Juxtapose her cozying up with the right wing conspiricists with her refusal to negotiate with our enemies. If I have it right, it is not OK to negotiate our interests versus theirs but it is OK to actually join with our enemies to attack a common enemy. (who in this case would be Obama; not someone I would think a fellow Dem would consider to be an enemy but I guess to Hillary he is...) Do I have this right?

The Clintonista's have gone too far. They are now damaging the future of our nation. Given that she has no chance to win the nomination, all she can do is to deomonize her oppponent. We need to tell Mrs. Clinton that it is time to withdraw. Let us start here on Mother Jones.

She has indeed confirmed again and again the say anything, do anything, sell out anyone, lie to anyone, hypocrisy be damned attitude that many of us thought was at the center of her and bill's cold ugly hearts. After what she and Bill did to working Americans in industrial areas with NAFTA she decided to go to Ohio and lie to everyone's face about that fact (see http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/?pid=300860 ), which was on top of Bills S. Carolina comments, the passing around of native attire photos, etc., etc.. Do lies and hypocrisy from the Clintons really shock anybody any more? She really does seem to lie almost as bad as Bush at this point, and it seems likely that Obamas supposed use of 'Karl Rove' tactics was Hillary channeling her own self loathing onto Obama. The more of this BS she pulls the more we can all understand and agree with the Powers 'monster' comment, which was of course about how 'she'll say anything'. Is there really a point to continuing all this? I haven't had a favorable impression of the Clintons for years, but at this point if I never hear about them again it will be too soon.

For Lent this year I'm giving up
on Hillary.

Hey David Corn, You are better shut up, since you are not better than anyone. You are only a bias tool media. Write more about the unknown OBAMA. That is what we, people of the United state need to know.

WHAT??? Talking to a Pittsburg paper editorial board is legitimizing the "right wing conspiracy." How about coming down to earth and realizing that Pittsburg is in Pennsylvania and Hillary is trying to win that primary?

By the way.. the Ken Starr analogy was prophetic with the follow-up dirty shots by the Obama campaign (as illustrated in your article.) As well as McPeak's "McCarthy" comment against a former two term President who is very popular in the Democratic Party. Now that is "unpatriotic."

And no one needs to distribute an American Spectator article (if true) to "whip up trouble" between Obama and the Jewish voters. Obama did that himself with his long term personal association with Wright.

Do not blame Clinton for Obama's self-inflicted problems. Calling Hillary hypocritical will not make this very big "Wright" issue go away. Next someone will be calling these Obama's problems the result of a grand "Clinton conspiracy."

Apparently Hillary also lied about sniper fire in Bosnia, which turned out to be local children's poetry (see http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/?pid=302252 ). Could the poems have really been that bad? Wasn't calling the kids poems sniper fire a little undiplomatic? They're old enough not to cry about it now, but still.

HIllary says "You can't choose your family but you can choose your pastor."

Well, guess what Hillary, you can also choose your husband. And after yours had oral sex with an intern you still chose to stick by him. Does that mean you agree/condone what he did?

No. I'm sure you disagree strongly with what he did, yet you did not walk out on him. Yet, when Obama's pastor says something that Obama disagrees with, you expect him to walk out on his church.

Good news is, there is virtually no way for you to win the dem nomination. But guess what, if you do, I will probably vote for you since you embrace about 90% of the policies that Obama embraces (just without the same honesty or eloquence).

You know- it is amazing how much Hillary is coming under scrutiny for every word that she says, for every move that she makes- because her life as a public servant is an open book. That is not something you can say about Obama. And the media and people alike are giving him the free pass due to that. I dont think that is fair or an exhibition of the American system of equality.

None of this should come as a surprise to people who have watched the Clintons from the beginning. Their modus operandi has always been to care deeply about a person's or group's opinion of them until the moment that person or group endorses and supports them. Once they are allied, however, they become almost invisible to the Clintons, who turn their attention to the next person or group which has not yet joined them -- even if that person or group is the polar opposite of those that are already on board.

Case in point: Bill Clinton made unprecedented overtures to the gay community in 1991-92, promising the sky and the moon if they would only support his presidential bid. Once they were safely on board, he turned on them with a vengeance, began openly campaigning for anti-gay votes, and cooperated and encouraged the institutionalization of legal discrimination against gay people.

The Clintons' cozying up to the organs of the so-called Vast Right Wing Conspiracy -- Scaife, American Spectator, etc. -- is right in line with this longstanding pattern.

Miss Das,

Have you been in a coma for the past two weeks? The Wright coverage has been unrelenting. On one occasion, FOX spent TWO HOURS commenting on a single five-second Obama soundbite completely stripped of context.

Free pass?!? Are you high???

Well put Nobama. I've never seen anyone put forth their arguments quite as clearly and brilliantly as you have.

(The idea that a candidate who has been running for the highest office for months has some skeletons in their closet that have evaded scrutiny is laughable. The MSM pounced on what little they could make out of pulling Wright's comments out of context, they would eat up any real controversy.)

Start here on Mother Jones? I started by contacting my representative (Dick Durbin and Rahm emanuel), Nancy Pelosi, Howard Dean, John Edwards and Al Gore. Leaders of the Democratic party need to step in an cut out the cancer the clintons have become, although I fear its too late. The damage has been done.

"Case in point: Bill Clinton made unprecedented overtures to the gay community in 1991-92, promising the sky and the moon if they would only support his presidential bid. Once they were safely on board, he turned on them with a vengeance, began openly campaigning for anti-gay votes, and cooperated and encouraged the institutionalization of legal discrimination against gay people."

He also advised John Kerry in the waning days of the 2004 campaign to make a series of high profile speeches around the country strongly denouncing gay marriage. Kerry, to his credit, thanked him for the advice and told his aids that he would never do that.

I read another article like this where Hillary will divide, say-anything, do-anything, and fight to get to the White House. She labels herself a fighter and it shows, Barack wants unity and it shows....her transcripts from her speeches are filled with "I", I am a fighter, I will do this or I will do that....Barack says "we", "yes we can" Our campaign has done this or that...

I dont hate Hillary, I do dislike her tactics, and I think she hides too much i.e. tax returns, earmarks, biz dealings, Bill Clintons dealings,

We need transparency, we need unity, we need Barack Obama

"So has Clinton no shame?"

Is it really necessary to ask that question at this point?

"Did she ponder the irony of using Scaife's platform (in the key state of Pennsylvania) to discredit a fellow Democrat?"

Come on...Obama's not a "fellow" anything. He's a black guy. Anything goes...

And I agree w/ Franklin, Nobama, that was the most eloquent and intelligent statement I've read all year. You should be working for the Clinton campaign, you'd fit right in.

Who needs a democracy anyway?

Actions speak better than words.

Mr Obama choose Mr. Wright as his spiritual teacher for 20 years and included Mr. Wright in his election staff, these are the actions of Mr. Obama. When shocking hate messages began to flow from the mouth of Mr. Wright on television, hyperbole spin was written for Mr. Obama distancing Mr. Obama from Mr. Wright. The weird thing is, some people actually believe the spin written by Mr. Obama’s election machine. But regardless what Mr. Obama says, he chose Mr. Wright as his spiritual teacher for 20 years and added Mr. Wright to his election staff.

If you make the choice to listen and learn from Hitler every week over 20 years, do you expect me or any other rational being to believe that you wouldn’t be or want to be influenced by Hitler’s ideas? And what does that say of your personal integrity if you chose American hating Mr. Wright, or Mr. Hitler as your guide in life?

Action is the real measure of a person. Not their words. We know who Mr. Obama is by his life and his teachers, not the words he spins. And we can only image the amount of hatred Mr. Obama will unleash once he achieves ultimate power. And woe be the whites, the poor, those of the Jewish faith and anyone else Mr. Obama thinks deserve retribution. if Mr. Obama were to be elected president.
And also consider recent announcement that the chief of the firm involved in the State Department’s passport breach is one of Obama’s adviser. (And why is this not being discussed?) And that Obama has been caught lying about Rezko, regarding the amount of money Rezko gave him, and that Obama still hasn’t come clean about his Rezko land deal. Or further, how Mrs. Obama makes a phenomenal $317.000 a month at a hospital in Chicago that is famous for turning away the poor, especially the black poor.

If Obama were to become president, what would stop Mr. Obama from appointing Mr. Wright to his cabinet? And after Mr. Wright’s appointment, if anyone complained they would be called racist. And it seems as if this strategy - that it is racist to criticize a black man - is already in effect as Mr. Obama can do anything corrupt with minimal impunity by the public or the press. But if Hillary so much as sneezes, she is taken through the laundry and hung out to dry and then beaten some more. Such an obvious bias treatment towards Mr. Obama because of his race is racial discrimination. And I believe another reason why Mrs. Clinton is unfairly criticized to such an extreme is because a handful of powerful men in the media can’t stand the idea of a woman for president – likely a libido thing.

We should have as our country’s leader someone with wisdom and knowledge, whose goal is the selfless betterment of the world. We should not elect someone with a personal agenda of personal power or select them because of the fashionably of their race or the preference for a gender.

Obama is not old enough or experienced enough to take on the role of the president, and if had simple wisdom, instead of a misguided desire for power, he would know this.

Actually, he is at the exact same age and experience level as John F. Kennedy when we elected him.

If you were schooled in history, you would know this.

Also, plenty of things would stop Obama from appointing Wright to his cabinet - primarily his better judgement, but also the necessary process of Congressional approval.

If you were schooled in the workings of the U.S. government, you would know this.

Also, comparing an angry preacher to Adolf Hitler is immature, and inappropriate. If you were a logically-thinking adult, you would recognize this...

Remember, he left the campaign to sign the death warant of a Black inmate and still got the Black vote.
Now they , the clintons are done with Blacks

Omoeko,
What are you talking about? What is a death warant, and why would a U.S. Senator have to sign such a thing?

And why would it matter to the aggregate black population?

it's such a beautiful thing to see the dems arguing amongst themselves. It brings me a globally warm feeling.

Please stop,with the Wright nonsense, guilt by association has never been the true American way. Please read the Frank Schaeffer article on his father, Rev. Schaeffer, it's an enlightening eye opener.
The Clinton team is without scruples. Look at all of the outright lies they have promulgated to embellish Mrs. Clinton experience ie, Bosnia, Macedonia-Kosovo, Northern Ireland, FMLA, S-chip, Darfur

I personally think America need none of the above, what is going on at the moment is like a very bad soap opera!

Obama's speech on the economy was brilliant. He gave a clear and easily understood lesson on the US market in its historical context, then set out PRINCIPLES for a 21st century US economy. Hillary has no principles. That is, she is un-principled, and all her many so-called "concrete" measures are merely fuzzy bullet points which we all know will be lost when she negotiates with her special interest lobbyists and multibillionaire supporters who are now threatening Pelosi unless Pelosi throws the race to their pal, Hillary. As the Queen of Mean, the only means Hillary understands are lying, kneecapping, and throwing the kitchen sink at honorable Americans. Her campaign has run on unpatriotic and unAmerican scorched-earth, drive-by shooting, gender and race gaming, divide-and-rule politics of personal destruction.

"because he has noted that the Israel lobby in America influences Mideast policy and because he advocates Israel withdrawing to its pre-1967 borders. Of course, that definition of anti-Semitism is absurd." This definition is the definition of Abe Foxman at the ADL. This is the mainstream Jewish definition of an anti-Semite.
Plain and simple, Obama will not get elected because he does not have Jewish support. We contribute close to 50% of the money to the campaigns, hence our voice. Get over it.