Hey, maybe Hillary's bashing of the NYT can be used by her staff to raise money from conservatives!

lol!

You have to give a lot of credit to Hillary. She put up with 16 years of bashing by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, the clucking clowns of conservatism, and she's had to face-down the leftist media for this campaign. And she's still standing. She's a stronger woman than you are.

Dear Barak Hussain Obama:

You are palying with the fate of the USA by motivating the immature college students. They do not know your trickery. You are merely a Community Organizer, you should remain so for several years to come. You and your people say that you are the copy of Robert kennedy. What Robert Kennedy, and even President Kennedy did for this country? Their lives were cut short. Technically, they did nothing for this country compared to Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Johnson.

The MSM has been out to write her obit from the beginning. The NYT has been fairer than most but it is an insult to democracy, when 5% of the Democratic vote is still disenfranchised, almost 11 million democrats have voted for her, the race is still essentially tied and there are several large states yet to vote to say she needs to get out, or her staff are abandoning her etc etc. Its just the sameold garbage.

Good for the Clinton staff to fight back hard against mischaracterizations of them. Lord knows the mischaracterizations of Clinton's actions or future are never ending.

Good for them!!@!!

Count the votes! Democracy matters. Don't let the press decide.

The stories are biased all the time!!! There is NO denying that. I'm sorry! It is a very liberal paper. You don't see any articles that question Obama period, but every other article is ready to write Clinton off even though the average of most polls show her up by 10 in Ohio and tied in Texas. Even nationally there was only one poll that had Obama up by a significant margin another poll that same day had Clinton up by 1% nationally. These media outlets know they are making money off of Obama fans so they keep up the same Rhetoric! Interesting!

Why is Mark Penn's name not on that letter? Kind of strange since everyone else is (Wolfson, Williams, Solis-Doyle, etc.). What gives?

What's really interesting is that the NY Times endorsed Hillary. Maybe they are having second thoughts now.
Gordon...not all Obama supporters are college students..check out the demographics of his supporters from the last 11 primaries/caucuses. You will find that he has support from all age groups. While you are at it you might want to go to the Library of Congress website and check out Obama's record while in the US Senate. It's quite impressive and much more extensive than Clinton's even though she's been a Senator longer.

Well, JoAnne, it seems an article by CBS claims the following on Obama: "Obama has spent his time in the Senate on "midrange issues," such as ethics reform and nuclear proliferation, where he could more easily find a Republican senator that would be open to working with him.

"He wasn't working on issues where you have hard Democratic vs. Republican divides,"
It appears many of us still don't know how Obama would do with the tough issues where he must take a stand. Roll the dice because you have no idea either.

Why is Clinton fighting with the Times? Oh yeah, its after 2:30 and the campaign hasn't had a fight since noon.

She's running the Scrappy Do campaign.

Boy, this is all Clinton does. "Shame on you, Obama; Shame on you, NYT; Shame on you, Chris Matthews."

Jake Tapper worried about the word "scolding" but that's all she's doing. She's running around getting people afraid to speak the truth.

Chelsea was "pimped" out, by the street definition of the word--so Matthews was just being hip. Obama's mailer was factually accurate. And the NYT said what they did. Did Clinton get upset when millions thought she gave a "valedictory" speech, or when her husband said it was make or break in Texas or Ohio? Nope. She just wants to take on the Times for printing the truth.

Somber was the mood until she changed it to shrill.

I THINK I'LL BLAME IT ON THE SUN THAT DIDN'T SHINE!!!!!!!!!!!!

YEAH, THE NEW YORK TIMES IS SO BIASED AGAINST HILLARY THAT IT ENDORSED HER.

We get it shelgirl, Paul, Jerome, you hate Clinton and all of us who support her. Anything new? Because we are almost eleven million strong as well, and if we should lose, we will remember who hates us more, the Obama crowd.

Good for you Hillary. I am so glad you are one tough cookie! I can not believe you have put up with this for all those years and you finally get to KICK THEIR BUTTS! Do it girl! We do have your back! Can you tell we are pretty sick of it too! Love the SNL right on target skit too. People are waking up to the media "Star Maker of Breaker" junk. It's like they believe they are some sort of GOD themselves. So much power to influence and so little scrutiny on them. Personal opinions are presented as facts, it's dumb disjournalism. They put things out to sensationalize stories in order to have a "story". See the so called news needs to sell space for ads too, so they'll do anything to make the sale even if it deminishes their reputation. By the way, what are they doing going back into the "Dark Ages" with the McCain "possible chance that an affair could have started eight years ago." Their credibility has been SHOT and it's like they can't stop themselves. The media is beginning to sound desperate. It's like they're becoming more vicious and determind to MAKE people beleive THEM. Over and Over and Over. Repetition of false information will never make the information REAL. Hey that goes for O's fliers too!

I'm one of the HRC voter, I will remember if Obama Hussein ,becomes the Dem. candidate, my vote will go for McCain.

Anyone remember the Hindenburg? Not a pretty sight... and neither is Hillary's campaign

There's been a steady drumbeat in the media and from Obama's campaign for Hillary to suspend her campaign. Why should she? There are important primaries to come. Why should those voters be disenfranchised?

There are new studies involving neuroscience that indicate that people are very suggestible - that they suspend past experience and solid evidence to the contrary - in their willingness to believe what is being "sold". If there has been a shift to Obama's campaign for some people, it's because the media has been so biased.

The story of this part of the election cycle will be the hugely biased media and their role in creating Obama's "persona".

People will remember this and these outlets will most likely pay a price. Perhaps it will hasten their already documented decline in readership and viewing audiences.

Gordon and DoGood1 obviously didnt receive alot of love and attention as children: because clearly their posts are fictional and baseless. Gordon, Barack's too busy preparing for his 11th and 12th wins of Texas and Ohio. I'm afraid he doesn't have time to read your lil' letter. And DoGood1--how much sense can you REALLY have if you listen to anything written by someone named Kitty? Huh? And folks are in an uproar about Barack's middle name? Get a Life folks! No better yet-get informed. Barack in 08'!!!

All of the Media asking Hillary to step down . why should she ?DO THEY THINK THE PEOPLE IN THE REMAINING STATES VOTERS DO NOT MATTER. SHAME ON THEM.
GO HILLARY !!!!
THE HAND THAT ROCKS THE CRADLE CAN ROCK THE VOTE.WOMEN LET'S ROCK!!!
HILLARY ROCKS!!!!!!

One question, didn't The New York Times ENDORSE Hillary Clinton for President? They DID! What was the point of that endorsement, so they could make up stories about her when she started losing, just to fill space on their paper?

Be serious people. Sen. Clinton had all the advantage in the world. Name, money, political support from Mayors, Governors, Senators, married to a former President. She ran THE worst campaign since Gulliani. I guess Gulliani's failure was part of the media's bias also.