Folks, you’ve been played like a fiddle by people in the media who just plain hate the Clintons. They tried to take Hillary down over her clothes, her voice, her tears. When none of that worked, they invented a race war.

There are some perfectly good arguments against Hillary—Iraq, the presence of people like Mark Penn, the big-money Dems in her circle. But this really is Al-Gore-says-he-invented-the-Internet stuff. And it’s deeply depressing to see so many progressives fall for it.

Bravo Paul Krugman. Tell it like it is! Thank you for being an American patriot and hero.

and BOO to the so-called progressives. You immature losers are destroying America.

I always read GG's articles. I would post to his threads but it is just a chat room with the same posters saying the same things. If Salon had a filter where one could ignore certain posters, I would participate in GG's threads. Or if I could determine who wrote the comment at the beginning, it would be OK. But to read a paragraph or a sentence and discover you're reading bebooper; that's depressing!

Reading Kovie or gc_Wall is truly enlightening and rewarding! Even shooter242 or some of the remarks imparted by sugarman are OK. At least I find out what the neocons are thinking and what their talking points are. But regarding most of the other chatters, without the benefit of a filter, I'd rather not bother.

As far a McCain goes, I detest his stand on the war but at least the torturing would stop. He is for campaign reform. He is far from an ideal candidate for me, yet is better than Clinton. He is honest, at least I tend to think so, but he could be fooling me. I don't have to make that choice yet.

The FISA bill is being voted on, and Hillary is not on the floor to vote on this bill.

Obama is voting on the bill.

Where's Hillary?

He would not say anything unless there is strong evidence supporting that position.

That is why he has been everybody's favorite. That is until, he says something bad about who you like.

I want a young energetic leader, who has not been sold on the political corruption in Washington D.C. as a way of life.

Right, you want someone who has only been sold on political corruption in Illinois.

Mr. Obama's main asset is that he appears to be quite rational, coherent, straight forward, and competent. Those traits matter to me more than the plethora of issues that I admit to lending my attention to only a few.

Mr. Obama made himself as a thinker and doer, and exudes an inner strength that one would expect in a leader. Mr. Obama is not someone I would want to have a beer with, he is someone I would want to learn from.

When he discusses his campaign or himself he appears to be quite genuine, and that is the way I want someone to be with me. His family keeps him humble, that is also important.

I want a young energetic leader, who has not been sold on the political corruption in Washington D.C. as a way of life. I want someone who actually gives a damn about the downward path our nation has taken due to corporate propaganda sold over the news media.

I want a president who knows that corporate control of the government is bad for America, bad for people, bad for the environment, and terrible for our political lives. The products the corporations have been selling such as war, torture, warrantless surveillance, privatization, corporate welfare, and disregard for the rule of law are symptoms of mental illness not sound public policy.

Dear Mr. Koppelman,

The New York Times Op Ed column has Frank Rich, Kristol and Maureen Dowd who constantly attack Hillary Clinton with vitriol and can seem to find little wrong with their "Teflon Candidate," Barack Obama.

Then there is Bob Herbert who is one of the most objective and even handed columnist who more people should read instead of the other three aforementioned. His last few columns has been excellent and does not write in favor of one candidate or the other.

As to Paul Krugman's column read it objectively, and you might get a more intelligent understanding of what he actually said.

As to Alex Koppelman, he makes it quite clear who he supports and seems to get great joy in being nasty. He needs to get a life that is more positive and gives something to humanity

instead of negativity.

..sleepier. Paul, can you hear me? When I snap my fingers you will stop squaking like a chicken and will wake up speaking ONLY Arabic.

SNAP!

Mr. Krugman, you can't be following the blogs or even the MSM I've been reading and hearing. There is plenty of debate going on with strong arguments for Obama and the Clintons being thrown out there in cyberspace. This is a true expression of our freedom of speech and our right to participate in the political process. Sorry Paul, your candidates don't have the Obama charisma and, the Clintons carry so much baggage their chances in a general election will sink into the slime they have created for themselves. This is coming from an independent Obama supporter and I hope my comments have not hurt your feelings.

I voted for Obama here in Massachusetts, but it was a tough decision for me to not vote for Hillary. I honestly like them both.

What appalls me is the fact that there are Obama supporters (and some Hillary supporters) who would prefer a McCain presidency if their candidate is not the nominee. My jaw dropped when I read a couple of Obama supporters on this thread say that they would rather have 4 years of McCain with the hope that Obama would come back in 2012. Are you kidding me? A McCain presidency would be like another term for Bush. 4 more years of war, 4 more years of the erosion of our civil liberties, 4 more years without anything being done about health care. This country cannot survive 4 more years of Republicans in the White House.