While I do think the press treated Clinton rudely and unfairly, they definitely ran stories that harmed Obama even more because they were aired particularly close to elections to undercut support and bring out opposition voting days. The phony story about a campaign adviser telling the Canadians to distregard Obama's NAFTA position is one example, the Wright story another.

That said, I'm surprised you don't have the Hillary nutcracker coverage on this list. I never saw it on MSNBC but understand other cable networks promoted it.

Still, as far as you list goes, I think it's padded a bit. Just because her primary opponents were professional enough not to bring up old scandals does not mean they would not become a problem in a primary were she the candidate. I don't know a Democrat who didn't worry about that and believe there would be some justification in referrin to the distractions President Clinton brought on during his terms in the White House. Many, many democrats did not want that kind of drama dominating the political arena again.

I also take umbrage with your argument about pundits claiming without proof that a strategy existed to turn Obama into the black candidate. That's cherry-picking in my book when it was quite clear that the Clinton campaign chose to racialize the contest to the detriment of this country as soon as they realized they had a real race on their hands.

Most important from my point of view, it was Clinton who complained in debates that she was being treated unfairly by having to go first; it was she and her supporters who made a point to drawing to attention to any real or imagined slight as evidence of sexism; it was she and her campaign that attacked Obama's credentials instead of his positions and tried to belittle him in voters' eyes.

The Obama campaign took the high road, which the public had made clear was what it wanted. Clinton's campaign didn't listen; instead it dished but couldn't take it from whatever direction it came.

I'm a late-50s white woman feminist. She saddened and embarrassed me. She earned the loss.
.

Posted at June 16, 2008 1:15 PM in response to Was The Media Unfair To Hillary? Here's Our Rundown.

McAuliffe says this and we should believe it, why? I'd like to see some documentation. That's quite a hall, and hard as it may be for junkies to believe, most voters aren't all that caught up in PA's primary campaign.
.

Posted at April 24, 2008 12:28 AM in response to Hillary On Track To Raise $10 Million Since Polls Closed Yesterday

It's the "If wishes were horses" argument. Good one, Bill.
.

Posted at April 22, 2008 10:46 AM in response to Bill's latest line,...

Something about your tone makes me doubt the genuine sincerity of your question, but I agree with the commenters above that the Obama campaign has steered clear of irrelevant dirt. When they have gone "negative" it has been to document instances in which reality belies the claims she's making on the trail. That doesn't seem out-of-bounds to me.

Additionally, you should look at his proposals for keeping voters involved in the policy issues that effect our lives -- particularly his plan for departments to hold policy meetings online periodically, followed up by opportunities for citizens to weigh in on proposals at hand.

Using technology to keep citizens organized and actually give them a seat at the table will go a long way to transform a political culture currently designed to keep us uninformed and manipulate us with emotionally charged misrepresentations of public figures and critical facts.

The Clinton and McCain campaigns' efforts to paint Obama as elitist are ludicrous when he is the only candidate standing who wants to revive egalitarianism in politics again.
.

Posted at April 22, 2008 10:43 AM in response to A Sincere Question

I just don't see the point of speculating -- and in such harsh language -- on this. What good does venting one's spleen do? There a lots objectively sound reasons for not wanting to see the Clintons back in the WH. More subjective ones belong around the kitchen table with family and friends, not in public where even the best-supported speculations just sound nasty.
.

Posted at April 22, 2008 10:05 AM in response to Bottom Line: All Of The Clintons Need Therapy

I heard the campaign told Kerry's office not to expect their calls to be answered after he came out for Obama.

I suspect that's common practice in campaigns, dancing with the ones what brung ya and scorning the rest. I'd like to think Obama's new politics is different in this way too. At least I hope so. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones was Clinton state campaign chair, and I'd hate to see Cleveland suffer because of it. That long-suffering city needs all the help it can get.
.

Posted at April 7, 2008 1:29 PM in response to Super Delegate Fearful?

oops. It was Lantos, hawk Democrat, who said that, as TPM reported. Sorry for the error.

Posted at April 9, 2007 7:58 AM in response to Springbreak in Syria

And one of Pelosi's Reaper aka Republican traveling companions has said she delivered the message just as Olmert related it to her.

There is delicate maneuvering going on here.

Posted at April 9, 2007 7:31 AM in response to Springbreak in Syria