, anonymous pamphlets, anonymous phone calls? Maybe we can get FISA to demand Salon turn over all users' IP addresses to you, so you can sift through them and look for patterns.

Glenn Greenwald might have an issue with that sentiment.

Krugman's column filled me with the kind of joy I get when reading Jabberwocky. Krugman has fallen through some sort of rabbit hole in which the rich and powerful Clintons, who get away with anything and everything, are somehow the victims and poor nobody Obama supporters somehow the aggressors.

Just remember, Paul Baby, what the dormouse said.

Anybody want a peanut?

-- Fezzik

Because a lot of the populace votes based on who they would most like to have a beer with.

Hmm, those who forget history are condemned to repeat it.

But go ahead and have a beer with Hillary. Obama says she is likable enough.

June 27, 1989.

Where have you been? Also, while the crones from NOW were hobknobbing on K Street, and the Ericka Jong and Paul Krugman were knee-deep in self-promotion and snob-literary career building, Planned Parenthoods, private and public abortion and birth control centers were closing up shop, as on that fateful day in 1989, the high court ruled Roe v. Wade to be a states-rights issue.

Under the Clinton Administration, the high court continued to pass further restrictions on abortion, both accessibility and procedural.

So, there's nothing to care about. Also, HRC went on record last summer (2007) that it was her current belief that the act of abortion was "a tragedy".

So much for the Clinton "Experience" change.

As for Obama "can't win"? Neither can HRC. If she could, she'd have the nomination wrapped up six weeks ago. She's polarizing in her own party.

As for those of us who will not vote for her in the general election, most of us were not going to vote for her in the first place, as one upposter said, "if Obama had never been born.

Curtains for the Dems.

Sorry, you did respond to the cytheria post.

I just felt with first few posts you made, you singled out Obama supporters (and I've noticed you arguing over the whole, Obama slights Clinton incident at the State of the Union Address) and said nothing about Clinton supporters who said similiar mean things about him.

I thought you were being blind to both sides. I see you kind of answered cytheria. (I'm sure you think she's just a Obama clone trying to stir shit up, though. Just kidding. Not really though.)

However, the reason why I said stop it to you is that you seemed hell-bent on tarring all Obama supporters with same brush. Which seems sort of...prejudiced. Not racist, just prejudiced. We're not all psychos. So there are few bad apples in the bunch. Isn't that normal in any presidential campaign? It was true when I ran for class secratary and it's true now.

Plenty of salon posters have been discussing policy, have been making arguments for and against the experience issues and also discussed the Iraq vote. If you want a policy debate there are plenty of people on this website to discuss this with. Instead, you start "reflecting" what the Obama supporters (all 100% of them I guess) have been saying about Clinton. Nothing about Obama. Wait a second, maybe my apology came to fast. I don't know, I think your just trying to instigate. And you used that cytheria post to cover your instigation so no one could call "shenanigans" or whatever.

Wow, your like a Rovian supergenius, aren't you? I salute you Agent Smith. Your the debil...hehe.

It isn't enough to talk about change. We've all heard the rhetoric. Real change is something that you can readily identify. It has characteristics that can reach out and touch in a visceral way.

When you've spent eight years in a hole surrounded by unseen threats dictated to you by some color code and someone comes along and demonstrates that not only do they not believe the "truth" you're living, but know that things can be different, you either offer up your hand or hunker down further into your hole.

People want to believe that they are instruments of change. We are all rebels at heart. We all grew up wanting to be more than our parents. We cannot move beyond where we are without the innate belief and aspirations that the future is an exciting, rewarding place worthy of the struggle it takes to get there.

Obama supporters realize they can escape the hole and find the incessant voice of a government that dictates from fear is replaced by the sounds of eager enthusiasm.

Paul Krugman can stay in his hole. Or he can leave it.

A poem forsooth:

People want to believe that they are instruments of change.

We are all rebels at heart.

We all grew up wanting to be

more than our parents.

We cannot move beyond where we are

without the innate belief and aspirations

that the future is an exciting, rewarding place

worthy of the struggle it takes to get there.

Obama supporters realize

they can escape the hole

and find the incessant voice of a government that dictates from fear

is replaced by the sounds

of eager enthusiasm.

Doo-dah doo-dah...

I can't believe what I am reading. My reading of Krugman's column - he sees that the media is consistently negative towards Clinton and defines this as "Clinton Rules". I've read through almost all the posts here and I see many Obama supporters using (parroting) what the media is/has been saying about Clinton since the 90s. It upsets me to see proported liberals who support Obama using those very talking points that the obviously biased media is concocting agst the Clinton camp. All the talk of queen Hillary and her sense of entitlement is totally made up by the media and I can't believe my follow dems who happen to support Obama would actually use that. For the record, I was ready to vote for Edwards on the Cal primary and I very carefully studied who to vote for. Hillary might not be as exciting as Obama but she has real and feasible plans on how to make our country better. I call shame on those out there in whatever camp who think that because the media says it is okay they can take low shots at Clinton without taking a closer look at who she is and what she stands for.