Matthew Dowd

What polls are you looking at? This is the media bias at its best. Wake up and smell the coffee. Clinton is still ahead by 5-10 points in Ohio, tied in Texas, and ahead by 10 in RI. This is not news, its bias, shameful, and disrespectful of a candidate that is better equiped than Obama to take on the hardest job in the world. Not to mention that if you look at the popular vote they are less than 300k votes apart, and that is very close considering 5-10% of Ohio's democratic voters is way more than 300k. Lets get back to covering the campaign instead of this negative bias towards Clinton. It doesn't do me or any citizen in America any good.

If Obama beats Clinton it's because the media has chosen to keep a halo around Obamas head instead of reporting real news or instead of reporting anything "bad" about him for one day and moving on. If the KKK had come out and said they supported Clinton and if she said she denounced what they stood for when asked if she would reject their support that would have been on the front page of every news paper in the US but let Farrakhan say he supports Obama and we get a lame excuse from Obama instead of just saying YES i reject his support and that doesn't make it very far in the Media. Or lets talk about Obamas relationship with Ayers or does the media once again want to pretend Obama has nothing to hide? It's a discrace the media is so afraid of being called a racist by not going after Obama the way they don't hesitate to go after any white man or woman. When did reporters stop investigating and reporting real news?

Yeah, whatever, Matthew. Spoken as a true republican white man. Totally unaware that bias against women exists in politics, and pretty much everywhere. Hillary is hitting the same glass ceiling we all hit, in the workplace, in government, in the community. Women are just simply viewed as less able to lead. We can't make any mistakes, or it's used as a reason NOT to promote us, not to give us the big project, or not to vote for us. A man, can make mistakes all day, and be forgiven. We've seen this over and over in this election.. the media fawning over Obama, ignoring his missteps while playing every one of Clinton's ad nausium. And you know what, american women see it in the workplace too. That useless guy you work with who does NO WORK and gets promoted while you do all the dirty work and get no recognition. It's the same damn movie.
Women have to work twice as hard, to get half as far. We still make less money than men for the same job, and we aren't equally represented in government, or in the levels of corporate power. Hillary Clinton is not perfect by a long shot, but she is more qualified than Obama. And if you think the fact that she's a woman, and that the media constantly badgers every mistake she makes isn't a factor.. well, you are DREAMING.
Not that I wouldn't expect this from you, or any other GOPer. They like to tell women that inequality doesn't exist, and it's a GOOD thing that women are never trusted with power in the GOP. How many GOP senators and congressmen are women? Only a few. How many female presidential or VP candidates have the repubs had? That's right.. ZERO. And it will stay that way. White men still control this country. And in this election it's clear... white men would rather have a black man as president than a woman. Even polls back me up.. look them up. Women are supposed to somehow ACCEPT our second class position in this country. Accept that a man, any man, even one with NO experience, will be chosen over the most qualified woman. The world is watching, and my international friends are STUNNED by this election. We have lost SO MUCH crediblity.
Sexism is still tolerated here in the USA, while racism is not. That's the bottom line.

Yeah, whatever, Matthew. Spoken as a true republican white man. Totally unaware that bias against women exists in politics, and pretty much everywhere. Hillary is hitting the same glass ceiling we all hit, in the workplace, in government, in the community. Women are just simply viewed as less able to lead. We can't make any mistakes, or it's used as a reason NOT to promote us, not to give us the big project, or not to vote for us. A man, can make mistakes all day, and be forgiven. We've seen this over and over in this election.. the media fawning over Obama, ignoring his missteps while playing every one of Clinton's ad nausium. And you know what, american women see it in the workplace too. That useless guy you work with who does NO WORK and gets promoted while you do all the dirty work and get no recognition. It's the same damn movie.
Women have to work twice as hard, to get half as far. We still make less money than men for the same job, and we aren't equally represented in government, or in the levels of corporate power. Hillary Clinton is not perfect by a long shot, but she is more qualified than Obama. And if you think the fact that she's a woman, and that the media constantly badgers every mistake she makes isn't a factor.. well, you are DREAMING.
Not that I wouldn't expect this from you, or any other GOPer. They like to tell women that inequality doesn't exist, and it's a GOOD thing that women are never trusted with power in the GOP. How many GOP senators and congressmen are women? Only a few. How many female presidential or VP candidates have the repubs had? That's right.. ZERO. And it will stay that way. White men still control this country. And in this election it's clear... white men would rather have a black man as president than a woman. Even polls back me up.. look them up. Women are supposed to somehow ACCEPT our second class position in this country. Accept that a man, any man, even one with NO experience, will be chosen over the most qualified woman. The world is watching, and my international friends are STUNNED by this election. We have lost SO MUCH crediblity.
Sexism is still tolerated here in the USA, while racism is not. That's the bottom line.

Thanks Matt for your insights. Perhaps a few of the elitist colleagues of your profession will soon be able to get beyond the tired cliches of the past and analyze things as they really are. The mainstream media needs to get over it's self-righteous knee-jerk liberalism and adapt to the post-modern world in which we live.

Did you both think of that on your own or take it from Mr. Penn's talking points? BOTH campaigns internals show a tight race in both TX and OH, Obama advantage in TX, and Clinton advantage in OH. Nobody knows how the late deciders will go. We do have REAL evidence of 11 straight Obama victories, including a 17% win in Wisconsin -- supposedly country more friendly to her campaign. The journalists are reporting what the see. Stop this irritating whining and accept the reality -- the voters thus far have favored Obama over Clinton. Let's get real! Sorry, was that plagiarism?

Mr Dowd this absolutely has to do with Clinton being a woman. And, as I said before, don't insult all women and men who have objected to the gendered and often openly mysoginistic treatment of Hillary's candidacy. We have been objecting for a long time.

Sexism has been aok in this campaign and the disgust among women especially democratic women is papable.

If Mr Obama is nominated I seriously doubt he will gain the white house.

Well, when the major media outlets and reporters are basically being Obama's public relations spokespersons it certainly makes it easier for people to vote for Obama. But in real life where you constantly hear, especially men, calling Hillary Clinton that "B--ch" with such heated anger behind it, one has to wonder what that is all about. It seems that even the most racially prejudial white man would vote for a man, even if they are racially predjudice against that man, rather than vote for Hillary Clinton. Now, personnally speaking, I like all the candidates running and feel that whoever Americans pick as the next President none of them could ever mess up the country as much as our current President Bush has done. But lets face facts and reality, the media is all over promoting Obama and singing his praises and basically being his greatest public relations advocates. I don't see that happening for either Clinton or McCain or any other prior candidate in this race. But I worry that once the race is narrowed down to just two candidates then the media might change their tune and start printing more negative press about Obama. So then I would wonder just what was the true agenda of certain media execs, to make certain Hillary lost and then switch their support to the Republican candidate, or just to make certain Hillary didn't get in to office? Of course, in your opinion, maybe all women who take a stance against your article and opinion are just "B--chs" themselves.

Another thing Mr Dowd,

Women make up 55-60% of teh ddemocratic vote in EVERY state.

Blacks are concentrated in states that are either red or blue, and will make less of an impact for the white house race.

A shift of 2% of democratic women voters will lose the white house for the democrats.

Obama by the way, has not won the democratic vote. Not by a long shot.

SB,
Don't try to tell Obamacans that clinton's voters won't come over to his camp. He's already declared publically that we are all in his corner. Arrogance? Maybe.
And Matthew- you have a daughter, right? Ask yourself this question, would you want your daughter to be subjected to the hatred and negativity Hillary has been subject to? You know, that's the world you are sending her into, right? And by denying sexism, you are saying she won't ever come across it. You aren't preparing her or yourself for the realities. Think about that.

well, whatever.may the best man..the best woman win

Mr. Dowd,

Are you by any chance realted to Maureen Dowd of the New York Times? You certainly have amazingly similar views/biases.

Mr. Dowd,

Are you by any chance related to Maureen Dowd of the New York Times? You certainly have amazingly similar views/biases.

An opinion: you sound like a shrew. No let me rephrase: you are a shrew. You must be so charming to be around. Racism and sexism exist first and foremost in the minds of the bitter, resentful, and failed. What easier way to blame all your failures on how you think others perceive you. In this country if you have ovaries or excess pigment in your skin you can write your own check. And what's all this venom against GOP? It's the Dems that are grappling with which "victimized" candidate they should stand behind: the black man or the white woman. You see, the Dems perpetuate this kind of victimhood and it is biting them right in the behind. Take your bitterness elsewhere and get a life. God there is nothing more distasteful than someone who is so quick to point the finger at others without first looking in the mirror.

Is there gender bias? Of course. Was Obama given a 'free ride'? To a certain extent, yes. But, I think you have a point, Matt. Everyone didn't discover Hillary was a woman right before super Tuesday. I am a woman who staunchly supported Hillary at first, not because she was a woman, but I saw her as the more viable democratic candidate. However, after reading Obama's web site and books, and listening to him (not reading what was printed ABOUT him), I began to waver in my choice and I now will vote for him. I prefer his message. I have been criticized for my decision on these posts, but this is America, so I ignore it. I'm glad that so many voters are enlightened enough not to vote for or against a candidate simply because ot race, gender or religion. It's pretty obvious that many any Clinton supporters would switch to Obama should he win since so many have already apparently done so.

Hillary went negative as the fighter she is and Obama stayed positive. Obama played a shrewd game and has topped Clinton. Plus, there's probably a majority of people in this country that don't want the Clintons back in office. It's not all her fault. It's mostly Bill's fault. The Republican attack machine is already painting Obama as a Muslim ready to let America be defeated by Al Qaeda. This is what they do best so Obama had better be prepared to fight back and fight hard. Play up the lobbyist thing on McCain.

Hillary went negative as the fighter she is and Obama stayed positive. Obama played a shrewd game and has topped Clinton. Plus, there's probably a majority of people in this country that don't want the Clintons back in office. It's not all her fault. It's mostly Bill's fault. The Republican attack machine is already painting Obama as a Muslim ready to let America be defeated by Al Qaeda. This is what they do best so Obama had better be prepared to fight back and fight hard. Play up the lobbyist thing on McCain.

Shrew. Another deragatory name to use against a woman. Thanks for proving my point.. stop to think. Have a strong opinion as a woman? You are a shrew. Or a B*&^%, or worse. And again, how many women are in high positions in the GOP? Compare that to the democrats. Proof is in the pudding, pal. ARe the democrats perfect, no, far from it, they've proven in this election they have gender bias as well.
Is gender bias the only factor in this election, no. But to claim somehow that it's not a factor, is just ridiculous.

The media did not mismanage Senator Clinton's campaign. Wastful spending on $1,200 worth of donuts in Iowa, paying high priced over rated conslutants, staying in high priced fany hotels, and not campaigning in cacus states have done her in. The media coverage has been fair to Sentor Clinton.

Sean, I emailed you after the 2004 race and told you the republican’s better start working then to find someone dynamic and good looking for 08, because the media would stop at nothing to get a demo in, it is all over the Supreme Court.
You pushed the Giuliani machine, not Romney till it was too late.
I'm probably more conservative than you, but talk radio left us like Reagan talks about the democrats leaving him. You and Boortz keep harping about the rich paying most of the taxes, even though my ancestory had their blood spilled so that these companies and exucutives could make all this money, i guess we don't owe them and their linage anything for giving their lives. You didn't fall in with Romney till it was too late. Boortz whom i used to like blames anti-abortion zealots, i blame you guys for hanging in with the big money machine till it was to late BIG BUSINESS, low wage scale, illegal imm.. Boortz and you didn't really give a rip about immigration till you felt the growl of the silent majority. We the people want a person that cares that a company and their dupes are not conspiring to ship our jobs across our borders as well as flooding our jobs with cheap labor, Obama seems too, all we get from you and Boortz as well as others is "the top 1% pay 27-37% of the taxes, as far as boortz is concerned anti-life, it's to bad that he didn't have to worry about his mom aborting him, i consider him to be a hysterical @ool, now.

You need to think about your base and whether you’re loosing yours.

Maybe we need a good house cleaning the hillbilly and McCain are the same old machine. Looks like Obama is it, like spit.
It's to bad about the Supreme court, I guess Boortz will get his wish, but i as male think that my body is mine and that i should not have to register with the selective service for war to die for somebody that might want to abort me, like Boortz.

Sean, I emailed you after the 2004 race and told you the republican’s better start working then to find someone dynamic and good looking for 08, because the media would stop at nothing to get a demo in, it is all over the Supreme Court.
You pushed the Giuliani machine, not Romney till it was too late.
I'm probably more conservative than you, but talk radio left us like Reagan talks about the democrats leaving him. You and Boortz keep harping about the rich paying most of the taxes, even though my ancestory had their blood spilled so that these companies and exucutives could make all this money, i guess we don't owe them and their linage anything for giving their lives. You didn't fall in with Romney till it was too late. Boortz whom i used to like blames anti-abortion zealots, i blame you guys for hanging in with the big money machine till it was to late BIG BUSINESS, low wage scale, illegal imm.. Boortz and you didn't really give a rip about immigration till you felt the growl of the silent majority. We the people want a person that cares that a company and their dupes are not conspiring to ship our jobs across our borders as well as flooding our jobs with cheap labor, Obama seems too, all we get from you and Boortz as well as others is "the top 1% pay 27-37% of the taxes, as far as boortz is concerned anti-life, it's to bad that he didn't have to worry about his mom aborting him, i consider him to be a hysterical @ool, now.

You need to think about your base and whether you’re loosing yours.

Maybe we need a good house cleaning the hillbilly and McCain are the same old machine. Looks like Obama is it, like spit.
It's to bad about the Supreme court, I guess Boortz will get his wish, but i as male think that my body is mine and that i should not have to register with the selective service for war to die for somebody that might want to abort me, like Boortz.

An opinion:: (Post 8:57) You're right. Gender bias is a factor. I have 2 friends who were upset with me for changing my mind and switching to Obama. They both told me that I was a "traitor" because they want to see a woman in the WH before they die." I agree with you, that's ridiculous!

I see the old accusations of sexism have come out, but they can just as easily been turned around. These gender warriors, so ready to stand behind Hillary would not give her house room, with EXACTLY the same behavior and attitudes, if she were a man. I want to see a female president, but I don't want anyone to be a president BECAUSE she is a woman. And I particularly don't want this one. It gets particularly ridiculous when the women-firsters argue that if Obama gets the nomination they'll vote McCain. Oh, good idea. Let the Republicans roll back freedom of choice out of a fit of pique.

A Racist Church's founding principles:

A congregation committed to ADORATION.
A congregation preaching SALVATION.
A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO WESTERN EUROPE.
A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF WESTERN EUROPEAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.
A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY

The arguement that the only reason Hillary is failing is because she's woman is asinine. Nearly 60% of the democratic primary voters have been women. If there is a gender bias, it works in favor of hillary, not against her.

I would contend that the only real reason Hillary is actually a viable contender is because she's a woman. She is one of the most divisive and most unabashedly political figures in the country. She seems to consistently place politics ahead of policy, a trait that's terrible but all to common in our leaders. But because of her gender she gets a huge chunck of that 60% block voting for her. To be fair, african americans overwhelmingly support Obama too, but there are several times as many women in the democratic party as there are african americans.

A single factor accounts for all the unexpected features of this election. Human beings always keep an eye on the NEW guy. Hillary was as familiar as the kitchen. Obama was unfamiliar. So everyone watched him. Just that simple.

Dowd is right! This isn’t about race or gender. It’s about blatant disgusting misogyny in high definition for the entire world to witness. Women across the world can see that women here in this country, touted to be the model of a democracy and land of the free, are as free as the white men allow and that it is white men control the government and they will decide who will be President.

There is little difference in white men in this country and the Taliban in Iraq and Afghanistan. Women have soundly been put in their place in this country again. The white male media controls the politics and the slant of every story that runs over and over and over again. The media is saturated with their contempt of women evidenced by the tone and their inability to even begin to glean understanding of what their blatant misogyny.

Will Obama win? Probably. Hillary can’t possibly continue to fight on so many fronts effectively. Her every action, taken or not taken is slanted to demean and belittle her as a politician. The crescendo from the white male press adds to the feeding frenzy around Obama and contributes to the mystic. He is a good speaker, but in reality no better than a lot of the Sunday morning pulpit lecturers. As the white boys sit and listen mesmerized by his accomplishments, i.e. being able to speak well, they see no deficits, only high praise for little substance. Meanwhile the public laps up the warm media milk like calves in the darkness.

Women abandon Hillary because the media says it’s over and the threat of four more years of the Republicans will in fact destroy this country, so let’s “heal the party” and moveon. We women are after all looked upon as compliant and healers of the “family”. We are expected to do what is right and best for all. We are expected to submit to the higher good, for all, except us!

The assumption that all of these women supporters of Hillary will bow to Obama is grossly over estimated. Many may finally be able to see that neither party in fact stands for their values in a so called democracy. Many may be too busy to vote in the general election. Many may write in a name in protest in the general election. And, many may fall in line and be “good girls” because they believe they have acted independently reciting the media mantras: “We don’t have to vote for a woman just because she is a woman. We can vote for the “best candidate”; the candidate that is “best for the job”. We can in fact vote for Obama.” There is nothing to stop them and the milk is about the right temperature for human consumption. Slurp!

I got the feeling that the Clintons are now preparing to accept their debacle and setting the media for the blame later. Hill's continued whining on her campaign stump will not earned her any more votes and might even turn-off her potential voters. If she is that smart, and I don't believe she is, then her stump should not be about whining. Her accusation of media bias did not reflect reality and their continued delusion that they are well loved and very popular. Bloomberg's announcement of not seeking the presidency is actually a concession that his candidacy is co-terminus with Hill's run, because he just can't let Hill become the president. Another thing that the Clintons didn't know about is that they are suffering from MADD - Media Adulation Deficit Disorder, resulting in her becoming a Whiner !
With Super delegates now slowly trekking into Barack's camp, it is very likely that she will again suffer another humiliating defeat in Texas and OH next week. Lewis have officially switched and this would have a net effect of 2 on the delegate count.

AmazonTravelor Post 9:28am:::This woman 'abondoned' (actually chose not to vote for) Hillary because she 'found her voice' and the tone sounded a lot like yours. She should have paid more attention to HOW she was coming across instead of sounding like she was mad all the time. Assertion, good---agression, bad. And BTW, had a male candidate demonstrated that behavior, he would have lost votes, too!

Dowd's premise that race, religion, gender is baloney. It is obviously important to the media, if not the people because they haven't shut up about it since these primaries began. Media focus does have great influence on who is viewed by the public. Hillary and McCain were best known by the public causing Hillary to be named by the Democrats early on. Obama only really became an important factor when he won Iowa where Democrats are independent minded. Iowans were greatly attracted to his oratory, giving Edwards a second place and Clinton third because she did not campaign there as vigorously as she should have. Edwards was ignored totally but Clinton got serious and won New Hampshire getting her back into the campaign. Soon, there was Oprah's widely publicized tour and media accusations of race baiting by Bill Clinton followed by Kennedy's endorsement. Horrible negative media coverage had disastrous effects for Hillary! Understandably, the blacks took notice, abandoned Clinton, and went to the polls in droves bringing Obama wins in the red states. By then the press began to rave about his fabulous wins, focusing more attention upon Obama, never mind that these red states will inevitably vote for the Republicans. Clinton had fabulous wins in New York, California, Massachusetts and New Jersey plus other important states. Rather than calling attention to her impressive wins, the media had little to say about it, focusing instead on the number of states Obama had won. After that, they either ignored Hillary or talked incessantly about her losses. There was a cumulative effect in play in Obama's favor.
It has been distressing for Hillary and Edwards fans watching Obama garner all the attention of the media. Now the press talks about his inevitable nomination BUT Texas, Ohio, and other states haven't even voted. Obama has about 100 more delegates...he is not inevitable as Dowd suggests. It is heartbreaking to watch fine candidates suffer because the press dislikes them or ignores them!

Anyone who voted for the war in Iraq should not be rewarded with the presidency of the United States.

The American voter have risen above sexism and racism when it comes to this vote ... and in the long run support the "one" who used good judgment.

I totally agree. And I'm a woman. I've watched the coverage of the democratic primary on what nears obsessive behavior. I think that Hillary has been cut more slack. No one talks about her being a woman except to say that she's suffering from gender bias. Personally, I don't think she's woman enough to be president. She's not person enough. But if we were to actaully have a sea of change because a woman was in the white house, it wouldn't come with her. Half the time she's riding her husband's coattails. The first woman to be president should get there on her own. And it will happen. But with Hillary: her message is muddy, her personality is unclear (Read: schitzo), and she's a polarizing figure - having nothing to do with her sex.

An Opinion: You did not state your gender, so why would you equate "shrew" with a misogynistic phrase?

I'm sure white women everywhere are just as opressed as black women. I mean nooses placed in their offices, racial epithets, most of their male relatives in hopeless situations, a history of chattel enslavement, a 400 year struggle for equality...

Wait, oh yeah, none of that is true. White women have been participating in American democracy longer than black women. The women's suffrage movement in the South was framed around the argument that white women voting would ensure white supremacy would last forever.

I'm sorry, I just don't buy the whole "women are oppressed more than black people." Just ask a black woman.

An Opinion: You did not state your gender, so why would you equate "shrew" with a misogynistic phrase?

I'm sure white women everywhere are just as opressed as black women. I mean nooses placed in their offices, racial epithets, most of their male relatives in hopeless situations, a history of chattel enslavement, a 400 year struggle for equality...

Wait, oh yeah, none of that is true. White women have been participating in American democracy longer than black women. The women's suffrage movement in the South was framed around the argument that white women voting would ensure white supremacy would last forever.

I'm sorry, I just don't buy the whole "women are oppressed more than black people." Just ask a black woman.

It appears that the democrats cannot get over the race and gender issues. Wasn't it a republican president that named a black woman to be secretary of state? I believe there are still bigots out there but for the most part they are on the fringe.

While these factors are not reasons why some candidates are failing, they are clearly the reason why some are succeeding. Nobody can say that Obama's success is not due to the African-American population of several states gathering to him, and anybody who think s about it must realize that Hillary's high polling numbers last year before the campaigning started were expressions of solidarity by women. Obama and McCain ignore these ethnographic facts at their own peril in the future; both need a woman in the vp slot going forward or else risk losing in November if their opponent has a woman as running mate...

newz4i, I hate to break the news to you, but ALL the presidential contendersw voted for the war in Iraq.

The only reason Obama did not was because he wasn't a member of Congress at the time, however, since he became a member of Congress, he has voted to fund the war each and every time. At a recent debate, he announced, just like Hillary announced, that he would NOT pull the troops out of Iraq.

I guess this means you'll be staying home on election day.

Race and gender DID matter in the democratic primary - just not in the way you portray it. Race was used against the Clintons (not Obama) beginning with Bill Clinton's fairy tale comment. It had absolutely nothing to do with race (and everything to do with Iraq), yet the media edited those comments, portrayed them as racist and the Obama campaign exploited that angle to disparage the Clintons. This tactic was used over and over again to drive support away from Hillary Clinton and toward Obama. Then, of course, there were the numerous articles and pundit comments using terms such as "pimping out" or "shrill voice" and "fashion choices" when describing Hillary's campaign, while no mention was ever made of Obama's arrogant chin up and head tilting during every debate, his often his lack of substantive message during most of the primaries, his use of his predecessor's words and his association and support from Big Pharma, Coal and Nuclear Energy companies, and his affiliation with shady characters (Rezko, Sinclair, etc). If these same issues had been linked to Clinton (and some similar items have been portrayed in the media) you pundits would have had a field day disparaging the Clintons. I find it disgusting and shameful. I once thought I would have no problem supporting Obama if he won the democratic primary. Not anymore. I won't vote for either McCain or Obama. Once again, I feel I've been cheated in terms of choices for the Presidency. I will write-in my vote in November.

I am a white middle-aged woman and I decide who to vote for by reading what their plans are on their website under issues and reading biographical histories of the candidates. To simply vote for Hillary because she is a woman like me is silly. I've had terrific men bosses in my lifetime and some real idiot men in charge; I've also had inspirational women bosses and some real stinkers. Gender doesn't matter a whit, it is the quality of the person's intelligence and their goals that matter. Hillary is divisive, her plans favor corporate profits and she isn't as wise or thorough as evidenced by voting yes on the Iraq Resolution (when the NIE report by our national intelligence agency showed this was a bad idea but she didn't read it.) Obama wins hands down, his plans are more logical, he sees the root cause of a lot of problems is corporate control of Washington and he has a way of uniting, not dividing that we really need in the crisis situation our country is in.

Even my own distant relatives seem to take guilty pleasure in sending out Obama- Moslem - anti-semite- unpatriotic
spam and slanders in emails. Some people enjoy being naughty and setting free the murky world of hate, fear and paranoia that floats in their unconscious mind. The same thing occurs in the internet blogs where people hide behind their avatars and web name personas.

I think the best way to handle this is to also use email and the internet to spread factual and substantiated real articles that report facts and events and discredits the subterranian rumor mongerers.

Posted by: marco123 - notice what you post, "...Obama did not..."

Enough said.

newz4i, Hillary wants to put Obama in the same sinking boat she is in, when it comes to her authorizing a preemtive war in Iraq. The fact is, Obama spoke out against the war when he was on the stump running for U. S. Senator of Illinois. He asked to be judged on that very issue. And in the last debate, he explained that once a truck is stuck in a ditch there are only so many ways you can get out of it hence his current voting record. He went on to say though, that HRC's vote, was facilitating and enabling George W. to drive the truck into the ditch in the first. place.
Let us remember that knowing the same information then that HRC had and knew then, many Senators and Congressmen did not vote to authorize the war.

The media continues to follow Obama around as if he were a puppy they have to clean up after.

Obama is a con man. Nothing more.

"the media! the media!" ... what a bunch of whiners. Guess what, the media haven't been biased. They're reporting the facts: Obama is winning. And sorry, they haven't been biased. If anything, they understate the enthusiasm for his campaign and message.

Hillary and George Bush are cut from the same cloth on this: he says "Iraq is just dandy, it's just those traitors in the media who insist on reporting bad stuff..." I guess they want doglike submission from the 4th estate.

Eric you really think the media has been fair? Doubt it, if they were fair they would have blasted Obama for not saying YES I reject Farrakhan's support when asked the FIRST time do you reject Farrakhan's support and not come up with his idiotic reply of I have denounced his language towards the Jewish community in the past. Denounce means to publicly criticize it doesn't mean you reject someone's support when asked a second time if he rejects Farrakhan's support Obama said "I can't tell a person not to think I'm a good guy" does that sound like Yes I reject his support? NO it doesn't and if the tables were turned and Farrakhan was the KKK and they asked Clinton if she rejected the KKK etc and she came up with the lame excuses Obama said it would have been on the cover of every paper out there for the next week. And if the Media aren't bias towards Obama then more people would be aware of his relationship with the Terrorist William Ayers.

Clinton has run a foolish campaign with a bad set of enablers like Terry mcAuliffe etal. Clinton would cover for the 911 commission, bush war lie, cash collector contractors, illegal wiretapping, torture suckers, INVESTOR class tax crimes and welfare assistance, the whole gamut, you add your own pet peeve...

I agree with your great post, Beth | Feb 28, 2008 10:20:52 AM.

And for those who say, "Senator Obama voted to fund the war each and every time," NOT funding the war after "Cheney and Bush's" preemptive strike would have created a blood bath of enormous proportions.

Gender dooes matter at least in the minds of many middle aged people,They believe that a woman should be home rocking the cradle and only a strong man should be allowed to lead.If we are looking for strength and commitment look no further than Hillary she has displayed unbelievable strength and grace dealing wiith her personal problems (bill)and the bias of the press who take every oppurtunity to take her to task over the smallest issue while virtually ignoring faux pas of Obama.Look at his voting record Less than stellar.We do not need a rock star in the white house ,we need a person that can make the hard decisions and work in a bipartisan fashion to solve problems not make promises they may not be able to keep .as much as we like to hate them who do you think provides jobs?corporations! agreed they need a little more restriction but not to the point they can't function and grow.I suppose if you are are on the lower end of the middle class you will be satisfied to let someone else do the labor and you eat the gravy. Lastly the president is the most visible ambassador of the United States He and his Or her family must display Unwavering comittment and honor to its Laws and tenets.I distrust anyone who has not been proud of their country or will not render proper respect for its symbols.or is a member of a group that advocates antisemetism or racial preference,(sorry Obama) rb 1 !

When I saw the title of this article, I figured it was a man who wrote it. Are you out of your mind or are you just blind to what all women have seen? Gender has been all over this race with the blatant media bias that Hillary has to suffer through. When in the history of this country where sexism is being played out on a national stage such as this....where a hard workign experienced woman is being minimized, mocked, criticized, kicked, punched and drag through the Mud over a good-talking man! Do not tell us that you can see more clearly through our own eyes!

History will look back and report on the 2008 Elections:
*Gender DID matter
*Race DID Matter (in a confused way because we wanted to forget that the first Black President was Black AND White in order to acknowlegde such progress)
*Obama was given a pass by sympathethic liberals and apologetic conservatives in the aftermath of BUSH.
It wasn't that people realized Clinton was a woman, it was that they realized she was a Clinton and emotionally over-reacted.
Mark my words...

prarie town: Assertion, good---agression, bad. Tone not acceptable. Hmmm. I think you make my point.

I am speechless! You get it! That's EXACTLY as I was feeling, while watching the SC primary. I was watching the race-baiting and WISHING I could vote for Obama! I'm a white Canadian Woman in Hillary's bracket...but as I got to see more of Obama through TV and debates, I liked what I saw. And the more I saw, the more I liked. Obama doesn't play the "GAME". When he's wrong, he admits it...when someone else is right, he can concede...he's open to compromise because he's rational. He's a Public Servant not a Politician. The "CHANGE" is all encompassing. It's deprogramming our leaders, and speaking honestly, the good and ugly. It's about ALL Americans not just certain slices. He tells us if WE STAND UP together, in great numbers, and send a STRONG message to Washington that the People are taking their Government back, and anyone who does not have the American People's interest at heart, and wants to play the old games, will be rejected! The People want things done, and most are willing to compromise. Obama embodies that desire.

--That is, if you want to call it "progress". There is no such proof in Obama's record thus far. He has not done one thing that I would consider genius or impressive in politics.

How can you say that religion and gender does not matter. Look at what happened at Romney and look at what people have done to the Hillary (as a woman). RACE MATTERS in this election. Look at what Obama's camp did to the Clinton's. His camp made them look like racists and any others that questioned them. Bill Clinton fought for any and all minorities and look at what he got in return.

OBAMA'S BAD JUDGEMENTS: 1) lets pull out of Iraq now and go back in tomorrow. 2) lets bomb pakistan without their consent if we find that alqeada is there....no considerations that pakistan is a nuclear weapon owner 3) voted 'present' when most of his colleagues fought to avoid sex shops from being set up next to schools 4) voted no when his colleagues tried to cap the credit card companies from raising rates 5) voted for the Chenney energy bill that has pilleage the tax payers money w/o much returns 6) opted to send out fliers noting a quote that his opponenent did not make 7) opted to partner up in a real estate deal with a man under investigation of political fixing and money laundering. 8) opted to take over 100K in donations from the same man who was still under investigation for political fixing and money laundering. 9) opted to sustain a spiritual counseling relationship with a pastor who had proclaimed that his hero is L Farakan who promotes hate against whites and jews. 10) opted to criticize oppenents of having close proximity with lobbyist when he had regular basketball games and poker games with lobbyist while in the IL legislature. OBAMA'S GOOD JUDGEMENT: 1)....But he made a speech against the Iraq war. Summary: One mediocre judgement do not equal "good judgement"

Sorry Dowd the reality is that race mattered quite a bit to obama and he played the game masterfully, to bad the media won't cover the truth.
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

The New Republic
Race Man by Sean Wilentz
How Barack Obama played the race card and blamed Hillary Clinton.
Post Date Wednesday, February 27, 2008

After several weeks of swooning, news reports are finally being filed about the gap between Senator Barack Obama's promises of a pure, soul-cleansing "new" politics and the calculated, deeply dishonest conduct of his actually-existing campaign. But it remains to be seen whether the latest ploy by the Obama camp--over allegations about the circulation of a photograph of Obama in ceremonial Somali dress--will be exposed by the press as the manipulative illusion that it is.
Most of the recent correctives have concerned outrageously deceptive advertisements approved and released by Obama's campaign. First, in Iowa, the Obama camp aired radio ads patterned on the notorious "Harry and Louise" Republican propaganda from 1993, charging falsely that Senator Hillary Clinton's health care proposal would "force those who cannot afford health insurance to buy it, punishing those who won't fall in line." In subsequent primary and caucus campaigns, the Obama campaign sent out millions of mailers, also featuring the "Harry and Louise" motif, falsely claiming that Clinton favored "punishing families who can't afford health care in the first place." A few bloggers and columnists, notably Paul Krugman in The New York Times, described the ads as distorting, but the national press corps mainly ignored them--until Clinton herself, seeing the fraudulent mailers reappear in Ohio over the past weekend, publicly denounced them.
The Obama mass mailings also attempt to appeal to Ohio's labor vote by claiming that Clinton believed that the North American Free Trade Agreement, signed in 1993 by President Bill Clinton, was a "'boon' to our economy." More falsehood: In fact, Clinton had not said that; Newsday originally applied the word "boon" and has now noted the Obama campaign's distortion. In this campaign, Clinton has called for a moratorium on all trade agreements until they are made consistent with labor and environmental standards--and account for the effect on jobs in the United States. Obama makes a big deal about how Bill Clinton signed NAFTA. But he fails to mention that, within the councils of her husband's administration, Hillary Clinton was a skeptic of free trade agreements, and as a senator and candidate she has said that NAFTA contained flaws that need to be rectified. Ignoring all that, the Obama flyer features an alarming photograph of closed plant gates, having no connection to any action of Senator Clinton's, as well as the dubious quotation about her from Newsday in 2006. Newsday has criticized "Obama's use of the quotation" as "misleading ... an example of the kind of slim reeds campaigns use to try and win an office." Obama, without retracting the mailing (and while playing to protectionist sentiment in the party) said only that he would have his staff look into the matter--long after the ad has done its dirty work.
Misleading propaganda is hardly new in American politics --although the adoption of techniques reminiscent of past Republican and special-interest hit jobs, right down to a retread of the fictional couple, seems strangely at odds with a campaign that proclaims it will redeem the country from precisely these sorts of divisive and manipulative tactics. As insidious as these tactics are, though, the Obama campaign's most effective gambits have been far more egregious and dangerous than the hypocritical deployment of deceptive and disingenuous attack ads. To a large degree, the campaign's strategists turned the primary and caucus race to their advantage when they deliberately, falsely, and successfully portrayed Clinton and her campaign as unscrupulous race-baiters--a campaign-within-the-campaign in which the worked-up flap over the Somali costume photograph is but the latest episode. While promoting Obama as a "post-racial" figure, his campaign has purposefully polluted the contest with a new strain of what historically has been the most toxic poison in American politics.
More than any other maneuver, this one has brought Clinton into disrepute with important portions of the Democratic Party. A review of what actually happened shows that the charges that the Clintons played the "race card" were not simply false; they were deliberately manufactured by the Obama camp and trumpeted by a credulous and/or compliant press corps in order to strip away her once formidable majority among black voters and to outrage affluent, college-educated white liberals as well as college students. The Clinton campaign, in fact, has not racialized the campaign, and never had any reason to do so. Rather the Obama campaign and its supporters, well-prepared to play the "race-baiter card" before the primaries began, launched it with a vengeance when Obama ran into dire straits after his losses in New Hampshire and Nevada--and thereby created a campaign myth that has turned into an incontrovertible truth among political pundits, reporters, and various Obama supporters. This development is the latest sad commentary on the malign power of the press, hyping its own favorites and tearing down those it dislikes, to create pseudo-scandals of the sort that hounded Al Gore during the 2000 campaign. It is also a commentary on how race can make American politics go haywire. Above all, it is a commentary on the cutthroat, fraudulent politics that lie at the foundation of Obama's supposedly uplifting campaign.

AmazonTravelor: Sorry, but I'm don't understand the inference of your reply to me. I believe a good leader needs to be (among other things) assertive. I feel that sometimes women, for a variety of reasons, become aggressive rather than assertive, and I think that's what happened to Hillary. I paid little attention to ANY of the other candidates early on because I felt Hillary was the best person for the job. I find her an extremely intelligent individual. Being a woman has nothing to do with it (for me OR her.) But as I became more involved and listened and read more about ALL the candidates, I chose to switch to Obama. PART (and only part) of the reason was because Hillary switched from being assertive to aggressive. She stopped stating her position and how it differed from Obama's in a clear and concise manner. She began sniping at Obama, ridiculing his ideas, and even resorted to trying to diminish him by doing a crude imitation. The change happened after Super Tuesday. I will certainly concede that the press has exploited the gender issue to a certain extent(as I stated in my first post). But I didn't pay attention to the press. And even if I had, it isn't Obama's fault anyway. In my opinion, he has handled himself in a more assertive manner. He has disagreed with her, but I have not heard him imitate Hillary in a mocking way, or make fun of her ideas. That was all I meant by the aggressive vs assertive remark. It is a small part of my argument, but a valid one, and one that I feel many would agree with. A woman does not HAVE to be aggressive (which is a turn off) to get ahead, but she does need to be assertive. Perhaps some women don't understand the difference.

Here is another perfect example of Media bias. As a woman, I am getting sick and tired of Hillary Clinton bashing and Obama praising by media.

i'm for hillary

I agree with everything obama says, hillary pushes the limit.

As a white middle aged woman from NH who voted for Obama I will say that Hillary is the reason I didn't vote for her. She has spent her entire campaign focused on why Barack Obama shouldn't be President. She has blamed everyone and everything else for her failure to get her message across. She has used negative attacks on an almost daily basis against Obama. She is not the kind of PERSON I want representing this country to the rest of the world.

obama > hillary
obama any day hands down or mitt romney!

hillary is nothin' but lies!!!!

...and I read all the comments and I'm still laughing about the jerk who complained that the entire Clinton organization ate $1200 of donuts while in Iowa...a lot cheaper to feed volunteeers donuts than a real meal, Pal!

The Navy still "feeds'em beans"...cuz der cheep

How much do we know about Obama? Not much, because he does not talk about details excep he is a smoker and he tried pots in the past. Some people are afraid of Obama, because of it.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JB26Aa01.html