Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Ohio Gov. Bashes Press for pro-Obama Bias


Ted Strickland, Ohio's governor. (Jeff Kowalsky/Bloomberg News)
By Dan Balz

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland is the latest supporter of Hillary Clinton to accuse the media of bias in its coverage of the Democratic nomination battle.

At a dinner with Washington Post reporters and editors, Strickland called the coverage "almost shocking at times" and unfair it the treatment of both candidate Clinton and her husband, the former president.

"Quite frankly, some of the people that I had most previously admired as commentators I have a remarkably different opinion toward right now," Strickland said.

Strickland was the second big-state governor and Clinton supporter to sound off about the press at the convention. On Sunday, at a panel hosted by Harvard's Shorenstein Center, Pennsylvania Gov. Edward Rendell called coverage of Barack Obama's campaign "embarrassing"

"He is running for the most important office in the world," Rendell said. "He basically got a free pass." Rendell also described MSNBC derisively as "the official network of the Obama campaign."

Strickland was one of Clinton's strongest supporters and helped her carry the Ohio primary in March. In his critique, he did not single out any commentators by name. But he was sharply critical of the treatment Clinton got at two debates just before the Ohio primary, noting that she was repeatedly asked questions first, giving Obama the benefit of being able to shape his answer in response to hers.

He recalled that Clinton had raised the issue during the Cleveland debate. "Then she was mocked for bringing it up, referred to as whining," he said. "I think it was very legitimate."

Strickland said he was troubled by innuendo in coverage of the campaign and particularly the focus on both Hillary and Bill Clinton. "I mean she was the candidate, for God's sake, he wasn't."

He also said he has heard complaints from Clinton supporters about the failure of the Democratic National Committee "for not being more direct in calling attention" to the problem.

By Web Politics Editor  |  August 25, 2008; 3:05 PM ET
Categories:  Barack Obama , Battlegrounds , Hillary Rodham Clinton  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Cable Funnyman Rips Cable News
Next: Van Hollen: Obama Campaign Needs "Second Wave"

Comments

Obama, Kennedy, Clinton, Carter- what's the difference? They all spout the same mindless Socialist pap and will inherit no lasting positive legacy.
McCain will bring his positive legacy with him when he's inaugurated.

Posted by: viejo1 | August 26, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

The politicians like Strickland and Rendell are totally opposite from the kind of politicians who "fit in" with the Obama camp.

If Hillary Clinton had gotten nominated, we could have had one of these men as her VP, or in some cabinet position.

Instead, we get Obama and Biden, and their sycophants like McGaskill and Richardson.

What Kind of Plagiarist Is Joe Biden?
(THE UNUSUALLY CREEPY KIND)
Slate Article By Jack Shafer

"Joe Biden's return as a vice-presidential candidate signals forgiveness—at least from Barack Obama—for having plagiarized a leading British politician during Biden's campaign for the Democratic Party's 1988 presidential nomination.

"The Biden episode merits revisiting because as acts of plagiarism go, it was spectacular, and because it points to other dicey chapters in his life. To know Biden in full, you must appreciate his parts.

"Biden's puttering campaign for president effectively died on Sept. 13, 1987, when the New York Times' Maureen Dowd reported that he had pinched major elements of a recent and celebrated speech by Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock. That speech, included in this May 1987 Labor Party broadcast, begins at the 7:23 mark.

"But Biden didn't merely borrow words and phrasings from Kinnock, which is a time-honored practice of candidates and their speechwriters and is almost never regarded as plagiarism. He became Kinnock,as David Greenberg writes today, claiming things about himself and his family that were untrue and that he knew to be untrue."

...
(more at: http://www.slate.com/id/2198597/)

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 26, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Mr. Strickland.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 26, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Wow. This Strickland (and Rendell) are real men.

It's so cool that some politician has the insight to see the need to speak up about the media abuse of its journalistic role this year and the guts to speak out.

These guys are really impressive.

It's people like Ted Strickland and Ed Rendell who were behind Clinton and while it's people like Claire McGaskill and Bill Richardson and Caroline Kennedy behind Obama.

'Nuff said.

It's so sad we won't see the Democratic leadership in charge of this nation, that we could have had.

The media helps push the most affected elitist blowhard to the fore of the Democratic nominating process yet again, so the Democrats can lose the general election yet again.

Posted by: AsperGirl | August 26, 2008 12:33 PM | Report abuse

they clintonistas of course don't say anything about the fact that msnbc didn't touch hillary's fundraiser, bill's friend and Chicago felon James Levin. they didn't spend much time talking about hillary's indicted fundraiser norman hsu.

they did talk about her flat out lies with Bosnia, and they spent a lot of time talking about reverend wright's outrageous comments. the difference is obama said "i reject and denounce" wright, while the clintons tried to make a lie the truth.

clinton pressed for more debates and strongarmed obama into them. when she didn't like her performance, she says it was the format.

msnbc gives democrats generally good press. obama ran a better, more disciplined campaign which is why he won by a narrow margin. it was clinton's to lose, and she lost.


http://www.nysun.com/national/clinton-fund-raiser-indicted-in-chicago-contract/35937/

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec07/hsu_09-20.html

Posted by: against the DLC | August 26, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

I must agree that MSNBC is biased in favor of Obama.

Keith Olberman might be the worst commentator of all time. He actually makes Bill O'Rielly look reasonable.

I am still waiting for Chris Matthews, keith Olberman or Rachel Mancow to say something about the Reverend Wright, Father Pfleger, Emil Jones, or Howard Dean's race baiting.

MSNBC failed to say one thing about Dean saying the Republican Party was the "white party" last week. If a republican had said something similar about the Democratic Party they would of played it up big time.

Competent journalism does not exist at MSNBC.

Posted by: Mike H | August 26, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Look at Ted Strickland's face. You can see a racist. He is the type of white trash the democratic party can live without.

Posted by: Michael Washington | August 26, 2008 12:36 AM | Report abuse

Im pretty embarrased to say i voted for strickland, allthough this state needed to move in a new direction.I think it's fair to say he had a high probability to be chosen for the VP slot if Clinton had been the nominee, so im kind of shocked at his inability to move on, get past this whole debate about press coverage.
Until it was fairly obvious that it was a slim to none possibility for her to win, Hillary received just as much press as anyone.She started the entire Negative durge that i think is the real reason she lost, i was really on the fence until she started slinging mud against someone in her own party.It was pretty sad , actually, to see someone with so much ability to stay on point, have a real message drop her standards at the door and sink to the low blow tactics that she did.
Strickland should get a clue real quck about his own rhetoric, he has 2 years before a re-election that im sure will be full of Repugnants just biting to get their shots off at him.Anyone working for him better be quick to advise him to mellow his tone. Ohio has a funny way of remembering antics from our government, and we have a real funny way of letting you know how we feel.

Posted by: Mullett | August 26, 2008 12:27 AM | Report abuse

Don't let Penn, Strickland, et al. fool you. They're not fighting for Hillary, they're excusing their own poor performances.

What a tawdry crew. They demean her name, and insult Democratic women.

Posted by: Helen | August 26, 2008 12:07 AM | Report abuse

MINISTER TO John:

Do you John Sidney (Songbird) McCain III take Carol Shepp to be your wife " to live together after God"s ordinance " in the holy estate of matrimony? Will you love her, comfort her, honor and keep her, in SICKNESS and in HEALTH, for RICHER, for POORER, for BETTER, for WORSE, in sadness and in joy, to cherish and continually bestow upon her your heart"s deepest devotion, FORSAKING ALL OTHERS, KEEP YOURSELF ONLY UNTO HER AS LONG AS YOU BOTH SHALL LIVE?

JOHN: "My friend - I do?"

MINISTER TO Carole :

Do you Carol Shepp take John Sidney (Songbird) McCain III to be your husband " to live together after God"s ordinance " in the holy estate of matrimony? Will you love him, comfort him, honor and keep him, in sickness and in health, for richer, for poorer, for better, for worse, in sadness and in joy, to cherish and continually bestow upon him your heart"s deepest devotion, forsaking all others, keep yourself only unto him as long as you both shall live?

“I do.”

Posted by: Family Values Guy | August 26, 2008 12:02 AM | Report abuse

Trying to get back on topic, here's a real life Clinton supporter who is now backing McCain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=597YG23mAWs

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Another reason Obama didn't rape Hilliary is because NEITHER of them is of the gender the other prefers.

Posted by: Percy Kution | August 25, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama DID NOT "rape" Hilliary!!!! If he had, she would have LOVED it and maybe even "straightened" up.

Posted by: Percy Kution | August 25, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

Governor Strickland is, in fact, a registered Democrat -- he supported Hillary Clinton (also a registered Democrat) -- are you going to run EVERYONE you don't agree with 100% out of the Party? As I recall, even Barack Hussein Obama ruffled feathers with his FISA vote ...

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Strickland is no Democrat. I hope Ohioans are watching closely.

Posted by: straight talk my a** | August 25, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

OBama RAPED Hillary.

RAPED HIllary.

Obama is just GHETTO TRASH.

This Hillary supporter is voting for McCain and I'm not alone.

Posted by: Mary | August 25, 2008 3:34 PM

This has to be a Republican troll -- black man raping a white woman, eh? Getting out your pointy headed sheets, dear? Ghetto trash -- have you ever been to a ghetto? Do you realize Obama was raised by a white mother and her Kansan parents? What ghetto were you thinking of? Oahu ... Waikiki Beach? Southeast Indonesia? Whoever you are, you're despicable. And whoever those women claiming to be Democrats on this board talking about supporting McCain clearly have never read his positions on women's issues, or those of interest to all Americans.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Ted Strickland should thank his lucky stars that the media hasn't shined a bright light on his allegedly freaky-deaky tendencies.

http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/10/13/why-ted-stricklands-1999-present-vote-on-h-con-res-107-matters-and-what-it-means-idx/

He should get with the program of supporting the candidate who can deliver peace, prosperity, health care, education, energy independence and the environment. Carping like a member of the first wives club should be beneath him.

Posted by: Deep Blue | August 25, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

LOL!!! Pelosi Tells Disappointed Clinton Supporters to Avoid 'Victim Politics'

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Conventions/story?id=5650893&page=1

Isn't 'Victim Politics' what the entire Democratic Party is built upon?!

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

You bitter PUMA b***ches(men included) deserve Mccain. With that said, I hope you get what you deserve. NOTHING!!! Lost jobs, more wars and broke. I hope you all loose it all. No remorse here.

Posted by: Cartier Caldwell | August 25, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

David:

Just as with Hillary "write-in" votes, it would be a waste to cast invalid votes because the "candidate" has to agree to have those counted -- there's no way that's happening -- if you won't vote for McCain, how about Chuck Baldwin?

http://baldwin08.com/Chuck-Baldwin.cfm

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

I cannot bring myself to watch MSNBC or Fox News. Neither has any objectivity. It's this type of propaganda/journalism that legitimized GW Bush's war of choice in Iraq.

Write in vote for Ron Paul - the only true agent of change with a record.

Posted by: David | August 25, 2008 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Funny that this column was written by Dan Balz, probably the biggest Obama shoe polisher of them all. Balz is so far up a certain part of Obama's anatomy he may as well check for polyps.

Posted by: muskrat | August 25, 2008 6:11 PM | Report abuse

let me call the WAAAAAAAAAAAAmbulance.

Sheesh, enough already.

How'd you like to be that Clinton supporter that's appearing in the mccain ad. Now the whole country knows that she's stupid and petty enough to vote against her own best interests because hill didn't win. The whole world laughin' at her stupidity.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

By now political analysts have worked out where Clinton's campaigned failed despite her successes in states such as New York, California, Texas, etc. Media bias against Clinton during the primaries is indisputable, ... but it was not the decisive factor. Ted Strickland is certainly smart enough to realise that.

Why then does he continue to undermine the candidacy of his party's (de facto) nominee? ...

Posted by: klaus futterer | August 25, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

There's general agreement among media analysts that press coverage is heavily biased toward Obama, against Clinton, and to a lesser extent, against McCain (though I predict the "lesser extent" part will vanish after the convention).

The worst part of the bias directed toward Hillary isn't necessarily the specific injuries alleged (such as fact that she was called on first, asked tougher questions, etc.). The worst part is that these actions showed such disdain for her, and so publicly, that it sent the message that she was somehow inherently guilty of something - perhaps the modern political version of original sin? - and thus someone worthy of disdain (vis-a-vis Obama).

It's hard to fight back from such a position of relative disadvantage, no matter what the press tells you. To a Republican candidate - whose voters are quite accustomed to this tactic by the media - such treatment is not necessarily fatal, since their voting base distrusts the media already, and usually discounts feeble attempts to manipulate the outcome. But to a candidate whose audience is *used* to trusting the media's judgment - like Democratic voters, for example - a move like this can administer the death blow.

Those who argue that the media cost Hillary the nomination have fertile ground on which to base their suspicions.

The question I have is: did members of the press honestly expect that they would get away with such unbecoming behavior without ever being called on it? (At least by someone whose opinion they *have* to respect, like a Democratic governor?) After the way they behaved, what did they honestly expect?

The worst thing about it is, it handicaps the candidate they are trying to help: Obama. By doing everything in their power to protect Obama from tough questions, they reinforce the image in the public mind that Obama is a china doll that will crumble the moment he is pressed to answer a serious charge, or explain an apparent contradiction.

And surely those who do this know this. So why, then, do they do it? Why do they set him up as the 'guy who won't answer tough questions'? Perhaps because the only thing worse than having your candidate known as 'the guy who can't answer tough questions' is having your candidate be the guy who finally takes a tough question, and then *actually crumbles*.

Having *a* candidate is better than having no candidate at all.

In other words, those sympathetic to him may be telegraphing, through their behavior, that they actually think the rap on Obama is *real*, and that, if they want to see him elected, it may be better to help Obama ride out the proverbial shot clock than to put him in a position to face any real questions, ever.

What does that say, folks?

Posted by: RD | August 25, 2008 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Strickland didn't complain when the media shilled for him during his election. What a crybaby. What comes around goes around, Guv'nor.

Posted by: Ohio Proud | August 25, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Im JakeD,
and I get paid,
For my posts,
all day.

Im JakeD,
I sit in my desk,
all day,
so I can be a pest.

Im JakeD,
I report to duty,
Today and tommorow,
So I can make dwell in YOUR SORROW!!!!

Aw yeah,
Aw Yeah,
Aw Yeah!

I get paid,
not like you,
my account gets fatter,
while yours gets thinner,
cuz ur a lozer,
and cuz I'm a winner.

KEEPINITREALZ4EVAYO!

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 5:01 PM | Report abuse

I'm from Iowa and there's no way Clinton would have won if Edward's hadn't been in the race as most of his supporters in locations where he wasn't viable did on January 3 and most of those who were elected to County convetions switched to Obama on March 12 which made up for his net loss delegate numbers in Ohio. I also believe that the media, particularly ABC and CNN favored Clinton so much that I jokingly referred to their initials as always backing Clinton and Clinton News Network. The worst showing was the double hatchet job by George (former Bill Clinton staffer) Stephanopoulos and Charley Gibson in a so called debate where we had to deal with phony issues like flag pins one more time.Interestingly enough at Rick Warren's church Obama had one on and McCain didn't so it was no longer an issue. I hated to see Hillary win the Appalachian States as the WT candidate and I'm not talking about world trade.

Posted by: ejgallagher1 | August 25, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Funny seeing the GOP concern trolls on here today worrying about poor Hillary's feelings, when their tune was so different during their own primary:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLQGWpRVA7o&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/25/115715/026/957/574683


Calling Hillary a "#itch"? Hilarious!

Posted by: Drain You | August 25, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

I don't recall much from "the press" during the primary season about dynasties, Marc Rich, library donors, etc. Does anyone think Clinton could have made it through the general election campaign without Rove & friends dumping that upon her?

Posted by: Jim S. | August 25, 2008 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Dont know if the Governor named those interviewers but here are a few:
NBC (network out to make MSNBC the Fox news of the left capitalizing on Obama campaign)is filled with these people
1.Chris Matthews
2.Tim Russert(RIP)
3.Andrea something(sounds like a very jealous woman)
4.Chuck Todd(partisan in"expert" disguise)
5.Olberman(not truely a journalist but a partisan hack who got the most mileage from his relentless slander)
6.The guy who said Clintons are pimping their daughter
7.Brian Williams
8.That short haired woman with Air America background(she at least admits that she is partisan democrat)
andmany others
What a disgrace.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

I hope Clinton and her surrogates are well aware that she is walking a slippery slope. If they refuse to unite the Democratic party she will never win another election, because the other side of the party will never support her again. I had so much respect for the Clintons, but not anymore. The way they are acting is ridiclous and petty. She needs to stop whinning. She is responsible for the divide with her negative campagning. The republicans are using her words aganist Obama.

Posted by: carrie of georgia | August 25, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

I'ma da JakeD . .
I'ma da JakeD . .
I'ma da JakeD . .
JakeD, JakeD, JakeD . .

Aww yeah,
Aw yeah,
Aww yeah, yeah, yeah. . .

You fear me,
You clearly,
Cant stand me,

Ima like-a mole,
Who'se on parole,
But I aint selling ma soul.

WEKOGNIZE!

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

As an Ohio Democrat planning to vote for her first Republican, I thank both Governors for their honesty. I know they say these things at the peril of not being re-elected. Just like the rest of us took our yard signs, etc., down at the risk of 0bama supporter retribution. God. I cannot wait until he is defeated an gone from the public stage. Never has a candidacy done so much harm to a political party.

Posted by: beebop | August 25, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps the Gov ought to cool off with a relaxing trip to Italy.

Posted by: Hardy | August 25, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

John McCain is soaring to new heights of hypocrisy on his wife's personal jet. He flies around the country bent on duping the public into believing he's "one of them," a regular guy who can empathize with Americans facing an overwhelming economic crush. What's more, he disparages those who oppose his ridiculous policy proposals as "elitist." But who's the real elitist?

The REAL McCain is a multimillionaire who owns ten luxurious homes. The REAL McCain backs President Bush's tax cuts for big corporations. The REAL McCain empathizes only with the interests of our nation's wealthy minority, not its money-strapped majority. But far too many are buying into McCain's deceit because the corporate press won't present the whole picture.

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/49248-mccain-s-mansions-the-houses-that-greed-built

Posted by: ZappoDave | August 25, 2008 4:06 PM | Report abuse

Will Gore steal Dem nomination Thursday night as he may be holding about 100 super delegates' support to deter others and conveniently take advantage of political discontent, chaos and confusion of primaries? As multi-millionaire, will he privatize US governments' programs, infrastructure and jobs for big profit$$$ versus take care of the 80% of the forgotten people?

Will Obama be rid of with his own generated sex and financial scandals? There is a term called "down low" in the black community for professionals who have gay sex on the side despite being married with children and have respectable daytime jobs. Larry Sinclair has come forward with gay sex and drug use claims with Obama in November 1999. He is scared of death threats from the Obama camp since 2006. Google "barack obama is a closet homosexual," or "Video: Pastor Manning Says Obama is Homosexual...," or "Digg - Is Larry Sinclair Obama's dark secret," etc.

President FDR won the 4th ballot in the roll call process in 1932. The rest is history. It should be allowed on Wednesday night. Otherwise the DNC leaves an undeniable impression that the process is stolen especially since Pelosi and Dean orchestrated MI and FLA votes in favor of Obama since summer of 2007.

Is Ted Kennedy's malignant brain tumor a fraud to distract from his real legacy of his 1968/69 Chappaquidic sex/murder scandal because he doesn't seem to have chemo and radiation side effects such as weight loss due to loss of appetite, jauntice, etc. like a typical cancer patient?

Wonder if Obama’s plane failure a couple of weeks ago was a cover up of his involvement in the general tampering of opponents’ planes during this election season? Does he have another "tampering" attempt scheduled for this Sunday when opponent’s plane is scheduled to fly from NY/NJ area to Madison, Wisconsin??? hmmmm....

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Totally agree with the Governers. Once this drama is over,journalism students are going to write many theses about how partisan journalists swayed a campaign to cuase the democrats to forfeit the easiest election chance they ever had.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Strickland is absolutely correct! Though left-wing extremists try to pretend bias doesn't exist in the media, it's clear to everyone with eyes and ears what is actually taking place. Obama was further left than Clinton, so the media shilled for Obama and attacked Clinton. No they are busy shilling for Obama and attacking McCain (who they once supported ONLY because he was the anti-Bush).

Posted by: davenp35 | August 25, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

As we all saw in the primaries, Strickland and Rendell are representing racists in their two states who openly supported Ms. Hillary's white entitlement. She won their support, but lost the nomination.

Get over it.

Posted by: KenR | August 25, 2008 3:59 PM | Report abuse

PUMA, indeed !!

Posted by: DJ | August 25, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Will Gore steal Dem nomination Thursday night as he may be holding about 100 super delegates' support to deter others and conveniently take advantage of political discontent, chaos and confusion of primaries? As multi-millionaire, will he privatize US governments' programs, infrastructure and jobs for big profit$$$?

Will Obama be rid of with his own generated sex and financial scandals? There is a term called "down load" in the black community for professionals who have gay sex on the side despite being married with children and have respectable daytime jobs. Larry Sinclair has come forward with gay sex and drug use claims with Obama in November 1999. He is scared of death threats from Obama's camp. Google "barack obama is a closet homosexual," or "Video: Pastor Manning Says Obama is Homosexual...," or "Digg - Is Larry Sinclair Obama's dark secret," etc.

President FDR won the 4th ballot in the roll call process in 1932. The rest is history. It should be allowed on Wednesday night. Otherwise the DNC leaves an undeniable impression that the process is stolen especially since Pelosi and Dean orchestrated MI and FLA votes in favor of Obama since summer of 2007.

Is Ted Kennedy's malignant brain tumor a fraud to distract from his real legacy of his 1968/69 Chappaquidic sex/murder scandal because he doesn't seem to have chemo and radiation side effects such as weight loss due to loss of appetite, jauntice, etc.?

Wonder if Obama’s plane failure a couple of weeks ago was a cover up of his involvement in the general tampering of opponents’ planes during this election season? Does he have another "tampering" attempt scheduled for this Sunday when opponent’s plane is scheduled to fly from NY/NJ area to Madison, Wisconsin??? hmmmm....

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Will Obama be rid of with his own generated sex and financial scandals?

Does Michelle know?

There is a term called "down low" in the black community for professionals who have gay sex on the side despite being married with children and have respectable daytime jobs.

Larry Sinclair has come forward with gay sex and drug use claims with Obama in November 1999. He is scared of death threats from the Obama camp since he came forward two years ago.

Google "barack obama is a closet homosexual," or "Video: Pastor Manning Says Obama is Homosexual...," or "Digg - Is Larry Sinclair Obama's dark secret," etc.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

I have a remarkably different opinion of the Ohio governor than I used to have: He is obviously a crybaby. If he wants "fair," he should come to Dallas this october for the Great State Fair of the Great State of Texas. That's a fair, pal! That's the only kind of fair that I've ever seen.

Posted by: Jack Alope | August 25, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Those who say that Clinton ran a poor campaign are, to a degree, right. She did not expect to lose in Iowa, and she did not expect Obama to play the race card in South Carolina, since in Iowa he won as the "above-race" candidate. In that way she "misunderestimated" Obama, whose career up to the time he was elected to the US Senate was as a racial politician, and so he knew how to play the get-whitey" game.

On the other hand, there was the Edwards factor. Hard to believe that Clinton did not know about Edward's affair. But if she did, why not out the guy? If Edwards had been out, she would have won in Iowa.

Posted by: John Schuh | August 25, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

OBama RAPED Hillary.

RAPED HIllary.

Obama is just GHETTO TRASH.

This Hillary supporter is voting for McCain and I'm not alone.

Posted by: Mary | August 25, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

It needs to be said how disengenuous the Clintonites come off in their "victim" roles...TIme to really, REALLY move on !! They ran a really lousy camapign and as said, DID NOT MAKE THE FINAL SALE !! This ongoing nonsense of claiming THEY were disrepected..THEY have disrespected ALL OTHERS FAR MORE in their inability to grasp they did NOT MAKE THE FINAL SALE and DID NOT WIN !!! The are disrepecting THE legit nominee and the LEGIT dems who are uniting in effort to secure the WH with Obama and Biden at the helm. The CLintons need to make supreme effort to atuthentically reconcile the perceived differences but to date have been more than a tad lackluster in such and it IS OBVIOUS !!! McCain and the Goperites who did NOT really figure they had much of a chance truly are indebted to the Clintons, but it IS and remains the rest of us who will suffer the consequences should somehow McC gain title to continue the Bush/ Cheney/ Neocon path.

Posted by: Bozzie | August 25, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Hello fake JakeD (at 3:07pm).

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

As an Ohioan and someone who voted for you, Ted, just SHUT UP ALREADY.

Posted by: Nancy G. | August 25, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Think Strickland and Rendell and other diehard CLintonites need to get a grip on REALITY !! The PASS the Clintons received as in how promoted as THE INEVITIBLE from her carpet bagged NY Senate seat FORWARD and who spent more time calculating her run for WH and all the while getting free passes does not equate to what Obama was given which was relentlessly focused most especially on whatever NEGATIVITIES could be scrounged !!! TIme for the UNGRACIOUS SORE LOSERS TO GET OVER IT, THEY made a bad "bet"...They lost , did NOT make the final sale and even now are willing to let ALL SLIP AWAY TO THE DETRIMENT OF ALL due to their inability to realize what a truly POOR CAMPAIGN was indeed in motion based more on arrogance than authenticity proven more so by their continued blustering and playing victimized. THE CLINTON CAMPAIGN WAS INEPT, face the FACTS !!! The CLINTON CAMP BLEW IT FOR THEMSELVES, time to take that responsibility and shoulder as a REAL PROFESSIONAL SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO !!!!

Posted by: Bozly | August 25, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Yup, we the Democratic Party are totally united. Yup 100% united . . . no dissent going on here . . . nothing to see here folks, nothing to see . . .move along...

Posted by: Racist Obama and his Wu-Tang Clan | August 25, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

"bashes"?

Feeling a little defensive, are we?

Posted by: Anonymous | August 25, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

PUMA!!!

Posted by: JakeD | August 25, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company