Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Wag the Blog: Clinton on Saturday Night Live (Special Sunday Edition)

When Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) disappeared from the campaign trail without warning yesterday, the rumor mill began churning. Had a cold or the flu knocked her down just 96 hours before the biggest votes of her political life? Did she sneak off for a clandestine courting session with former senator John Edwards (N.C.)?

Turns out Clinton had hopped a plane for New York City where she appeared in a sketch on "Saturday Night Live" -- mocking, among other things, the media's treatment of Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), her position in the race and even her laugh?

Not a night owl and missed the sketch? Here it is:

For today's special Sunday edition of Wag the Blog, we want to know whether Clinton's appearance last night had any effect on how you view her as a candidate. And, whether it did or didn't, do you think her "SNL" star turn will influence voters in Ohio and Texas? Why or why not?

Sound off in the comments section below. The best (most insightful/thoughtful/funny) responses will be excerpted in a post of their own later this week.

By Chris Cillizza  |  March 2, 2008; 11:00 AM ET
Categories:  Wag The Blog  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Managing March 4 Expectations
Next: FixCam Week in Preview: Ohio-Texas Two-Step Time!

Comments

lkuw lqot byaujpl aseythwf jwdn hmqajn govnufs http://www.hbtsiogx.lmgy.com

Posted by: fdvpchj atrlfi | April 11, 2008 1:13 AM | Report abuse

axrgks ulyfvmo sdcyozn ugekqybas yafcth bjexihkg jhelqkynz

Posted by: wsndvrm wmntg | April 11, 2008 1:12 AM | Report abuse

Reading all of these comments about how "great" she did on SNL is sickening. She was a loser, is currently one BIG TIME LOSER, and will always be a LOSER!!!!

These sketches confirm the fact the SNL and its producers have a disgusting lovefest for Hillary. They can continue to ridicule Obama all they want but they won't be laughing when Hillary is defeated.

Hillary should form a committee of humiliated first ladies. And she should head this committee and then they can discuss the art of being humiliated in front of all the world and pretend that they are "victims". Hillary, Silda & Dina all fall in this category. Their lust for power or better yet, the lust for the "perks" that come from being the first lady is too much to pass up even if it means having a little humiliation tossed their way.

Posted by: delakile | March 17, 2008 4:42 AM | Report abuse

Hillary and Bill Clinton have made a significant issue about how the press is treating Hillary unfairly in their hyper-critical reporting on her and their "softball" reporting on Barak Obama. Hillary maintains she has been fully investigated by the media and Barak hasn't!

As the Tony Rezko trial begins in Chicago, Clinton and her surrogates are linking Obama to Rezko and the media is speculating about whether Obama will be called to testify as a witness in the case. Obama has always admitted he received $85,000 in contributions from Rezko which Obama has now donated to charity rather than keep.

Yet the civil fraud trial of Bill Clinton for defrauduing Hillary's largest donor in 2000 into giving her campaign more than $1.2 million, pending in Los Angeles courts since 2003, is now preparing for a November, 2008 trial. The discovery that is now proceeding after a February 21 hearing, and the pending trial, have NEVER been announced by the mainstream media.

Hillary was able to extricate herself as a co-defendant in the case in January, 2008 after years of appeals to be protected by the First Amendment from tort claims arising out of federal campaign solicitations she made. Her abuse of the intent of California's anti-SLAPP law after the California Supreme Court refused to dismiss her from the case in 2004 is emblematic of her contempt for the Rule of Law.

Hillary will be called as a witness in both discovery and the trial according to the trial court Judge who so-advised Hillary's attorney David Kendall when he dismissed Hillary as a co-defendant in 2007. A subpoena is being prepared this month and will be served personally on Hillary, along with Chelsea, Pa Gov. Ed Rendell, Al Gore and other well known political and media figures.

Yet the media has refused to report about this landmark civil fraud case- brought by Hillary's biggest 2000 donor to her Senate race, regarding allegations that were corroborated by the Department of Justice in the criminal trial of Hillary's finance director David Rosen in May, 2005. That indictment and trial was credited as resulting from the civil suit's allegations by Peter Paul, the Hollywood dot com millionaire Bill Clinton convinced to donate more than $1.2 million (according to the DOJ prosecutors and the FBI) to Hillary's Senate campaign as part of a post White House business deal with Bill.

The media - except for World Net Daily- has also suspiciously refused to report on Hillary's last FEC report regarding her 2000 Senate campaign, filed in January 30, 2006. In a secret settlement of an FEC complaint by the plaintiff in Paul v Clinton, Peter Paul, the FEC fined Hillary's campaign $35,000 for hiding more than $720,000 in donations from Paul, and it required Hillary's campaign to file a 4th amended FEC report.

In that report Hillary and her campaign again hid Paul's $1.2 million contribution to her campaign and falsely attributed $250,000 as being donated by Paul's partner, Spider Man creator Stan Lee, who swore in a video taped deposition he never gave Hillary or her campaign any money.

Lee did testify to trading $100,000 checks with Paul to make it appear he gave $100,000 to Hillary's campaign (admission of a felony) but none of that has been reported by the "overly critical" media!

Where is the outrage from Obama that the press is engaging in a double standard relating to his possible role in the Rezko trial and his refunding the $85,000 contributed to his campaign by Rezko- which Obama has always admitted taking. The media makes no mention of Hillary's role as a witness in Bill's fraud trial for defrauding Hillary's largest donor- and Hillary's refusal to refund the $1.2 million she illegally received from Paul, which she has denied taking from Paul ever since the Washington Post asked her about Paul and his felony convictions from the 1970's before her first Senate election in 2000?

visit hillcap.org

Posted by: pedromatos11368 | March 11, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

hillary is great, she will be the smartest choice for president.

Posted by: badlizzard1 | March 9, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary isn't our next POTUS she might have a shot at acting.
I cannot stand her but the woman that I just watched looked and acted like someone I'd like to know.

Why couldn't she act like that on the campaign trail I wonder?

Posted by: mrmc23320 | March 3, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

I agree completely with Mustafa Hirji, above. I think the sketch serves to humanize her, in a way she hasn't been completely sure she can afford to. It's a fine line. She has to be tough, yet soft. That's hard to get across. She's also got to be very careful and calculate every thing she says and does . . . without seeming to be calculating. Talk about tough.

Essentially, I think they'd both make good presidents. They're very similar on most platforms, after all. The differences are these (in part).

a) I live in the country, and still see "Impeach Clinton and Her Husband, Too!" bumper stickers on yer older-model beat-up pickup trucks. That's a lot of hate to overcome. Some folks who might stay home to avoid voting for McCain will drag themselves to the polls by their fingernails to vote against Hillary Clinton. It's not fair. It's not her fault. But it's a fact. When Bill made that first acceptance speech and she popped up and said, "And I'm a lawyer, too, so you're getting two for the price of one!" there was a collective gasp of horror from across the South. They thought they'd voted for a good ol' boy, and got a Yankee woman. And then she tried to DO stuff! Personally, I'm glad she did, and don't blame her in the least for the goal of trying to help her country any way she could. But not everyone feels that way.

b) In order to fix the world's vision of us as arrogant, ignorant, intolerant, and greedy, we've got to go 180 degrees in a different policy direction than we've had. And not just under Bush. Remember that it took them years to plan 9-11. Remember the embassy bombings under Clinton. Not to mention the earlier WTC bombing in the parking garage. We were hated even when Bill was in office. We need to reevaluate our foriegn policies, both political, military, and economic, and make drastic changes if the rest of the world is going to revise their opinion of us. I think Obama's the only candidate that can accomplish that.

jenniearcheo

Posted by: jenniearcheo | March 3, 2008 3:35 PM | Report abuse

She has run a great race and I feel that she is the best we have right now to help kick our economy in high gear again ,she is the kind of real change OUR COUNTRY MUST HAVE RGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: gwbrweb | March 3, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

byronoccor wrote:
"Would I be crazy to suggest a so-called preposterous position that the Republican paid for press has every intention to put Obama in the presidential race knowing that Clinton would win? Obama has hidden stuff that the Republicans would not push into the news until Obama is the candidate. Hillary Clinton has already been through the Republican abuse and smearings and survived."

I would say you're not crazy, because I've thought of this myself many times. I shudder to think...but then, I shudder to think of another 4-8 years of the Clintons.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

tessa2 wrote:
"Regrettably [the Post] article fails to mention that Obama's national campaign co-chair is Jesse Jackson, Jr. But if you don't believe me just search the internet.
So who is strong-arming the superdelegates to back Obama?
Ans. Obama's national campaign co-chair, Jesse Jackson, Jr. and other members of the Black Caucus."

Okay, I see your point. I was not aware that JJ Jr. was his national campaign co-chair.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Hillary tends to be viewed by the public as nasty, tough, and combative. Her recent underdog status has emphasized this as she's needed to draw contrasts with Obama to get back into the race. No one likes unpleasant people, and it is particularly
unappealing in women to come across as unpleasant, unfair as that is.Obama's public image as a person who speaks in positive terms and about hope wins out on Hillary's unpleasantness.

Much has been made of Hillary's need to humanizer herself--to show the she's not what her public image is portrayed as. Her strongest moments in the campaign have been when people have seen that she's not some automaton fighting political battles, but a funny, caring, and lively human being. The SNL piece helped to highlight that (in contrast to the parody skit of the debate just before where she was combative and whinny). The skit will help counter Hillary's image problem and humanize her.

- Mustafa Hirji

Posted by: mustafa.hirji | March 3, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

I guess the Fairness Doctrine is dead and buried.

The Daily Show will be a mistake. Jon Stewart can be tough when he wants to be.

Posted by: gbooksdc | March 3, 2008 1:21 PM | Report abuse

I loved the show. It shows Hillary's excellent sense of humor which we always heard from the media did not exist. Actually, she has always had a great sense of humor.
And she is still very attractive, in spite of all the nastiness and disappointment she has had to put up with.
Shows such as this could help her improve her odds in the election. It will help counter balance the nastiness about her put out by Bill Maher and Randi Rhodes and Laura Flanders.
I adore Hillary and this show serves to remind me why.

Posted by: bghgh | March 3, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

OH come on all you Barack Hussein Obama supporters you. Wanting a president whose middle name is Hussein and Last name is Muslim ;-/. It is just a comedy show! GET IT COMEDY ;-}. Hey for you all "want to make it into a racial thing" I do not hear you fuzzing about The Chapell Show and how he disgraces the black community. HELLO. So, lets all grow up and act like adults. It is was a COMEDY show. OK.

Now vote responsibly not blindly.

HILLARY! HILLARY! HILLARY! Yeah.

JC, Houston, Texas

Posted by: abjcortez | March 3, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's base comprises women over (say) 40. She seeks to rally around her as many of these women as possible by "humanizing" herself, most recently via SNL. Her strategy attempts to evoke a sisterhood of victims and sometimes appears, at least to a man, to take on the moral fervor of a women's crusade dedicated to the mission of giving us our first woman President without further delay.

Hard to know how this will work. No doubt it will help mobilize sympathizers who search for gender identification as a higher priority in our commander-in-chief than for instance the wise exercise of judgment by this leader. But will it give pause to some men and thoughtful women of all ages?

Posted by: FirstMouse | March 3, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's biggest problem in the past few weeks has been looking relevant in this race. She has lost 11 contests, Obama is now trading fire with McCain (and even Bush), and Clinton hasn't been getting much attention. Most of it that she has been getting is for questionable campaign maneuvers (like the photo of Obama in Kenyan dress), complaining (about debate issues, about voting rules in Texas), and somehow things related to Saturday Night Live. When she brought up the media sketch in the debate, she came off as petty, desperate, and irrelevant. This will only increase those feelings among voters, most of whom have already stopped listening to her, and have either already decided to vote for her, or are undecideds who will probably go to Obama in the end.

Posted by: C.Prachniak | March 3, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

Saturday Night Live hasn't been funny in a long time and it's culturally irrelevant now. Her Daily Show appearance tonight might do her better.

Posted by: donjaime37 | March 3, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

Well, it won't influence the election, but it's definitely the classiest thing she's done in a long time.

Posted by: light_bearer | March 3, 2008 10:08 AM | Report abuse

"Life is a b***h and then you die, so don't vote for one".
------------------

AS if this reflects everyone's view of Hillary or women and should be the basis for voting for her!

Posted by: wpost4112

This was just an observation. I live in a very red section of Florida and the hatred of the Clintons is palpable. I can remember seeing bumper stickers in 1993 saying "Impeach the President -- and her husband". Nothing will motivate a dispirited Republican base like Hillary Clinton heading the Democratic ticket.

Posted by: jimd52 | March 3, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

As do I. That's a place where a person can really make a difference. Can a former President serve as a SP justice?
-----------------

definitely.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:49 AM

William Howard Taft served as a Supreme Court Justice - in fact Chief Justice after his presidential term was over.

Posted by: jimd52 | March 3, 2008 9:38 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's appearance on Saturday night was funny, and smartly so.

While it will not help her overall performance--because people are not voting for Obama because he's not "popular" or a bit of a "rock star" himself. It will remind people of Hillary's humanity.

For me, it reminded me why I liked Hillary before she became such a whiner and started using pandering, petty tactics to take out Obama.

This should show the CLinton campaign, she is at her strongest when she is just Hillary.

I also think that like Sen Dole's appearance--it signals she is moving on, and "rising above" the nomination to secure her position as a leader in the party.

I think her SNL skit will go down as a turning point when Clinton reminded Americans she was on their side--regardless of who wins in the Two Step on Tuesday.

Posted by: chadibuins | March 3, 2008 9:12 AM | Report abuse

Free political advertising time on national TV. Can't be bad for her, but she didn't really do anything with it and was only reaching the converted, so I can't see it actually helping her.

Posted by: krnewman | March 3, 2008 8:44 AM | Report abuse

I thought the sketch was great until she appeared at the end. This election I will vote for Obama or no one.

I think that the anti-Obama posters on this blog bring up ridiculous views that amount to "just words" that aren't backed up by facts.

Seems to me that Clinton's plan is TELL A LIE LOUD ENOUGH AND LONG ENOUGH, PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE IT. Clinton is generally always speaking FLUFF and taking the classic approach of riddling the opponent with so many questions that they never get to make a point because they are too busy answering questions.

I challenge anti-Obama folks to go to his website and evaluate his positions because everytime I read or hear something from the anti-Obamas, they are flat out misstating the facts.

Posted by: Patowmack | March 3, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Artemis for the link.

Regrettably this article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/02/AR2008030202434.html?hpid=topnews⊂=AR&sid=ST2008030300128)

fails to mention that Obama's national campaign co-chair is Jesse Jackson, Jr. But if you don't believe me just search the internet.

So who is strong-arming the superdelegates to back Obama?

Ans. Obama's national campaign co-chair, Jesse Jackson, Jr. and other members of the Black Caucus.

Posted by: tessa2 | March 3, 2008 8:13 AM | Report abuse

The woman has lost 11 contests in row by huge margins. She should be thankful the media even pays attention to her. This will be all be over on Wednesday.

Posted by: zb95 | March 3, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Chris We saw you on television a few times now -


I guess you have moved up to the beg time -


Does this mean you aren't going to want to talk to us anymore???

Posted by: Miata7 | March 3, 2008 7:59 AM | Report abuse

Don't count Senator Clinton out yet! She's smart, tough, experienced and funny. She'd be the best president. Senator Obama would be a good VP. He's incredibly talented, just needs some seasoning. We face too many serious problems for any on the job training.

SNL did a great job of exposing the real story in this campaign: media bias. When Hillary was ahead by 100 delegates, media called it a virtual tie. When Barack is ahead by 100 deleates, the media is calling for her to withdraw before Tuesday's vote. Senator Feinstein said it best: Senator Clinton is a viable candidate and there is no reason for her to withdraw before the race has run its course--certainly will be through Pennsylvania as Senator Clinton will win Ohio, and at least the popular vote in Texas and should do well in Rhodes Island.

This race is not over. Hopefully there will be more SNL moments. I for one, applaud them for bucking the media tide and taking on the obnoxious Tim Russert.

Posted by: Mondegreenie | March 3, 2008 7:58 AM | Report abuse

Chris,

With all the compelling news worthy stories out there this morning, why on earth would you write about some goofy SNL skit?!?

Posted by: zb95 | March 3, 2008 7:36 AM | Report abuse

YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton. :-)

Best regards

jacksmith...

Posted by: JackSmith1 | March 3, 2008 6:27 AM | Report abuse

This idea was truly brilliant and here's why:
The previous show hammered the point that she has been trying to make which is that Obama gets favorable coverage. Her appearance keeps that message alive for another week.
Ironically the writer of the skit is said to be an Obama supporter but he felt that the media coverage has truly been harder on Senator Clinton.
Secondly, the skit previous to Hillary's remarks actually makes fun of her by calling her a woman so "annoying" that companies will give in to what she wants. Therefore, for her to be on SNL after being roasted by them, and her self-deprecating remarks, breaks the idea of her being stiff,while the skit, which will be replayed on many websites and TV stations (including The Daily Show), will give her campaign days of FREE positive advertising that will be seen by all demographics and in all of the regions that are having a contest on March 4th. Finally, her appearance will not convince an Obama supporter to turn against him, but maybe it will make it easier for some undecided voters, to view them both as viable and "likeable" candidates and vote for Hillary. Also, in a blue-collar state, such as Ohio, the fact that she is willing to go all out and "work hard" to get their votes may be more endearing than in other states.

Posted by: mcfield | March 3, 2008 6:12 AM | Report abuse

Would I be crazy to suggest a so-called preposterous position that the Republican paid for press has every intention to put Obama in the presidential race knowing that Clinton would win? Obama has hidden stuff that the Republicans would not push into the news until Obama is the candidate. Hillary Clinton has already been through the Republican abuse and smearings and survived. Texas will go Obama big time - thanks to the media of Texas. I ask, could Texans really be for a black so soon after the black man was dragged behind a truck as if it was 1800's? Only if it is politically expedient? They helped stick the USA with Bush and now they want us stuck with McCain so we Texans can benefit from an Iraq driven oil-defense economy?? Ohio was purchased by the Republican media years ago. Americans, you do not have a clue of the media power. POLITICS IS DOING THINGS TO GET YOUR WAY. REPUBLICANS LEARNED A GENERATION AGO TO BUY THE MEDIA AND CONTROL IT. THAT IS SIMPLE POLITICS. THEN, OF COURSE, BLAME THE MEDIA AS TOO LIBERAL -- TO FOG UP THE PERCEPTION AND BLIND THE PEOPLE TO THE MEDIA'S REAL ACTIONS. OBAMA - CLINTON DEBATE, IT DOES NOT MATTER AS THE REPUBLICANS WILL DELIVER MCCAIN THE PRESIDENCY, JUST AS BUSH SAID THE OTHER DAY. BESIDES THE MEDIA, THEY HAVE OTHER WAYS. AS JOSEPH STALIN SAID "I DO NOT CARE WHO VOTES OR HOW THEY VOTE, I GET TO COUNT THE VOTES."

Many of us could really be happy with a Clinton-Obama ticket, but that will not happen as Republicans, not Democrats will determine that. Laugh if you want. Laugh at Jeb Bush and Florida also. Laugh at Ohio's presidential votes.

Posted by: byronoccor | March 3, 2008 5:14 AM | Report abuse

mcauli1: Much of what you say is true and accounts for resentment between races. None of my ancestors were slave owners. I don't feel responsible for slavery, nor the injustices done to Native Americans. Women were oppressed yet I don't vote based on that oppression. Women were little more than chattel of their husbands, brothers and fathers. No voice by vote, unable to own land or work in public. Yes, the white female and black female had experiences that could be called similar but even that is not my experience. I can own property, I can vote.
Why should I suffer discrimination now at the hands of a people who were never themselves slaves for actions of others, which neither of us belonged to that era. African slave traders sold their own people into slavery and yes they were mistreated but not by me or my family. Slavery exists today yet I don't see African Americans championing the cause of human rights.
Resistance and fear remains because whites perceive that color-blind equality is not what is actually being sought. There are black student councils, black entertainment television and radio programs, black history week, black state of union meetings, black ministers and black governors meetings, on and on. By their very names, these organizations exclude whites. The evil of bias, bigotry and prejudice will never be righted by reversing discrimination against a generation trying to build a bridge to equality.
The very reason Obama is untouchable is because HE IS black. Bill Clinton found that out early on. If Obama's lack of experience, his voting records are challenged, it is tagged as racist. Michelle Obama can barely conceal her anger at white America yet America gave her opportunity, hope, an education, freedom and now a chance to be first lady. If she were living with ancestry in Africa, would those opportunities be hers?
Yes, there is resentment when support for a candidate is based on color and not on character or experience. It isn't that Obama IS NOT a good man but if he were white or Hispanic he would not be where he is now. His inexperience would rise as an issue and he would fare no better than John Edwards, who was infinitely more qualified and spoke almost totally for the poor and oppressed. No, Obama is where he is BECAUSE he is black.
Strange how people vote with emotion and not brains. It is a coalition that holds Obama up. White males who won't vote for a female, young voters who feel Obama's rhetoric is their 'voice' for change, whatever that means and yes, don't forget that solid black backing that wouldn't care if Obama had two heads and wore a turban on both.
So many people voting emotion and feelings. Well, Obama may get my vote in the end as a Democrat because there are worse choices. I imagine McCain and the swiftboaters will have him to 'lunch.'
Nadar said if a Democrat can't win by a landslide we might as well fold up the party and I agree. But you know what will happen? We are dividing our party with this hatred or anger and the Republicans will smile all the way through another 8 years of disaster.

Posted by: juliarea | March 3, 2008 4:51 AM | Report abuse

I probably wont comment on this blog much more, but as an Obama supporter (and as Ive recently learned a closet racist) I thought the cartoon was hilarious. Thank God for Smigel...otherwise that show would be total crap.

Im sure all my fellow Obama supporters will call me a half-breed for condoning that, but as many a HRC supporter said "lighten up!" Can anyone seriously say that without Daily show/Colbert we wouldnt all have jaundice by now? And to my fellow supporters, if he doesnt get the nomination remember what his campaign has shown, you cant look to the past and cry, you have to look to the future and smile.
I know this sounds pompous, but I need a spot on his speech-writing team.
Later you all, and let the donkey bust through the gates of 1600 penn ave, no matter whose riding it.
Chris

Posted by: medwreck17 | March 3, 2008 4:31 AM | Report abuse

to JmCauli1, I agree with much of what you said, most actually. That said, you still have to admit that traditionally white institutions have had a negative effect on the community and to some extent still do.

Also the disparities in prisons do speak of less than equal standards (much like the recently overturned inflated sentencing guidelines for crack-cocaine detentions above and beyond those imposed for powder).

Just a thought, but I agree that race-baiting is BS, and it seems that people in or for the campaign shouldnt make an issue of race when the candidate avowedly resists any attempt to make it an issue (not that he really could).

Posted by: medwreck17 | March 3, 2008 3:59 AM | Report abuse

I am writing to not be such a smart ass this time before Joan rips me again.

To tell the truth Joan I am not particularly well read and most of the campaign criticisms I listed are ones that I sort of observed through several of the campaigns that we studied in the aforementioned Mass Media and Politics class. I also will suggest reading the Book of the same name by Doris Graber. I think its the sixth ed. and there is an "American" before politics in the title. Most political scientists will tip their hat to Dr G, so I assure you it is quality scholarship. She's 84 and knows so much about politics it's bewildering. Also she edited another volume in which one article details the see-saw relationship WJC had/has with MSM. I cant say either was an easy read in the sense that I have deep objections to several media actions and still do, but I can also better grasp the other side.

I would surely entertain any readings you would suggest and unlike several Obama supporters I dont have an HRC problem, I just hope they both are willing to take on the other as RM, or else I fear this unfolding coalition will be undone in Nov.

Give the environment a break before the GOP breaks it for good.
Chris

Posted by: medwreck17 | March 3, 2008 3:49 AM | Report abuse

wapost4112 posted something quite revealing when he answered someone else's post with the following:

"But what if, as a white person, you lived in a country where you were only 16% of the population and had been oppressed for 200 years...wouldn't you feel a need to build self-esteem for the group as a whole before being able to join the 84% of the population that were former oppressors???"
__________________
Well, well. The Politically Correct Reverse racism of the Obama campaign has slipped out, because wapost4112 would have you believe, as a percentage of the Blacks do and a percentage of the Whites do, that every White American, all 84% of them, are "former oppressors."

Why don't you just come out and call every White American, all 84% of them, nothing but Crackers, nothing but card carrying bigots.

The sad fact of the matter is that some Americans like wapost4112, actually believe that every White American, all 84% of them, were slave owners, that every White American was involved in lynching, that every White American was a member of the KKK, that all Whites were responsible for every injustice inflicted upon the Black population.

The sin of slavery in America is clear and undeniable but to cast every White American, all 84% of them, as former oppressors, former lynchers, former members of the KKK is just despicable.

I will remind you that the majority of the population during the Civil War was in the North where it was illegal to own slaves, that in the South the majority of Whites did NOT own slaves, and that nearly 100% of the 500,000 dead of the Civil War were White. So at least half of the 500,000 dead White men from the Civil War were fighting for, among other things, an end to slavery.

I am White and will not be made to feel I have to apologize for it in a country that is now and has been for its entire history majority White.

Further, I will not sit by silently, sir, as you hold a magnifying glass to the warts of the White race which are, in fact, the warts of the entire Human race and go around proclaiming that these self same warts you possess are beauty marks!

I will further remind you that slavery was not invented by White America. It is chronicled in ancient Babylonia and Egypt, and they were NOT White!

This belief that "Whitey" is responsible for all the evils visited upon the Black man and, to some, on all the world can be no more clearly seen than in some of the statements of that malignant whack job Louis Farrakham.

This belief is also seen by many as the sub rosa sentiments behind Mrs Obama's statement that she had never found reason to be proud of America until her husband ran for president.

Posted by: jmcauli1 | March 3, 2008 3:17 AM | Report abuse

I think this article from our friends at the Post adds nicely to the information on black superdelegates:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/02/AR2008030202434.html?hpid=topnews&sub=AR&sid=ST2008030300128

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 2:32 AM | Report abuse

Joan...

Take a breather. I said I have to go now because I wanted to write more but (as a student) I have home work. So sue my self-righteous ass. Also, I think I was deferential (ie dispelling any notion that I was an authority) on 3 separate occasions in that post. Since you didnt cite what was self-important or what makes me a Blowhard aside from my I have to go comment, Im not sure what to respond to. Granted most people know that blogs are a place to spread invective like wildfire, but I think they were intended as a forum for debate. At least I have the guts to supply my name.

in addition, I would love to hear all the things that her campaign has done really well. Obviously based on your extensively researched posts, you should be able to offer something other MSM conspiracy.

I refuse to discuss the Rezko issue (not least because its ongoing) because I live in Chicago and the Trib has been browbeating me with it for the better part of his campaign and before.

I suppose there is more to discuss, but my education is more important than answering critiques that dont include a critique. But there is one last thing, this country was founded by blowhards and what makes America great is that we can say one thing and do another. (Oh and before you call me on it, that was plaigarized (and I might've mispelled plaigarized)
The best to you and yours,
chris

Posted by: medwreck17 | March 3, 2008 1:56 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, I read that part, but I still don't see where it says the Obama campaign is strong-arming people. It could just be other politicians - Kennedy, Kerry - or maybe even Lewis' financial supporters. I just wouldn't read too much into it.

Have a good night.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 1:40 AM | Report abuse

Here is the transcript, I think it is pretty damning but I guess if you are a die hard supporter you could see it thru rose colored glasses.

BROWN: Let me start with you, Congressman Cleaver.

And just give me your reaction to Representative Lewis' decision.

CLEAVER: Well, I saw him today, joked with him earlier today. I have no reaction. I understand clearly that he is in charge of himself. He made a decision based on his own congressional district.

He has been under pressure. And I think he is a national hero. He is one of my heroes for sure. And I have nothing but respect for him. I also must say that there were those that put pressure on Mr. Lewis.

BROWN: But who were they? What kind of pressure?

CLEAVER: Well, I think you would have to ask him to talk about that.

BROWN: But you said you knew he was under pressure. So, who are you talking about?

CLEAVER: Yes, I do know. Well, I can only talk to you about what he said in the general way. I think he would have to give specifics if he chose to do that. And I think that -- and there are others if you're interested.

One of the ironies here is that one of the legends of the civil rights movement has been bludgeoned over what he fought to obtain for all of us. And that is that people could make independent political decisions without reprisal.

Then Rep Lee goes on to deny it is the Obama campaign applying the pressure.

That's it for me -- Goodnight all.

Posted by: tessa2 | March 3, 2008 1:32 AM | Report abuse

Joan, there is a difference between criticism and complaint. It is the job of a leader to have the wisdom to recognize what is wrong with the past and work to change it (or at the least avoid repeating it). By your definition, everyone is a whiner (including Hillary). Should we not criticize the f-ed up job Bush and many others have done for fear of being called whiners? I have heard few complaints come out of Obama's mouth during this campaign, but that is all I hear from Clinton these days.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 1:26 AM | Report abuse

Obama whines about stuff contantly but nobody calls him on it because he is a man.
When he accuses Hillary of using tactics from the "past", that is him whining. When he talks of "change", that is him whining.
Nothing worse than a whiny guy.
Yeah, we really want a President like that.
I'd like to see what he says if his name is mentioned during the Tony Rezko trial tomorrow. We will probably have to dig that up in the underground press, because the mainstream media fails to report these things. Obama needs to be questioned, because he changes his answers constantly, the sign of a liar.

Posted by: joanthebaptist1 | March 3, 2008 1:12 AM | Report abuse

"white and black women have little in common in respect to shared experience"

Wow I can't believe you said that. What do you base that on?

As to Clinton's baggage:

Certainly Bill Clinton's Lewinsky affair was wrong, but was Sen. Clinton somehow to blame for that? Are you suggesting that she should have let her husband. Is that your complaint.

She voted for the Iraq war because she and most of the country was misled by Bush.

I have not read of this pedophile case from any major news organization.

Posted by: tessa2 | March 3, 2008 1:12 AM | Report abuse

Let's talk about Obama's baggage.
One of Senator Obama's books "The Audacity of Hope" is based on the preaching of his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, whose close ties with Louis Farrakhan, whom he honored as a "Great Man" is unnerving. He had a 17 year relationship with Tony Rezko, a Syrian slumlord (now in jail), who caused poor people to live in squalor on the south side of Chicago, without heat in the dead of winter. Then there is the campaign funding he received and ties to Nadhmi Auchi, a billionaire Iraqi terrorist funder and Rashid Khalid, a Pakistani terrorist, and the Kenyan terrorist, Raila Odinga. I also don't want to leave out the Weathermen, William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Were they Timothy McVey's inspiration?
One of Obama's most aggressive and involved supporter is Oprah. Who has at least one school in Africa. Obamba, who's father, and his father's family is from Kenya, both have such strong ties to that part of the World. Has anyone elese been reading the World News? Everyday in the News, we read about the unrest and all the problems that are going on in Kenya. How do we know that we won't end up in the middle of that mess, having to send troops in there, or that we won't end up in another war, This time in Africa. This feels like another bush situation..........and thought is very scary!
Then there is the Exelon Corporation nuclear plant in Illinois that had not disclosed radioactive leaks that contaminated the drinking water at one of their plants. Senator Obama lied about how he did something about preventing this situation from happening again.
Now down to his Elmer Gantry character.
He is not truthful, and he tells the American people just what they want to hear, but he doesn't really say anything about how he will "Change" things. I watched the debate, and the hard questions were asked of Hillary first, then his answer would be "I agree". Hillary really did shine in the end.
Saturday Night Live really did a good impression of the whole Obamamania thing.
PT Barnum said it best "You will never go broke underestimating the American Public." It seems that Senator Obama is bulletproof from the media really revealing any of his dirt. But then again the media does not care about anything but their bottom line I also believe is a Republican ploy, in part, to gain a running mate for McCain. They knew that McCain was in the bag, in the primaries, so why not vote for his running mate? The question will come down to the general election, and who will come out to vote, and for whom.

I hope this explains why I support Hillary, and why I think it would be in the best interest of this country for her to win. If she doesn't win the nomination, then who else is there to vote for? Ralph Nader?

Posted by: joanthebaptist1 | March 3, 2008 1:05 AM | Report abuse

And we all know that Cathy Crowley is a Hillarian!

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:56 AM | Report abuse

Tessa, I read that transcript and nowhere did it say that superdelegates were being strong-armed. The implication by Lewis himself was that the pressure was coming from his constituents and maybe the black community as a whole. The commentator (I forget who, was it Candy Crowley?) tried to steer it in the direction of some controversial statement about some specific person or entity putting pressure on Lewis and other black superdelegates, but there was no clear (or even ambiguous) conclusion to that effect.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 12:52 AM | Report abuse

As do I. That's a place where a person can really make a difference. Can a former President serve as a SP justice?
-----------------

definitely.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:49 AM | Report abuse

>>I have seen no evidence that his campaign has strong-armed >>anyone.

Here is a link to the CNN trascript

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0802/27/se.02.html

----------------

Thanks. I read the whole transcript and saw no evidence.
Can you point to something specific?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Women however have not voted as bloc while blacks have.

=============

True, but in the black culture, race is a greater divider than gender. Largely because white and black women have little in common in respect to shared experience, but all blacks share the prejudice they face simply because of their skin color.

Whereas we see Hispanics split along age lines because again, their experiences are different, given legal status and language issues.

I mean why wouldn't all blacks vote for Obama? He's a great candidate! And the blacks are a small percentage of the entire population.

Why don't all women vote for Hillary?
Baggage. She's got more baggage. Her co-dependent relationship with a man who took advantage of a young girl under his employ. Her vote for a stupid war. Her defense of a paedophile and grilling a 12 year-old girl..

there are legitimate reasons.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:44 AM | Report abuse

wpost4112 wrote:
"I hope [Obama] is a supreme court justice in his later years."

As do I. That's a place where a person can really make a difference. Can a former President serve as a SP justice?

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 12:39 AM | Report abuse

>>I have seen no evidence that his campaign has strong-armed >>anyone.

Here is a link to the CNN trascript

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0802/27/se.02.html

Posted by: tessa2 | March 3, 2008 12:38 AM | Report abuse

Very true Artemis. But Americans are addicted to drama. They often can't understand a person like Barack, whose passion for truth and commitment to justice is more like smoldering embers than a conflagration.

An extraordinary person, let alone politician. I hope he is a supreme court justice in his later years.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

Women however have not voted as bloc while blacks have.

Posted by: tessa2 | March 3, 2008 12:30 AM | Report abuse

I would just like to iterate something I said MUCH earlier:

Furthermore, it is shameful that Obama has been put on the defensive about his Muslim name and the question of whether he has ever been a practicing Muslim. I understand the importance of the question for Middle East foreign policy, but Obama has said that he has never been a practicing Muslim. Enough said. But his critics keep on pushing the issue, as if he is trying to hide something, suggesting that their interest is driven more by paranoia than a concern for foreign policy. Since when is religious freedom in America exclusive of certain religions? The whole debate is an insult to Muslims in America.

Obama is being attacked for his Muslim name and his African heritage - but he is the only candidate who has not reduced himself to using the physical and/or cultural attributes of his adversaries to sell himself. Finally, do you hear him whining today about the attacks on his person last night? Nope. He just keeps focused on the task at hand, no unnecessary distractions, no drama. Talk about a class act. Think about that.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 3, 2008 12:28 AM | Report abuse

Obama all along has set the bar very high. He has always claimed that he represented change from old politics. He would like to be the candidate of hope and unity.

He cannot be that and allow his campaign to strongarm delegates a la Bill Clinton.

Or for that matter pledge to use public financing and then change his mind
==============================


I have seen no evidence that his campaign has strong-armed anyone.

The public financing issue does trouble me and i await to see what he does should he become the nominee.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:26 AM | Report abuse

Prejudice is alive and well but in places we fail to recognize. Example: Male bias against females in authority roles is equally ugly. See MSNBC's political coverage for excellent examples of male bias. Did you watch the Black State of the Union message on C-Span? Their meeting was blatant exclusionary racism. MLK championed equality, not racism. Can you envision whites conducting a "White State of the Union" meeting today? Color-blind equality is not their goal. The bottom line is control.

===========================

But what if, as a white person, you lived in a country where you were only 16% of the population and had been oppressed for 200 years...wouldn't you feel a need to build self-esteem for the group as a whole before being able to join the 84% of the population that were former oppressors???

You don't speak of NOW...or other female organizations where men are not welcome. Again, is this not understandable?

I agree that there can be a reverse discrimination. How could there not be? Are blacks more perfect than whites that they are not prone to their own prejudices?

Why expect perfection of blacks that we have not ourselves achieved?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Chris,

Someone should go thru all the major talk shows today and count the number of times that Barak Obama was even mentioned...all I saw on every program were shills for Hillary and the SNL highlights. I'd love to hear the real story of how Clinton managed to totally shut down ANY coverage of Obama in the 48 hours before the Tuesday primaries. Did Bill threaten the networks? Or Paulson? Or are you all you talking heads just so excited to get attention from the big guns on her campaign that you blithly carry whatever message they offer to boost your numbers?

You all missed the real story, which was on 60 Minutes tonight, when Steve Kroft tried and failed to get Hillary to say whether or not her campaign was the source of the disgusting "Obama-is-a-Muslim-and hates the flag" smear campaign. I'm sure you and the rest of the MSM will ask her one of these days, and maybe even get a straight answer, right after the Tuesday primaries have made the issue irrelevant.

Posted by: smeesq | March 3, 2008 12:22 AM | Report abuse

Cheers for Hillary's last bid on young voters.

However, I found the skit extremely distasteful and have never fancied SNL humour.

Posted by: stvn_le | March 3, 2008 12:20 AM | Report abuse

Obama all along has set the bar very high. He has always claimed that he represented change from old politics. He would like to be the candidate of hope and unity.

He cannot be that and allow his campaign to strongarm delegates a la Bill Clinton.

Or for that matter pledge to use public financing and then change his mind.

Posted by: tessa2 | March 3, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Prejudice is alive and well but in places we fail to recognize. Example: Male bias against females in authority roles is equally ugly. See MSNBC's political coverage for excellent examples of male bias. Did you watch the Black State of the Union message on C-Span? Their meeting was blatant exclusionary racism. MLK championed equality, not racism. Can you envision whites conducting a "White State of the Union" meeting today? Color-blind equality is not their goal. The bottom line is control.

If he is the Democratic nominee, I will vote for Obama, but I won't vote for him because he is black. Nor will I vote for Hillary because she is female. My choice is Hillary because she is the only Democrat left in the race who is both experienced and qualified.

Posted by: juliarea | March 3, 2008 12:13 AM | Report abuse

First off Chris, you come off as some self important, self righteous, all knowing jack*ss.
I am not sure who you think you are impressing with that BS, but your not on some date with a blond chick at the local college pub. You claim to be a student and you may have read a couple of books, but you obviously are naive. What America hates more than anything are BlowHards.
Oh I have to go now, Nasa's calling me, I need to give them some specs for a new hydo -powered rocket. What a SCHMUCK!

Posted by: joanthebaptist1 | March 3, 2008 12:03 AM | Report abuse

Actually, after Obama's performance in the last debate,

Ditch is the new black.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 3, 2008 12:03 AM | Report abuse

I am getting a t-shirt that says "B--ch is the new Black!" You go girl!

Posted by: englishtnscones | March 2, 2008 11:59 PM | Report abuse

"If you don't think Sen Obama's campaign is appealing to racism how do you explain Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri comments on CNN that superdelegates have been told, "You're not black if you're not supporting Barack Obama. ... It is ugly."
Rep Cleaver is an African American supporting Sen. Clinton."

-----------------

I treat this like the story about Bill Clinton strong-arming Bill Richardson. Intense politics.

If I ever saw proof that Obama's campaign officially did something like this, I'd have to reconsider. I suppose it is mostly black-on-black "political persuasion" by overzealous types acting on their (misguided) own. Now, I have read reports of black constituents telling their elected representatives that their political future depends on their delegate vote...and this is just political reality...and nothing to do with Obama per se.

Is their a racial element to Barack's campaign?..sure...just as their is gender AND race in Hillary's campaign, just as their is in McCain's campaign.

So?

Same if their were a Hispanic candidate.

How long did it take us white folk to get beyond the Protestant/Catholic/Irish/Italian/German boundaries? WE still struggle with Xtian/Jewish.
So it will take more time to look beyond race and gender, but we are far along the road.

I do agree that it is easier to get away with gender bias than race bias...partly because some gender differences are hard-wired and harder to distinguish whereas race differences are only skin deep.

Having taught in both all-male and all-female schools, I can attest that they are world's apart in modi operandi.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:59 PM | Report abuse

APPALLED by Senator Clinton's Comments on 60 Minutes on Sunday

This is the kind of change that Senator Obama is talking about -- a change from this kind of talk and behavior and down in the mud tactics. He is not simply talking about a change in policies. I was stunned when I watched 60 Minutes this evening. I simply do not understand how Senator Clinton, as sophisticated and intelligence and "experienced" as she is, could have responded in this way on a national news show. Following is her response to Steve Croft's inquiry regarding whether Senator Clinton thinks Senator Obama is a Muslim. Surely there are a hundred better ways she could have answered this?

HRC: "Of course not. I mean, that, you know, there is no basis for that. I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that."

Croft: "You said you'd take Senator Obama at his word that he's not a Muslim. You don't believe that he's...?"

HRC: "No, no. There is nothing to base that on. As far as I know."

Posted by: AnneBaughman | March 2, 2008 11:49 PM | Report abuse

Okay, there is a lot to respond to, but I will not try to attack too many people because that does nothing to further the debate.

Im sorry, but MSM media has been quick to blow things out of proportion since 24hr networks arrived. And if there was anything to the charges that HRC's campaign drops about BHO every few days then they would gain traction in the media. I agree that MSNBC is a half-assed network and an ideological mud-puddle (and Im democratic, so I wont go fellating Fox anytime soon). So Matthews, Schuster, etc are irrelevant, much as talk of celebrities or tv shows swaying votes is irrelevant. These shows are a needed relief during any campaign or presidency. Just so you know, most Obama supporters dont race-bait or any other pandering. The people who denounced WJC's comments were HRC supporters until bill screwed it up for her. Media report things, it is up to us to interpret the reports. Pundits have an opinion, dont like it, dont listen to it. Take a media and politics class and you will learn how they report things, and NOTHING...I repeat NOTHING will surprise you. Moreover, I would suggest reading Walter Lippman's account of the media's influence in primaries (warning: it's very pro-smoke-filled room and anti-media for the feeding frenzies many of you decry). If you cant make anything stick with Obama dont be shrill, work on defining yourself like in NH, (when I stopped listening to any of the BS the MSM spreads)where you won.

Also, I have looked at several blogs just to see why people support their candidate and it seems that Mark Penn is either ghostwriting or the OSAMA jab is just too irresistable.

One thing that i have to respond to however, is the charge that young people are caught up in the haze and excitement of Obama is another reason we forego the polls when the major parties put up BS candidates (John Kerry...please). I could be more of a jerk to you "unclebraddah" but you know what you wrote was crap. What happened to Howard Dean? Not only that, there is this tendency (that often produces political paralysis and the dreaded status quo)to live in the past. The fact that WJC was a great pres is not an argument for HRC's candidacy!The same kind of mentality is the reason there will never be a two-state solution. All the past is for is to learn...not to browbeat the present with your lamentations over what once was.

As a poli-sci student I think Im somewhat able to diagnose some failures of her campaign.

1) too much reliance on polls, nothing underdogs hate more than someone who writes you off before the contest takes place!

2)Telecasts via Satellite to large states and ignoring small states is the kind of defeatist strategy that kept the Dems out of the ascendance in congress for so long (while the treasury was raped a 1000x over). Does anyone remember the MSM story about how the DNC engineered their routing of the Repubs in 06'. They went to every state...not writing off those that are traditionally red.

3)Just because your campaign team has accolades that far proceed them doesnt mean they wont say stupid things (more often than not)repeatedly!

4) BILL!!!!!!!damn egomaniac...anyone remember the "me and 41 are going to clean up our image in the world" comment that GHWB didnt even know about.

There is more to be said, but those are probably the most glaring errors.

And before any of you claim Im caught up in the fever. His record does show that he will better to our Constitution than any of the others. The speech thing is a non-issue and I dont like that his campaign has made that their National Security argument because its weak. For all of you who like to parrot HRC's charge that "he voted to keep funding the war, so his speech doesnt mean anything." Does anyone understand how committee assignment, and party line voting work, if so you might understand why BHO didnt hang his political future by a rhetorical "no" vote that wouldnt have affected policy in the least?

Also, he does have legislative accomplishments in the Senate, which next to HRC's, makes her look like she's been on ciesta.
I have to go right now,
Chris

5)

Posted by: medwreck17 | March 2, 2008 11:48 PM | Report abuse

oh dear! Joan the baptist has returned from the desert!

Reason has taken wing!

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Having watched the tedious debate reenactment, the race-bating Obama Files and the at best mildly amusing "Editorial Response" starring Sen. Clinton, I have the suspicion that SNL's writers are still on strike.

Good comedy brings an underlying truth to light. What I've seen of SNL suggests the show operates on the distortion of truth. If other countries do it, we call it propaganda.

Posted by: charlesf | March 2, 2008 11:44 PM | Report abuse

joanthebaptist1 wrote:
"I thought the line about Hillary being relentless to get things done, is right on."

Keep in mind that her method for getting things done was to hound people to death with a shrill voice and other obnoxious personality traits, traits that are always assigned to strong women by sexist men. And this characterization of her was taken to be positive? I keep coming back to the same word: shameful.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 11:44 PM | Report abuse

Hey Jim, Research this!
Obama's Boneheaded Mistake


The allegations against Rezko that involve Obama are contained in one paragraph of a 78-page document filed last month in which prosecutors outline their corruption and fraud case against Rezko, who was also a key money man for Gov. Blagojevich and other politicians. Rezko is set to go to trial Feb. 25. The revelation that Obama's name could come up in court is a political headache he doesn't need as he heads into a round of primaries that are likely to determine his party's nomination for president. Obama is not named in the Dec. 21 court document. But a source familiar with the case confirmed that Obama is the unnamed "political candidate" referred to in a section of the document that accuses Rezko of orchestrating a scheme in which a firm hired to handle state teacher pension investments first had to pay $250,000 in "sham" finder's fees. From that money, $10,000 was donated to Obama's successful run for the Senate in the name of a Rezko business associate, according to the court filing and the source. Rezko, who was part of Obama's senatorial finance committee, also is accused of directing "at least one other individual" to donate money to Obama and then reimbursing that individual -- in possible violation of federal election law. A spokesman for U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald declined to comment. Obama -- a state senator when he got the contributions in 2004 -- has moved to distance himself from Rezko since his longtime friend and supporter was indicted in October 2006. After news reports that Obama had engaged in a real estate transaction with Rezko's wife at a time Tony Rezko was known to be under investigation, the senator called the episode "boneheaded" and "a mistake."

'No way of knowing'

Obama campaign aides said Friday he was unaware Rezko was behind the contributions cited in last month's court filing or that the document referred to the senator."We have no way of knowing he is the politician named here," spokesman Bill Burton said, "but we returned this money months ago for other reasons." Obama donated more than $44,000 in Rezko-linked contributions to charity last year, including the $10,000 donation mentioned in the court filing. That money was donated to Obama by Joseph Aramanda, a Glenview businessman and Rezko associate who, sources have said, is the "Individual D" prosecutors say received the $250,000 in finder's fees demanded by Rezko. Individual D did nothing to earn those fees, according to prosecutors. The $10,000 contribution to Obama was given in Aramanda's name on March 5, 2004, records show. While Obama's camp has said the senator did not know Aramanda, Obama's office hired Aramanda's son as an intern in 2005, at Rezko's urging. Repeated attempts to reach Aramanda, who was involved in pizza franchises Rezko owned, were unsuccessful. He has not been charged with any wrongdoing.

A longstanding relationship

Rezko is one of Obama's earliest political patrons. Long known as a prolific fund-raiser, the Syrian-born businessman helped raise money for Obama's political campaigns beginning in 1995, when Obama was running for the Illinois Senate. In 13 years in politics, Obama has gotten at least $168,000 in campaign donations from Rezko, his family and business associates. The Sun-Times reported that figure last June. Obama's "best estimate" seven months earlier had been that Rezko had raised no more than $60,000 for him. When Obama ran for the U.S. Senate, Rezko held a June 27, 2003, cocktail party in Rezko's Wilmette mansion, picking up the tab for the lavish event. Obama's campaign staff has said it has no records to show who attended that party, or how much it cost. Obama's relationship with Rezko dates to 1990, when Obama, then a Harvard law student, interviewed for a job with Rezko's development company, Rezmar Corp. Obama turned down the job, instead going to work for a small Chicago law firm -- Davis Miner Barnhill. That firm did work on more than a dozen low-income housing projects Rezmar rehabbed with government funds. Eleven Rezmar buildings were in the state Senate district Obama represented between 1996 and 2004. Many of the buildings ended up in foreclosure, with tenants living in squalid conditions, the Sun-Times reported last year. In one instance, Rezko's company left tenants without heat for five weeks. Obama said he was unaware of problems with the buildings and minimized the legal work he'd done. Obama's relationship with Rezko grew closer in June 2005, when Obama and Rezko's wife bought adjoining real estate parcels from a doctor in the South Side Kenwood neighborhood. Obama paid $1.65 million for the doctor's mansion, while Rezko's wife paid $625,000 for the vacant lot next door. Obama's purchase price was $300,000 below the asking price; Rezko's wife paid full price. Six months later, Obama paid Rita Rezko $104,500 for one-sixth of the vacant lot, which he bought to expand his yard. In November 2006, he expressed regret about the transaction. "It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else," Obama said, "to believe that he had done me a favor."

Posted by: joanthebaptist1 | March 2, 2008 11:42 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely in her favor! Its about time she fought back against a little sexism or gender bias in the media, poking fun at the pundits, their spin and herself too. SNL just proves Hillary is 'up' for any challenge and she is ready to roll!
P.S. (on day one!)

Posted by: juliarea | March 2, 2008 11:39 PM | Report abuse

wow, she almost sounded like a human being. she must be getting great coaching ...

Posted by: nosubstituteforvictory | March 2, 2008 11:38 PM | Report abuse

If you don't think Sen Obama's campaign is appealing to racism how do you explain Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri comments on CNN that superdelegates have been told, "You're not black if you're not supporting Barack Obama. ... It is ugly."
Rep Cleaver is an African American supporting Sen. Clinton.

Posted by: tessa2 | March 2, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

We don't need a laid back president, We need a pitbull.

-----------


That's always the VP job description. Not the P.
She'd definitely be great for VP.
A pitbull will not restore this nation to glory.
But a positive person of excellent judgment will.
That's Barack.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

He is beginning to be looked at more closely.

-----------


Well, I agree that THAT is a good thing.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:33 PM | Report abuse

I thought the last two shows were really good. It showed Hillary on a lighter side. It showed her sense of humor, and smart people usually have a sense of humor.
Comedy is exaggeration, and it's the surprise element, comedy 101, so for the people that are offended, lighten up. Alot of Comedy is based on truth and SNL is known for their political skits, and it's a hit or miss. This was definitely a hit. I thought the line about Hillary being relentless to get things done, is right on.
I think she has what it takes to get things
done. We don't need a laid back president, We need a pitbull.

Posted by: joanthebaptist1 | March 2, 2008 11:31 PM | Report abuse

"He said they have been told, "You're not black if you're not supporting Barack Obama. ... It is ugly."
-------------

Nothing compared to what women are being accused of by Gloria Steinem and company.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:29 PM | Report abuse

"BurgeNicole,

So I guess playing by the rules is telling superdelegates what they must do- or is it sicking Donna Brasille on innocent comments and making a racist flak that brings you from 40% among African Americans in SC to 80%, thus saving your campaign.

Look, they are both doing what they need to do to win, but Obamopaths believe that their immaculate candidate is "above the fray" when he has been rolling in the dirt the whole time. Look at the article in the New Republic:


http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304&k=5083

----------------------

That article was written by a Clinton shill.

He testified at Bill's impeachment, in a particularly embarassing performance according to the NYT, and his wife, another Princeton prof, heads up "Feminists for Hillary."

So much for objectivity.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

The change is the fact that not all the news reports about Obama are rosy.

He is beginning to be looked at more closely.

Posted by: tessa2 | March 2, 2008 11:26 PM | Report abuse

I think in the past week we've seen a real change in the media.


---------------

Seems like the same old media to me.

next weel it'll be Hillary's hiding her tax returns, Bill's relationship with that dictator in Turlestan, the upcoming lawsuit against the Clintons by one of their fund=raisers, etc etc

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:23 PM | Report abuse

I have no desire to see either candidate on snl. Nor do I wish to see them dancing with Ellen. While it may provide a brief moment of amusement I feel it diminishes the dignity of the nominees and more importantly undermines their future stature should they become president.

They should not have to resort to a comedy show in order to convey to us their humanity or their sense of humor. If they feel this is the only vehicle which allows them to communicate these traits then they are sadly lacking.

Posted by: lbgertz | March 2, 2008 11:21 PM | Report abuse

I think this SNL sketch could really go either way, depending.

I'm part of the "youth voting bloc" and I don't know anyone who watches SNL anymore. Then again a significant amount of young adults will probably see this online. And in general, I like to think that most people determine who they're voting for off of something more substantial than SNL (Then again, that's probably how a majority of young people are informed about any type of politics). I don't see it giving her much of a boost.

It could also go the other direction, especially for people who watched the last debate. The part at the beginning where Hillary made comments about the media giving her the first question and referred people to the SNL sketch came off as really whiny. I mean, sure your supporters feel bad for you but I doubt anyone else does. Being treated "unfairly" by the media is part of being a public figure. So this follow up sketch to the original one, coupled with her comments in the debate could end up backfiring on her.

All that said, I doubt it's going to make any difference at all.

Posted by: Etrnallybored | March 2, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

One other new item from this week that I thought was interesting was how much pressure black superdelegates were getting to support Obama.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri said Thursday that black Democratic superdelegates who support Sen. Hillary Clinton have been "bludgeoned verbally" to prod them to switch to Sen. Barack Obama.

Cleaver, who is African-American and a superdelegate, has backed Clinton since last summer and this week re-emphasized that support. He said that he himself has not been pressured, but that black superdelegates from all over the country have been subjected to harassment, threatened with primary opponents and called "Uncle Tom."

He said they have been told, "You're not black if you're not supporting Barack Obama. ... It is ugly."

Posted by: tessa2 | March 2, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

BurgeNicole,

So I guess playing by the rules is telling superdelegates what they must do- or is it sicking Donna Brasille on innocent comments and making a racist flak that brings you from 40% among African Americans in SC to 80%, thus saving your campaign.

Look, they are both doing what they need to do to win, but Obamopaths believe that their immaculate candidate is "above the fray" when he has been rolling in the dirt the whole time. Look at the article in the New Republic:


http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304&k=5083

Additionally, many of the politically and historically naive supporters of Obama- not all of his supporters, but those who ignored politics previously or voted for W or the like- don't really utilize the traditional media outlets.
comedy does leave an impression- it was when Leno and Letterman put the Dean scream on in 04 that I knew the campaign was over- nothing worse than being the target of a joke that assumes something is a truth when it is not (the scream was nothing in context). It is my hope that something allows people to relook at this campaign and realize that running a 2 year senator who gets almost all his support from wealthy educated whites and the African American population might be a bad idea since we did not gain the whitehouse with this coalition the last 2 times.

Leon

Posted by: nycLeon | March 2, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

I think in the past week we've seen a real change in the media. Obama has had to answer questions about Louis Farakhan and his pastor Jeremiah Wright's award to him. Questions about whether his economic advisor contacted Canadian goverment officials to warn them that he would be anti-NAFTA during his campaign but that it was just empty campaign rhetoric. Bush, Clinton & McCain have all criticized his foreign policy credentials.

And now even SNL is pointing out some of the media bias during the election.

And yet to come the Reszko trial .. . .

Posted by: tessa2 | March 2, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

It was alright, they could have done something more creative with her than they did but that's hardly her fault. It reminded me of when Bob Dole showed up to meet Norm MacDonald who had been playing him during the 96 election. Barack's appearance on SNL was a bit better, although she did better on Letterman. So it's all a toss-up, they both have their moments.

Posted by: grimmix | March 2, 2008 10:57 PM | Report abuse

Interesting comparison by Dowd:


Tangled in her own victimhood, she snipped to Cynthia McFadden that Obama had written in his book that "he's a blank screen and people of widely different views project what they want to believe onto him." She said voters were projecting their hopes onto that blank screen even though "he just hasn't been around long enough."

In the next breath, asked about the women who feel sorry for her, she said: "I think a lot of women project their own feelings and their lives on to me, and they see how hard this is. It's hard. It's hard being a woman out there."

So projection is bad with Obama but good with her?

--------------

The old Clinton two=step.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

Here's a newsflash for all the democrats out there (read this Terry McAuliff!!) - Hillary alienated every republican when she outright called her husband's affair w/ Monica "a rightwing republican conspiracy" I'm sorry, but I don't believe that Monica was a republican and I don't remember ever receiving an apology for her offensive remarks.

Should Obama win the nomination, I will be voting for Obama. Should Hillary win the nomination, I will run out and vote for McCain. There you have it DEMS - the choice is yours. Hillary is way too polarizing and vindictive to unite this country and if you want the White House, you need someone you can elect. - good luck -a former republican/new independent (& there's a lot of us out there - there's no magic in this pollsters!!!)

BTW - remember how great Al Gore was on SNL afer he lost?? Again, a little too little, too late but maybe Hillary will have a great career as a documentary film maker??

Posted by: sharwood | March 2, 2008 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Chris said tonight on Larry King live, that if Hillary should win there would be lots of deffectors who wouldn't vote for her. This really demonstrates the point that in fact many Obama's supporters ARE overly zealous.

-------------------

That's not what he said. What he said was (and anyone can watch for themselves) that Obama's supporters were more likely to opt out then Hillary's supporters.

He didn't say all or even most, just more than Hillary's....It doesn't make them more zealous
or even zealous, just motivated by Barack and not Hillary, as many Republicans are not motivated by NcCain and will stay home during the general.

I support Barack and am undecided between McCain and Hillary during the geneal. It will depend on how she wins the nomination.

It must be by significant wins in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania, not by subterfuge or tortured arguments.

All the hate on Barack doesn't bother me....lot of nuts out there.... but there are many women legitimately pasionate about putting a woman in the WH...their frustration is something I can understand, even if it is expressed crudely or directed towards Barack.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 10:41 PM | Report abuse

jmcauli1 wrote:
"There is one mannerism that Fred Armisen/Obama has missed out on though. That's the one when Clinton is about to make a convincing point that Obama doesn't like so he raises his index finger like a kid in grade school who was always brown-nosing the teacher

That's all he has to do and the reporters stop listening to Clinton and become transfixed on Obama."

The reason they omitted the finger is because they never allowed him to speak. In real life, he actually speaks. Though I don't agree with you, I found your Three Stooges analogy hilarious.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 10:33 PM | Report abuse

wpost4112 wrote:
"He never said a negative word about his opponent..."

Yep. As I said much, much earlier in this thread, he is a class act. Thanks for sharing that - I have not had a chance to see him in person.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 10:27 PM | Report abuse

Chris said tonight on Larry King live, that if Hillary should win there would be lots of deffectors who wouldn't vote for her. This really demonstrates the point that in fact many Obama's supporters ARE overly zealous.

It's interesting because it's Hillary who has mentioned party unity in almost every debate, stating that what ever happens the party would unite around the candidate who won the nomination, while Obama has never used those words.

It's clear that though the MO has been swingin his way, she is now on the receiving end, and of course now the Obama campaign wants her to bow out.

Her campaign just started to get into gear in the last month, so the longer she runs, I see her MO on the upswing, enough to win.

Posted by: vammap | March 2, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Seytom wrote:
"To the Clinton people manipulation is simply the way things are done."

Yep, and we don't need another 8 years of that. Thanks for bringing it up.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

When this chick lets her boundaries down, she rocks!

===============

Agreed, Would that she had Margaret Thatcher's confidence and resolve (not to be confused with Thatcher's political views). I'd vote for her in a second.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Hillary has great comedic timing! I enjoyed this clip very much.

When this chick lets her boundaries down, she rocks!!!!

Go Girlfriend! ;-)

Posted by: nesssamarie | March 2, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Richardson to endorse Barack on Wednesday.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 10:19 PM | Report abuse

Hey, she's got natural comedic timing. I enjoyed seeing her in this manner.

When this chick lets her boundaries down, she rocks!

Posted by: nesssamarie | March 2, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Both Hillary and Barak in Westerville Ohio today...Barack drew a much larger crowd...strange for a conservative Ohio town...this from someone who was there:

First disturbing thing I noticed as I arrived; Hillary supporters protesting the Obama event (THIS FROM FELLOW DEMS OUTRAGED THE HUGE LINES OF SUPPORTERS!) There were ~ 6 that I saw with hand made signs. On a funnier noter someone made a 15 foot float based on Dr Strangelove showing John McCain riding a giant missile stating NO MORE WARS!


When the meeting was over, someone called and asked me what I thought. I was mildly surprised by my answer:

Yes, I said simply. Yes, he just might be all that.

In person, Barack Obama is even more charismatic than on TV. He is tall, lithe, coordinated. He is thoughtful and funny at the same time. His enormous appeal seems to be built on a combination of intellectual and social intelligence. One of the people present was, I knew, a Hillary Clinton supporter. Obama clearly sensed that, bore in, tried to win her over.

I asked him a question about the nation's decaying infrastructure; would he, if necessary, support something like a new WPA, the federal program that put the unemployed to work during the Depression? Obama responded with a sophisticated plan for a program that would assist states and communities to do just that, by using a pool of matching fund money.

His program made sense, but what impressed me more was that he had clearly studied the issue, assimilated the knowledge, and was able to call it forth without seeming like a policy wonk.

Bottom line, what he seemed to be saying was that he thought he could bring about change -- because he thinks we are ready to bring about change, after the years of the lies and filth and greed of the Bush administration. Would he ask us to sacrifice?

Yes, he would. We're going to pay more for energy, for gasoline and electricity, and that's probably not all. He wants to give students a $4,000 tuition credit -- and would require them to do a fair amount of national or community service.

He intends to do a lot of things, but adds, "My first job is to build a working majority. And despite having an unabashedly progressive agenda, I've been able to attract independent and even some Republican votes, in a way that I'm afraid Hillary Clinton can't." He never said a negative word about his opponent, except that she is "too polarizing a figure" to bridge the great divide in our nation today.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Why has there been no commentary on what seems almost certainly to be a set-up by the Clinton campaign, with the help of SNL? First Wolfson and then Clinton call attention, rather oddly, to a favorable SNL skit, then lo and behold, the next week, the weekend before the Ohio and Texas votes, she appears on SNL. To the Clinton people manipulation is simply the way things are done.

Posted by: Seytom1 | March 2, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

consignjp wrote:
"I find it truly amazing that the blacks will vote for anyone just because they are black and they will stick together for a common goal which is all well and good but women, well they just don't get it - which is why we will probably NEVER have a woman in the White House. They play right into men's hands. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb."

So we should vote for a woman just because she is a woman? That insults the intelligence of intelligent women. Blacks are voting for Obama because he is a great black candidate. If he weren't, they probably wouldn't. Hillary is not a great female candidate. She is a Clinton. Enough said.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

I found the skit to be funny, not as funny as the last one, but funny enough.

There is one mannerism that Fred Armisen/Obama has missed out on though. That's the one when Clinton is about to make a convincing point that Obama doesn't like so he raises his index finger like a kid in grade school who was always brown-nosing the teacher

That's all he has to do and the reporters stop listening to Clinton and become transfixed on Obama.

He could turn that into the old Three Stooges routine where Mo has the other two mesmerized by his hand movement, so much so that Larry and Curly end up rapping their heads against a table as Mo's hand slaps the same table or whatever object Mo wants them to rap their heads on.

The skit, as funny as it was, was nothing compared to the rousing and heart-warming round of applause the audience gave her.

It is clear that that group of New Yorkers know Hillary from experience and see her as the kind, generous, funny, and warm-hearted women that she is.

They never bought into the Right-wing smear machine's ugly caricature of her that the ankle-biting Obamanuts so quickly and shamelessly repeat about a fellow Democrat.

Posted by: jmcauli1 | March 2, 2008 10:11 PM | Report abuse

SNL bit was okay.

This is funnier.
A video by the Daily Show I think.
The whole series is good.

youtube.com/watch?v=zNfnROOfbU8

Posted by: ictv31 | March 2, 2008 10:10 PM | Report abuse

SNL bit was okay.

This is funnier.
A video by the Daily Show I think.
The whole series is good.

youtube.com/watch?v=zNfnROOfbU8

Posted by: ictv31 | March 2, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton truly is a class act! She has faithfully served her country for some thirty years and has made significant contributions. Yet despite her service, she's received unbelievable abuse. I continue to be amazed with her grace, as well as her ability to remain focused and positive in the face of media bias and hits from the Karl Rove's. I find her ability to forgive and to remain focused on goals and the well-being of our country particularly impressive. Hillary Clinton's numerous strengths make me extremely proud to be an American!

Posted by: wcowan1 | March 2, 2008 10:09 PM | Report abuse

Clinton on SNL. A brilliant idea to help voters see her as a regular person. It cannot fail to help her win the Iowa caucuses and cement her status as frontrunner. What? Oh. Well then its a brilliant idea to help humanize her consumers who might want to buy a book.

Posted by: litero | March 2, 2008 10:07 PM | Report abuse

reminder of your original statement....

"Incidentally Zogby is on B.O steering comittee so I have a real problem with this obvious conflict of interest."


Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Enjoying the conversation.

Not sure sharing the stage was kind to Clinton. First, she had a 'firewall' strategy (where other losses don't matter) like Rudy's. Now she shares the stage with the first proponent of the failed firewall strategy. A concession next Saturday night? Still waiting for a McCain spoof, the man is BEGGING for it!!!

Posted by: aug10morris | March 2, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Tags: Zogby, Polls, Obama, Superdelegate

I am waiting for an apology.

===================

I'd be happy to apologize if necessary, but cannot access that article. Can you provide the complete article so i can vet?
Thanks.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

WaPo put up an ambiguous headline on this article. "Hillary on SNL" said to me "Hillary gives her opinion of the SNL skits." I almost didn't read the article. I thought the scene was good, and I liked the one last week too, but I only see them on the Internet because I don't own a TV.

Posted by: dotellen | March 2, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

Oh ljaffe. lighten up. Hillary has more class in her little toe than you. Do you have to call the gracious lady such names. You should go to the library and read. You have so much to learn.

Posted by: adairbrad | March 2, 2008 9:48 PM | Report abuse

Hillary shows again why she is so awesome!

She is so well prepared and smart, but, can put you at ease with her witty and fun personality. Among her many assets is her 35 years of experience, not only in politics and public policy, but, also her background in law, corporate development and business strategy. She would make a tremendous president and Obama a great VP to her, this would be an ideal way for him to gain the experience he lacks for a future presidential run.

However, it's a shame that a majority of white men don't like her and are costing her this election and deserved presidency, more importantly it's a shame for our nation and our progress.

Posted by: cheersdk | March 2, 2008 9:46 PM | Report abuse

no proof? here is my proof about Zogby its the brother who also runs Zogby research. I remember reading this story just wasn't sure wher and hearing John Zogby confronted by Russert on Meet the Press weeks ago about it. I don't come here just making up bs as some want to do to advance their candidate. Does it effect their polling which always seems to inflate B.O polling spreads, you decide, but you were wrong and here is the proof from myDD a progressive proObama site. How about Brazinksy are you going to try and convince me that that her BO cheerleading has no connection to her dad who is B.O.'s foreign affairs top advisor. See a pattern here of conflicts? Do you want proof that Zbignew Brazinky is Mika's dad?
Apparently others have pointed out these conflicts by the media which no one wants to confront.

Zogby Analyst is Obama Superdelegate
by silver spring, Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:42:35 AM EST

I found this interesting story in the Legal Times this morning:

http://www.law.com/jsp/dc/PubArticleDC.j sp?id=1201601143051&hub=TopStoriesMo re

"The Battle for Superdelegates Heats Up in D.C."

"James Zogby is firmly in the Obama camp -- so much so that he's worked other superdelegates on behalf of the Obama campaign. The president of the Arab American Institute says he first heard Obama speak at the 2004 convention, when Obama burst onto the national political stage, and he was impressed.


And then in February 2006, Obama spoke at a DNC meeting, giving "a thoughtful discourse on the idea of cynicism, and talked about how we need to install idealism in politics." That was enough for Zogby, who gave Obama workers his phone number. Zogby became an official supporter this past summer.

Zogby has made at least a couple of dozen calls to other superdelegates to rally support for Obama. He's had some success winning over a few..."

I looked up the Zogbys on Wikipedia and found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Zogby


"(James) Zogby is also a senior analyst with the polling firm Zogby International, founded and managed by his brother John Zogby, and is a prominent lecturer and scholar on Middle East issues..."

So, it's interesting to note that one of the senior analysts with Zogby Polling -- the pollster who is predicting big Obama wins for today -- is also a major Obama superdelegate.

There is no proof, of course, of any bias resulting from this apparent juxtaposition, but this is nevertheless an interesting part of today's picture.


Tags: Zogby, Polls, Obama, Superdelegate

I am waiting for an apology.

Posted by: leichtman | March 2, 2008 9:42 PM | Report abuse

I find it truly amazing that the blacks will vote for anyone just because they are black and they will stick together for a common goal which is all well and good but women, well they just don't get it - which is why we will probably NEVER have a woman in the White House. They play right into men's hands. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.

Posted by: consignjp | March 2, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Hillary did a great job, and who knows about getting votes. But the real story was that horrible black-face really, really unfunny and insulting skit about Obama. Racist? I don't know the definition, but basically having the white guy in black face acting like a dolt, hiding other Africa Americans? Yeah, I'll go ahead and say it's bigotted and in terrible taste. I am embarrassed for SNL with that one. They should cut that character off, now.

Posted by: Vaughan1 | March 2, 2008 9:33 PM | Report abuse

wpost4112
Okay you cut and pasted one sentence out my posting to comment on and in doing so you proved my point. The topic here is humor and my premise is that some people do not HAVE a sense of humor. This is SNL not "Meet the Press". If you want to have a serious discussion about the cult of personality we can do that another day under another article. In the meantime,lighten up and check out Obama's gig on SNL in NOV. http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/index.shtml#mea=179711

------------------------

LOL.
Hey..I was the FIRST post on this blog to say I found Hillary funny on SNL. She WAS funny...not as funny as Belushi or Church Lady or Rosanadanadana...but funny enough.

But this blog isn't JUST about the SNL episode...it's about whatever we want it to be about....mostly Hillary/Barack/McCain (sorry Miracle Mike)!

And what's wrong with Meet The Press?? LOL.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

A sleaze is a sleaze is a sleaze. Stench is stench is stench.

One hopes that her SNL appearance will not seduce many to think she has a sense of humor and, thence, any SENSE (other than a sense of how more to prostitute her amebic character.

Posted by: ljaffee | March 2, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

Of course it didn't sway my opinions of her. I live in TX and I've already voted and will caucus on Tuesday, it's too little too late. If anyone is swayed by her appearance on SNL, they are a mindless conformist. Today's SNL is terrible with average skits. Every now and then a skit gives them viral fame or drags them into the media again, such as dick in a box, Lazy Sunday, and now this.

Posted by: hurleyhooligan | March 2, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary Clinton belonged to a church espousing the opposite color as Barack Obama the country would be in an uproar. I find his church and beliefs a bit hard to take. It makes me wonder who his "changes" are going to be benefiting. Check their website out. http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

Posted by: consignjp | March 2, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was great, as usual. It shows the real Hillary. What a personality. If only everyone could see it. I'll bet she even has a better bench press than that wimpy muslim, B. Hussein Osama Obama. And give me a break! After reading some of these comments, I believe there are some dems that should be republican, or perhaps muslim. Maybe even little rats that follow the piper to a cliff.

Posted by: adairbrad | March 2, 2008 9:30 PM | Report abuse

Listening to our CC on Larry King repeat stating correctly that the Dems are weakened by a Hillary nomination but not a Barack nomination.

I think CC has that right.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 9:28 PM | Report abuse

the skit was hillarious...it was great to see BO put in his realistic place...nothing particularly special...just another politician, albeit with a fancy way with words...but theyre just words....and when you compare two politicians....hillary comes out way ahead. I loved it and continue to think hillary is by far the better candidate.

Posted by: ogdeeds | March 2, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

I had not realized that SNL was for sale. However I must admit that I have not watched since Mr. Bill became a regular because even then the humor had become second-rate.

Posted by: luckitri | March 2, 2008 9:22 PM | Report abuse

"Life is a b***h and then you die, so don't vote for one".
------------------

AS if this reflects everyone's view of Hillary or women and should be the basis for voting for her!

I live in Virginia..you should hear what I hear about the n*gger who wants in the WH.
My car already has a nice key-scratch next to my Obama bumper sticker. One assh#le doesn't make a million...at least, not in my mind.

However, I remind you that Tina Fey identified Hillary as a b#tch and Hillary's appearance on the show gave it a seal of approval. I personally thought Tina Fey was way out of line because I don't think strong effective women are b#tches, just as I do not think that strong, effective men are b#stards. That quality is separate from true leadership.

Why any woman would want to be thought of as a b#tch is beyond my comprehension.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

Not to put too fine a point on, but the media WERE just doing their jobs.

Posted by: rippermccord | March 2, 2008 9:11 PM | Report abuse

I am sure Obama is probably a good man but there is no doubt that he lacks experience and given the fact that our country is in "critical" condition right now at home and in the Middle East can we really afford to have a neophyte in office? It could be a really costly mistake and take us down further than we are now. How well do people know Obama? Sure he has great speech writers and the charisma to deliver them well but the Presidency isn't an on-the-job-training program. And yes, EXPERIENCE does count.

Posted by: consignjp | March 2, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I just found the following on the web on NewsBusters, hardly a Democratic mouthpiece:

"CBS Devotes 3% of Hillary Profile to Scandals, 42% in Obama Piece" at http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2008/02/29/cbs-devotes-3-hillary-profile-scandals-42-obama-piece

And for trustworthy background on why Hillary played the "media card" and why she did when she did, have a look at this from the Pew Center at http://pewresearch.org/pubs/738/obama-clinton-coverage

"Obama and Clinton Tie for Coverage, But Barack Wins on Tone
Democratic Race Dominates Presidential Campaign Coverage

by Mark Jurkowitz, Associate Director, Project for Excellence in Journalism
February 20, 2008

After weeks of focusing on the prospect of a deadlocked race with no end in sight, the media narrative for the Democratic presidential race shifted dramatically last week, anointing a definite frontrunner and an underdog.

In a week in which the Democratic candidates thoroughly dominated campaign coverage, Hillary Clinton barely edged Barack Obama in the competition for exposure. But in the period of Feb. 11-17 -- which included three resounding Clinton losses in Virginia, Maryland and Washington D.C. -- the media raised serious questions about her campaign's capabilities and her viability."

Posted by: rippermccord | March 2, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

tonyigwebuike wrote:

"...In the wake of sept 11 I dare say that whoever did not vote to authorize force in Iraq is the unpatriotic one. ..."

The terrorists were in Afghanistan, and still are, not Iraq. And, I don't think (someone correct me here) Iraq was never part of the original hunt for Bin Laden. So yes, the Bush admin. lied about things, or simply exaggerated, or whatever... But Clinton never actually read the intelligence report. That is the problem that a lot of people have... She didn't read the report, she just voted with political winds that day.

And the Al Queda in Iraq today are not actually linked with Bin Laden. This is a recent article that I think someone here posted:

http://bangornews.com/news/t/viewpoints.aspx?articleid=160917&zoneid=34

I want to read more, find out more details...

But my whole point is, being called unpatriotic for questioning a war is really a HORRIBLE thing. If we are going to defend the world from tyranny, then we really need to start attacking a LOT more countries. How about China? They have been doing some pretty horrendous things to their people. Yet because we trade with them, they are buddies.

I think this was the point, questioning the motives of invading Iraq. The justification has changed:
WMD and a threat
.. nope, none of those
then, terrorist links,
.. nope, none of those
Saddam is pure evil
.. awesome, we got him
More terrorists...
... you get the drift

I think a lot of people, including Obama questioned the initial motives, since they were hasty and would take away from the pursuit of real leads in Afghanistan. So, now EVERYONE questions it, but Obama is unpatriotic for opposing at the beginning? I think it shows he had a little more of a cool head than everyone wanting to level the world because we were in a rage.

Posted by: foomonkey | March 2, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

I am an independent voter but am planning to vote for Obama. But I am an young woman who has been very patiently waiting for her chance to vote in Primary. However, primary in my state does not occur until April 22. Why can't DNC and the rest of the nation give us our chance to vote?

Posted by: malinimalini77 | March 2, 2008 08:06 PM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Malinimalini77: PA Primary is a closed primary: you will have to register as a Democrat in order to cast your vote for Obama

Posted by: SMARTINSEN | March 2, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

wpost4112
Okay you cut and pasted one sentence out my posting to comment on and in doing so you proved my point. The topic here is humor and my premise is that some people do not HAVE a sense of humor. This is SNL not "Meet the Press". If you want to have a serious discussion about the cult of personality we can do that another day under another article. In the meantime,lighten up and check out Obama's gig on SNL in NOV. http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/index.shtml#mea=179711

Posted by: PScars | March 2, 2008 9:08 PM | Report abuse

I say GO HILLARY! I am a European gal and I can still remember how messy Eastern Europe was during early 1990 when I was only 12 right after Berlin wall fell and marked the start of democracy in the post-communist countries. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. When Clinton came to power the name of America echoed bigger then ever all over the world! The Clintons visited every country in the Globe and represented America as the superpower that it was. I miss those years and I want them back!
Germany, England, India, Pakistan, Philipines almost every other country has had either a Queen, Woman Chancelor, Woman Prime Minister, Woman President you name it. Its about time America shows the intelligence, nurturing and the power of her loving women which by the way mark the biggest percentage of working class and needs to be recognized. I can't beleive that it was only 1920 when women voted for the first time in America.
I have nothing against Obama, frankly he would make a great Vice, but we got no time to waste! We all know how long it takes for one to learn the ropes at a new job, with no experience, with no power. Even for a cashier's possition you need at least 2 weeks of training. Common, we are talking about the position of THE PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES.
It is sad that women sometimes don't voice each others successes as well as man do. I don't know what to call that. I guess it happens in every class be that racism, feminism, high-school, places of work, you name it. Bottom line we are all humans we have our likes and dislikes. When it comes to politics we should be smart about our choices as we have seen how time has proved us wrong.
Hillary is a strong woman given all the facts that we know, she stayed by her husband's side and we all know it is not easy. She has the experience that a president or any possition holds no matter what you apply for. This is the reality! We need Hillary to be the next President, We need America to reinstate its name and power in the world, We need America to give Hillary the benefit of the doubt and vote for a great future! With this said, I enjoyed SNL's skit, I enjoyed Tina Fay's fearless updates because not all the truth can be told with a straigh face. Life is too short and you got to laugh at it sometimes. I say GO HILLARY!....Thanks SNL!
TEXAS-OHIO-RHODE ISLAND-VERMONT...PLEASE VOTE 4 HILLARY! WE ALL NEED HER!...Amen!...PEACE.

Posted by: rotoni78 | March 2, 2008 9:07 PM | Report abuse

I have lived through the years of FDR and Truman and on. After reading a lot of the comments, I have to say that no one holds their tongue back. Some are the most mean-spirited comments I've ever heard of. What happened to the days when people were polite to each other. When they disagreed, it was polite and not hurtful. Can't we go back to the days when we were all nicer to each other.

Posted by: gjhood1 | March 2, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

Since when di the Washington Post and the New York Times sttart quoting Karl Rove as if he was a neutral election commentator?
http://jtaplin.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/trust-me-says-karl-rove/

Posted by: Trumbull | March 2, 2008 9:05 PM | Report abuse

The depth of Clinton hatred amazes me. I saw an SUV today with a waxed message on the rear window "Life is a b***h and then you die, so don't vote for one".

She is an incredibly divisive figure. While she has worked well with Republicans in the Senate, I cannot see the Republicans cooperating much with a President Clinton - their base will crucify them for it. Also, should she be the nominee, the down-ticket Democrats in red and purple states and districts will suffer tremendously. That is exactly why red and purple state officials are swarming to Obama's side.

Posted by: jimd52 | March 2, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

You Clinton slammers and accussers will be damn sorry if your God Obama makes office. The truth on this guy you will find out,when our country falls.All you Obama dreamers are just what you are dreamers and hopers.You knock the only one that can help this country.If he makes it to office, you might just as well put your heads between your legs and kiss your ----- good-bye. concerned viet nam vet

Posted by: gjennings_55 | March 2, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Just loved Hillary's performance on SNL. Seriously, we are blessed with outstanding candidates, and on the Democratic side, Hillary would be my choice - this time - with Senator Obama in eight years. But with national security my main concern, I'm thinking I'll vote for Sen. McCain.

Posted by: dgould42 | March 2, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

It has about as much effect as Bill playing his sax on MTV. It's all an act. If someone votes for her based on her appearance on SNL or the Daily Show, they're an idiot! People see right through this smokescreen and realize that it's just an attempt to play with their minds.

Posted by: giantfan | March 2, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

I am 56 years old and not a SNL viewer since Bill Murray left but I came home from the symphony last night, switched on the TV and saw the skit. I only watched because of the hoopla over the last debate skit. I turned it off as soon as Clinton's speil was over.

I thought it humanized her but is way too little way too late. I agree that the portrayal of Obama is borderline racist and I didn't see the cartoon.

There are some very ugly anti-Obama posts here today - some are particularly racist. There seem to be Clinton supporters coming out of the woodwork to slime Obama.

If Hillary said "I take him at his word" when asked about the Obama is a Muslim rumors, that is one more example of why we do not need another Clinton in the White House, that was one of the slimier comments of this campaign - especially since her campaign workers always seem to be behind these scurrilous e-mails.

As for the whining about Obama attracting Republicans and independents - well that is how general elections are won. The Democrats lost the last two presidential elections because independent swing voters broke for Bush. Clinton's negatives among swing voters are very high, Obama is very well regarded by independents and is attracting legitimate Republican supporters. I do know that there are some Republicans voting for him in the primary NOT because they think he is easier to beat but because they despise Clinton so much they want to help kill her candidacy. Obama is running much better in the polls versus McCain than Clinton.

If Clinton manages to win Ohio and RI while losing Texas and VT - which seems likely. She should drop out because the delegate math becomes impossible. Should she somehow manage to manipulate rules to seat Michigan and Florida and get a majority of the super-delegates, she will split the party wide open and probably lose the overwhelming African American vote in the election thereby tipping the race to McCain.

In the interests of true disclosure, I am an independent and will probably vote for McCain. I will definitely vote for him if Clinton is the nominee but would be open to voting for Obama depending on the VPs for each party - a far right Republican VP would really turn me off.

Posted by: jimd52 | March 2, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

I thought the skit was very funny. It shows that Hillary has a sense of humor and that she is not the unfeeling, uncaring person that the media has portrayed her to be. I am from Texas and I have already voted for her. I am going to participate in the caucus on Tuesday, as well. I have waited 8 years for her to run...the day George Bush won, I knew that she would.

Posted by: yourairbabe | March 2, 2008 8:58 PM | Report abuse

He sounds just like Carter.

================

LOL.

In what alternate universe?

If anything, he sounds EXACTLY like Bill Clinton...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGW38Zy4bJo

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

OH YEAH! I WISHED I COULD HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN THE SKIT! WHAT I DID SEE I NOTICED SHE HAS A BEAUTIFUL SMILE & CUTE ROUND CHEEKS...I NEVER REALIZED BEFORE THAT SHE WAS PRETTY. I LOVED HER SHPEEL WITH AMY...LOTS OF FUN AND WARM PERSONAL INTERACTION. SHE HAS MY VOTE IN OHIO NOW. BECAUSE I WAS TURNED OFF EARLY IN THE YEAR WHEN I HEARD SHE CRIED. BUT NOW I SEE HER AS A CONFIDENT REAL PERSON. I ALWAYS KNEW SHE WAS A GO-GET-IT-DONE TYPE PERSON & I FEEL SHE WILL CHANGE THE ECONOMY AROUND! GOD BLESS OUR NEXT PRESIDENT & GOD BLESS AMERICANS!!!

Posted by: PowerPops_KayMarie | March 2, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

I LOVED her on SNL. And I LOVE the Jack Nicholson campaign ad. Brilliant and bravo Hillary.

Posted by: consignjp | March 2, 2008 8:53 PM | Report abuse

As a marketing & graphic design professional, the idea to have her appear on SNL is rather creative, innovative, fun, and also gave her the ability to tap into an entirely different demographic in a fresh, and new, way *before* she's even elected, or not, as President. Her performance went well and she came off as having fun and a good sense of humor; all important traits for a highly demanding and stressful job she's applying for: President of the United States.

I want to see someone in the Presidential seat who can do the job as President, who has the guts, the know-how, the experience, the aptitude, the candor, and the "balls" to defend our country while standing tall for important home-base issues...and to do it all with grace ~ and a good sense of humor are important factors.

O'bama is just telling Americans what they want to hear, so he'll win. It's not the kind of language that can run an institutionalized, bureaucratic, slow-ass, staid, political office...remember Carter? He sounds just like Carter. O'bama may be trying to "be" a Kennedy in appearance, charm, and language, but he'll never be Kennedy. Hilary Clinton could be a modern-day "Kennedy", and she does so with innovative promotional ideas like SNL while showcasing her softer side - while years and years and years of hard core experience. She knows how to play the game, and that's what we want. Good job! :)

Posted by: louise_gd | March 2, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

I might sound crazy, but I know I'm pretty sure I'm, not (everyone tells me that I'm smarter than I think I am (even my Republican friends) so I'm giving this a shot. PLEAZE!!!, VOTE FOR OBAMA, give 'politics' a CHANCE AT CHANGE.


Posted by: shannons1 | March 2, 2008 08:47 PM
__________________________________________

We heard you the first time. Nothing in there about why... just that CHANGE is needed. Reminds me of his campaign.

Posted by: anfwa85 | March 2, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

I personally thought the skit wasnt funny at all. I used to be a fan of SNL back when John Belushi and Bill Murray were a part. But sorry..I find the show not funny at all. And personally I think Hillary did it for effect...not the real Hillary at all. Another personality of Hillary...how many does she have????????

Posted by: Webster51 | March 2, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

i saw a clip of the SNL. seemed so 'light', ie: totally fawning towards clinton, and making obama look 'foolish'. However,the mistakes Clinton has made: (i) like romney, changing positions and 'words' too much, (ii) not having the sense to let her staff do the 'dirty work', rather than engaging in the mud-slinging herself, (iii) claiming her first-spouse role to be 'experience', (iv) being managerial rather than leader-like, (v) not even concerned about the best interests of the country/ party,

Posted by: IDoCare | March 2, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

wpost, I was trying to shed light, not heat. I knew John was John an Jim was Jim and that "leichtman" had perhaps confused them. I have no idea who is on BHO's steering committee and do not care.
----------------

LOL. Sorry MIA. Didn't see your name.

L made some accusations about Zogby a while ago and won't offer proof.

No prob.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

I'd like to share with you my observation about the problems Hillary has had in this campaign (I teach campaigns to university students).

1. How to position her?

. It's very difficult to position a woman as a believable Presidential candidate in this country.
. Her campaign has positioned Hillary as an Experienced and Qualified person.

** But experienced and qualified persons were never elected to be President, since TV became the primary means for Americans to choose their President.

2. What should her message be?

. It's very difficult for a woman to present her message of national importance with credibility.
. Her campaign has made Hillary present a full plate of policies and programs.

** But most voters don't and won't try to understand these policies and programs because they are part-time and temporary participants in our political process.

** Most voters also have a stronger doubt about a woman's ability to battle other men or the System to have her policies/programs adopted and implemented.

3. Where can she find popular support?

. It's very difficult for a woman to find support from a cross-section of voters.
. Her campaign has made Hillary reach out to middle-age women voters, older voters and working class voters who can better appreciate her vow to help make their (less than upwardly mobile or economically fulfilled) lives better.

** But women typically apply a very high andd critical standard to judge other women
who have achieved a certain level of success.

** A lot of men simply don't like strong,
capable and competitive women.

** Hillary is a Centrist (less so than Bill) and is vulnerable on the NAFTA issue, among others, during the Democratic
primary election period.

I can go on and on and on...

What I told the graduate students in the Mass Comm Theory and Research seminar is this:

"Presidential elections are a popularity contest. This is because electing a President is a very emotional decision.

Most voters say that they vote for the candidate that they trust. In reality,
they vote for the person that they like, instead of the best-qualified person for the job.

In other words, voters want to like their President and are not overly concerned about whether their President is truly capable of doing a good job to lead the country.

An overwhelming large number of voters act like the blind mice that are feeling their way through an elephant (or an election). They tend to grab on whatever issue(s) that can make them feel connected to the candidate as the guiding light that heps them cast their vote.

It's undeniable that Sexualism (and sexism to an extent) in the press and in society has hurt Hillary, whether consciously or unconsciously. This is easily evidenced by Chris Mattew's comment about the reason why Hillary was (or is) running for a public office.

Carolyn Lin

Posted by: carolyn.lin | March 2, 2008 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Hillary you did great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama bin laden Sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
--------------------------------


PScars: fyi: the above is an example of a Rush Republican pretending to be a Hillary supporter just to create a little hatred between Democrats.

They do the same against Hillary.

And yes, there is a special place in hell for them.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

I know one will read this whose mind I can change, but my husband says GO! DO it, do whatever you can. My husband is from Scotland. He has a science Ph.D. Men and women both think that he is a really smart AND a cool guy (who adores smart women - he thinks smart women should rule the world). He has always treated me as an equal, even though I only have a B.A. His colleagues, men and women, treat me as if my opinion and knowledge is equally as great as theirs'.

As much as he believes in the high intelligence and capabilities of women, he thinks that if the Democrats don't vote for Obama NOW, we will never change the world and we will be stuck with the Republican craziness FOREVER!!!! (and I full heartedly agree).

I'm a knee jerk, liberal, woman over 50, for Obama (even though I loved the Clintons!) because I think we really, really need what Obama stands for NOW! I really do want a woman president, but we need Obama now! at this point in time. PLEEEZZZE!!!!!

This is from my heart!!!! Let's give the Clintons their due after we have had a break from Bush/Clinton/Bush/????? Really,! Bill, convince Hillary that it's going to be okay! she will have her historic moment a little bit later.

I might sound crazy, but I know I'm pretty sure I'm, not (everyone tells me that I'm smarter than I think I am (even my Republican friends) so I'm giving this a shot. PLEAZE!!!, VOTE FOR OBAMA, give 'politics' a CHANCE AT CHANGE.

Posted by: shannons1 | March 2, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

How can expect any more aplomb and refinement? You may not agree with all of her politics but she is a very likeable person and I think that is what she has proven with this showing. She normally doesn't use this so much as Obama does. Something, it seems, that Obama expects and has taken for granted in a lot of his appearances. I do think she has more qualifications and would expect and trust that she would follow through with her plans. Obama doesn't convince me completely and I sincerely hope she makes the nomination.

Posted by: zeroclown2 | March 2, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Pleas dont vote for obama his going to crash the country he's an extremist muslim!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: braily100 | March 2, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

wpost, I was trying to shed light, not heat. I knew John was John an Jim was Jim and that "leichtman" had perhaps confused them. I have no idea who is on BHO's steering committee and do not care.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 2, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

This just confirms what most know, she is a good actor. nothing she or Obama could at this point would make me want to vote for either. what is most sure is a lot of women will vote for her just because she is a woman,and most all blacks will vote for him just because he is black. well 1/2. both are socialist and want to run all aspects of our lives.

Posted by: danrodavis | March 2, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

Hillary you did great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama bin laden Sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: braily100 | March 2, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

wpost - Jim Zogby, brother of John Zogby the pollster, works in the family business. He also is an Arab-American activist and member of the DNC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Zogby

======

So, now you switch brothers,eh?

Still waiting for your proof to back up your accusations about either Zogby being on Barack's steering committee or publicly endorsing him.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

So when is Hillary going to play the Saxophone???

I want to see a hip, hip, Hillary with "Two turntables and a (saxophone.)"

Posted by: aintth | March 2, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

I know one will read this whose mind I can change, but my husband says GO! DO it, do whatever you can. My husband is from Scotland. He has a science Ph.D. Men and women both think that he is a really smart AND a cool guy (who adores smart women - he thinks smart women should rule the world). He has always treated me as an equal, even though I only have a B.A. His colleagues, men and women, treat me as if my opinion and knowledge is equally as great as theirs'.

As much as he believes in the high intelligence and capabilities of women, he thinks that if the Democrats don't vote for Obama NOW, we will never change the world and we will be stuck with the Republican craziness FOREVER!!!! (and I full heartedly agree).

I'm a knee jerk, liberal, woman over 50, for Obama (even though I loved the Clintons!) because I think we really, really need what Obama stands for NOW! I really do want a woman president, but we need Obama now! at this point in time. PLEEEZZZE!!!!!

This is from my heart!!!! Let's give the Clintons their due after we have had a break from Bush/Clinton/Bush/????? Really,! Bill, convince Hillary that it's going to be okay! she will have her historic moment a little bit later.

I might sound crazy, but I know I'm pretty sure I'm, not (everyone tells me that I'm smarter than I think I am (even my Republican friends) so I'm giving this a shot. PLEAZE!!!, VOTE FOR OBAMA, give 'politics' a CHANCE AT CHANGE.

Posted by: shannons1 | March 2, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

I thought she did a great job. It takes courage to laugh at one's self, and she was terrific... Go Hilary!

Posted by: paulagoldenLA | March 2, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

"Hey jim why don't you tell Obama to give up his 1.6 million dollar house he bought from that crook in Chicago. He got it 300,000 under appraisal, now ain't that something. Change my rear end."

==============

LOL. I see the bottom of the barrel has been scraped.

Barack did not buy his home from Rezco. And the couple he did buy the house from said it was the highest offer they had received on a street with lots of for sale signs. Chicago Tribune had this all laid out years ago.

Next?

Or do you want to talk about who loaned the Clintons a couple mil to buy their house??? Does McAuliffe ring any bells?? Former head of the DNC who set up these primaries??? Hillary's fund-raiser??


You can change your rear end now.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

The comments posted here perfectly illustrate why the Democrats can't let the primary drag on until the convention - way too divisive!

Posted by: salmonsc | March 2, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

And then there was Whitewater... I just can't get past that.

Posted by: relada | March 2, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

The courage to laugh at yourself is always a sign of a confident person. I thought she was terrific.... but did she get the earrings back?

Posted by: paulagoldenLA | March 2, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

When people hollar "Live, from New York...etc.", you have to sound like you are electrified, you have to believe Saturday Night Live IS THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE!

Mrs. Clinton sounded like a visiting tourist unfamiliar with her sorroundings, although N.Y.C.is her own home town. It was another missed opportunity.

Posted by: rfpiktor | March 2, 2008 8:32 PM | Report abuse

wpost - Jim Zogby, brother of John Zogby the pollster, works in the family business. He also is an Arab-American activist and member of the DNC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Zogby

Ira, thanks for the clarification on the telephone calls. Tonight I received another BHO live call - but this one was from San Francisco! I begin to see that the sample of 14 which was my reference point is too small.

This morning I posted that I thought HRC had excellent comic timing,as did MDH the previous week. It seems that the public profession of politics is ever more like acting. I wrote this morning that I could not imagine Truman or Eisenhower, the first two presidents in my consciousness, having performed in this way. I suppose this was the inevitable result of television. Certainly, the Redford movie, "The Candidate" previewed all that followed.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 2, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

I'd hate to think voters would be influenced by a comedy sketch that stretched the facts about Sen. Clinton's supposed media disadvantage farther than a Texas taffy pull.

While Sen. Clinton has complained of having to field the first question in many debates, that same circumstance also has allowed her the last word.

For two consecutive SNL telecasts, it has been Sen. Obama and the media that have taken the beating, while Sen. Clinton has enjoyed the equivalent of a treasure trove in free campaign commercials from the same source.

In fact, the media bias for Sen. Obama, if there ever was one, has long since turned to a bias in favor of Sen. Clinton.

The past week's CBS Evening News broadcast a series called "For the Record" that could not have been more to Sen. Clinton's advantage. From the outset, it was apparent that CBS News had assigned two correspondents with jarringly mismatched reporting skills, one each to profile the candidates. Nancy Cordes, a relative newcomer to network news with only one presidential campaign under her belt, was assigned the Clinton puff piece. Dean Reynolds, a three-time Emmy winner, son of news legend Frank Reynolds, and a 23-year veteran of international and national news with multiple presidential campaigns to his credit, took on hammering Sen. Obama.

When it was all over, Cordes' piece weighed in at more than a minute longer than Reynolds' piece (a lifetime in network news). Not until roughly halfway through her eight-minute profile did Cordes bring up anything negative about Sen. Clinton, and then she magically dismissed 35 years of controversy in under 40 seconds. Reynolds seven-minute piece began with a not-so-veiled reference to his funny name and obscure record, continued with Reynolds calling him a "traditional liberal" who passed "marijuana use" and other legislation, and noted an Illinois' Republican lawmaker's appraisal that "I can't think of a tax increase he didn't embrace." This is the first one-and-a-half minutes of the report, which continued by raising -- but never answering -- questions about Obama's religion, the photo of him without his hand over his heart during the National Anthem and other patriotic litmus tests. At roughly half-way into the report, Reynolds launched into the litany of Clinton accusations, including Rezko, Farrakhan and more.

Has Hillary gotten the shaft from the media? Yes, if you count reporting Obama's 11 straight wins as "giving him a free ride." No, if you consider the audacity of spin in Sen. Clinton's ninth-inning complaint.

Posted by: rippermccord | March 2, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

I am allowed to change my mind based on the people that surround him. For a group that claims to be about unity, some (not all) Obama supporters are doing a great job pushing other voters away.
======================

Do you actually believe that anonymous internet bloggers are all Obama supporters?? Who knows who they really are!

It's well known that Rush Republicans hang out in these blogs just to stir up hatred between Obama and Hillary supporters.

If that's your criteria, I feel sorry for you.

But you certainly have the right to change your mind based on any criteria you want. Just don't expect to be taken seriously if the criteria is bogus to begin with.

The real question is who has campaigned negatively? And who has not. Hillary has and Barack has not. That's provable.

Don't blame Barack for a handful of obnoxious and anonymous bloggers or the Media...he has no control of either.

Cheers back. :)

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

I am a white college student here in our United States of America. My best friend growing up was african american. I am not racist but can not understand for the life of me why in this country we have allowed ourselves to become blinded. I have read the posts about viewing the SNL skit as racist. Balogny. Do you realize we just had a BLACK HISTORY month?? A whole month dedicated to the BLACK community? Unless my history teacher was mistaken there were men of CAUCASIAN orgin in office and civilians who helped curve the racism and slavery as well! Where is the month observing their efforts? BET. BLACK ENTERTIANMENT TELEVISION... are you serious? If a WHITE ENTERTIANMENT TELEVISION company started the roof would come down. We as americans overlook these and pass them off because some feel we owe those of color a debt. We don't. We are all americans, we are all created equal. So those of you voting for Obama just because its time for a BLACK man... get over it. Its time for the RIGHT canidate. I am a Clinton supporter. But it comes down to experience. If she loses my vote rests with a war hero and dedicated citizen and politican McCain.

Posted by: anfwa85 | March 2, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama does alot of talking, but doesn't have much to say.

Posted by: niksiz | March 2, 2008 8:28 PM | Report abuse

The more I hear Sen. Obama speak, the more I am reminded of something I heard somewhere in my past. It goes "life isn't a bowl of cherry's, and who ever tells you it is or can be, is trying to sell you something." I have been in marketing and sales all of my professional career. So I will say this, He has definately got a great pitch, after all he's saying what we already know, which makes it so easy for Sen. Obama to sell it. And man are they buying it. Just my observation...

Posted by: workman_ms | March 2, 2008 8:24 PM | Report abuse

Hey jim why don't you tell Obama to give up his 1.6 million dollar house he bought from that crook in Chicago. He got it 300,000 under appraisal, now ain't that something. Change my rear end.

Posted by: starcevich7 | March 2, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

" I going to have a hard time sticking to my original pledge if people don't tone down this blind adoration and wackiness."
============================

What does anyone else's adoration or wackiness (provably not restricted to Obama) have to do with your original pledge?

Do you stop believing in someone because someone else acts irrationally?
_

I am allowed to change my mind based on the people that surround him. For a group that claims to be about unity, some (not all) Obama supporters are doing a great job pushing other voters away. He may win the nomination but don't kid yourself he will need Clinton and Edwards supporters in November when the party that turned John Kerry into a war criminal gets warmed up.

Cheers

Posted by: PScars | March 2, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Who is MDH?

Posted by: mikedow | March 2, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Good Therapy for Hillary-she enjoyed it no doubt it was a compliment to be on SNL

Posted by: jackjill1998 | March 2, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama is asked if he is a Christian. What about Hillary? She is a white woman, so she is automatically assumed she is a Christian? I see another racial prejudice here. Since Obama is a black person, his Christianity is questioned. Then, let me put it this way. Does Hillay geuinely walk her Christian talk? Can you picture her as someone who has worked to bear the fruits of the Holy Spirit, such as love and compassion. I don't want to preach now since you and Hillary all probabaly went to church today. But, can you really picture her as someone who turns the other cheek, say nothing when someone accuses of having done something not agreeable to her? Jesus told the rich man to go and sell everything he had and give to the poor. Has Hillary done that? Can you really picture Hillary sharing her wealth with the poor, not the governement money which is yours and mine? She says that she has 35 years of experience. What kind of Experience, I may ask? I will tell you one experience that really shined a few days ago. The experience to attack Obama with the 3AM ad. Besides, why doesn't she pick up the phone instead of the poor little girl in the ad? She makes other people do what she can't/doesn't want to/won't do. She let other people do the dirty jobs. Now, that is the gosepl according to Hillary.

Posted by: jim_shn | March 2, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Want a good used car salesman? Obama's your man. He's slick in his talk
=========================

Not as slick as you.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

You guys are making a big deal out of it. The one who said I will never watch SNL again, because Obama's face was not made to look good, why dont you just take a chill pill and go to bed at 9pm because SNL doesn't want you as an audience anyways!!
YOU GUYS NEED TO JUST LOOK AT IT AND JUST LAUGH, AT LEAST THATS WHAT HILLARY DID! and you guys are just pissed that NBC had the balls to state the obviouse about how media is being soft on nobama.

Posted by: ajabedy | March 2, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Oh and another thing.....
Did all you people complaining now, cry foul when Obama appeared on SNL and tweaked the Clintons? Probably not. Regardless that was funny too as was last nights skit. If Obama becomes the nominee and/or president you better prepare yourself for Letterman, Stewart, Maher and more SNL. It goes with the job so I suggest you lighten up.

Posted by: PScars | March 2, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Want a good used car salesman? Obama's your man. He's slick in his talk, assuring the people "He Will Bring People Together". For what? It would be nice if he would put in words exactly what HE would do for this country. Minnesota had Jesse Ventura when people wanted a change. Look what happened there. Be careful you are not following another one that "Promises" but does not deliver. The young voters are hungry for change, but be careful. You might get what you did not want.

Posted by: grandmommak | March 2, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Frankly I thought it was her best moment since this campaign began. She was human, funny, warm, even joking at her own expense. Will it help? I doubt it. Too little, too late.

Posted by: mklein660 | March 2, 2008 8:07 PM | Report abuse

I am an independent voter but am planning to vote for Obama. But I am an young woman who has been very patiently waiting for her chance to vote in Primary. However, primary in my state does not occur until April 22. Why can't DNC and the rest of the nation give us our chance to vote?

Posted by: malinimalini77 | March 2, 2008 8:06 PM | Report abuse

In my opinion, this is an ongoing attempt by all politicians to get in touch with the American people. Since our nation has become very media-oriented, it seems appropriate for a candidate to get in front of the camera.
On the other hand, I think it reflects poorly on the American public that this is what it takes for the candidates to get votes. It appears that American voters are making judgements on media persona and not on abilities. Shame on us for being so lazy and shallow!
I am not a democrat and am glad to say that I will not be a part of the end result if Hilary loses. If the democratic voters would look at what really matters in the primaries, they would vote on substance not persona........It truly is a no-brainer- Hilary Clinton has what it takes to run the oval office. As for Mr. Obama, give him a few more years to develop and learn. The highest office in the world should be in the hands of the most qualified.

Posted by: mrlncrvn | March 2, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

I thought Hillary was GREAT last night. I've always liked her. She's taken a lot of crap from the media for years. I think it's time they give her a little credit. I watched a news show today that said she is getting some bad press because she wasn't very accessable to the press in the previous months. I thought their jobs are to report facts. One news man reported that Hillary was ahead of Obama in Ohio by 49 to 40 points, with 11 undecided. He insinuated that Hillary would lose Ohio. If the table were turned, if Obama was ahead by 9 points, it would be reported that Obama was running away with the vote. Come on people, can't you see what the media is doing to this country? And really, isn't everyone getting a little SICK of listening to Obama's speeches? Each one sounds just like the last one. Then we hear him say how Hillary is all over the board on issues. First it was Health Care, then Free Trade, then Security. Well I thought the President HAD to manage ALL of these. All Obama comes up with is how he didn't vote for the war. Well there's a good reason he didn't. HE WASN'T THERE!!!!!

Posted by: ssmith1018 | March 2, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

"wpos: check the dnc site and google zogby.
its ok that he supports B.O. but as an influential pollster I don't think that speaks well for his integrity or objectivity and is an obvious conflict of interest.Personally I think all of these talking heads for Obama shoul be disclosing who they support, but I am sure that would not do good things for their ratngs"

---------------


You are the one who has stated that Zogby is on Obama's steering committee and has publicly endorsed them, so you need to provide the proof.

Or admit you are supplying false info.

Back up your accusations.

Why can't you?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

What a wild primary election year so far...when you have conservatives stating they are going to "pout this election" because they don't want to play, and no political satire up to this point because of the TV writers strike which has allowed Obama to sail thru primary after primary with no sharp witted attacks and everybody waiting for Clinton's legs to curl up under the house leaving the ruby slippers for Obama to take...why not allow Hillary to have some fun and take a poke at her laugh of all things? The US is becoming way too serious!

Posted by: user265202 | March 2, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary presented as likeable and warm. Her appearance WILL help and she will win Texas and Ohio. Go Hillary!

Posted by: cunningham_robbi | March 2, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

" I going to have a hard time sticking to my original pledge if people don't tone down this blind adoration and wackiness."
============================

What does anyone else's adoration or wackiness (provably not restricted to Obama) have to do with your original pledge?

Do you stop believing in someone because someone else acts irrationally?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

wpos: check the dnc site and google zogby.
its ok that he supports B.O. but as an influential pollster I don't think that speaks well for his integrity or objectivity and is an obvious conflict of interest.Personally I think all of these talking heads for Obama shoul be disclosing who they support, but I am sure that would not do good things for their ratngs

Posted by: leichtman | March 2, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

the young and hip should be doing something constructive with their lives.

Posted by: bodymanone | March 2, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

2Bush's 1Clinton, RepubliCONs, DemocRats look at the mess. We need healthy representation (no more corporate puppets). I'm looking for healthy progressive third party republiCans or demoCans. Vote wisely or we will be waking up on isle 1-25 at Wal-Mart where all the robots live & work. Obama has my vote.

Posted by: aloha2michael | March 2, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

So what if Hilary has good comic timing? Nothing matters because: The New Black will always beat the Old White

Posted by: TeddyRoosevelt | March 2, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

(And, to be real, does anyone REALLY think Obama tackled Clinton in the debates?? -- particularly, foreign policy????)??
----------------------------

yes, not only in the debate, but in the most important foreign policy decision in our time...the vote to give george bush complete leeway to wage war. RESULTS from HER decision: 4000 Ameican soldiers dead, tens of thousands without limbs or brain function, a Middle East problem without end that is draining our treasury and turning the world against us.


Yes, I'd say he more than proved the he has better judgment on foreign policy.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Great skit.. Shows to me she has the character to laugh at herself through all of this!! Look at the history BUSH screws up CLINTON to the rescue (great economy boost BILL!!) BUSH screws up again and now lets let CLINTON fix it AGAIN!! My vote is with you hilary and to all who watch any show like SNL or MAD they use our freedom of speech and play on all forms of humor!

Posted by: anfwa85 | March 2, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Wow!
After scanning the comments one thing is certainly clear, many Obama supporters do not have a sense of humor! Maybe they are thin skinned because SNL did not make fun of Obama but the groupie-like mentality that surrounds his campaign. I voted for Edwards in my state primary and while at one time I thought I could support any of the top 3 Democratic candidates should they win, I going to have a hard time sticking to my original pledge if people don't tone down this blind adoration and wackiness.

Posted by: PScars | March 2, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

I loved SNL's skits. We all need to lighten up. Whether or not it will help Senator Clinton is unkonwn. It does show that she has a good sense of humor. To me this is all secondary. She is incredibly intelligent, something this country needs in a person who will guide this country and represent us around the world. I have seen her on several occasions dating back to a speech she gave along with Tipper Gore some years ago. As the line from Jerry McGuire. She had me after "Hello". jjmeilert, Vienna, VA

Posted by: jjmoo | March 2, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

The old way of politics showing its true color with attacks on individual's belief and their way of life.

The experience of the past politics led us into the Iraq nightmare. How's the 'experience' handled the 3 am emergency calls? You guessed it... with the invasion of Iraq!

Do you still want the failed 'experience' to lead our country?

Posted by: esophal | March 2, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

I'm a Hillary fan. Let's put that out there from the start. I felt compelled to chime-in because of the prior comments -- and, frankly (hillary supporter or otherwise) -- the OVERWHELMING pro-Obama press attention that appears to exist:

1) I LOVE any candidate who is able to go on national TV and attempt to be humorous no matter how lame it may (appear) to be (hell, we have a President presently who does that EVERY TIME he speaks - without intending to be funny!!!!);

2) Honestly, if you can get the air time, (and I don't fault any candidate who can get ANY airtime in these EXPENSIVE days), to appeal to a younger audience or otherwise. GO FOR IT!!!! (Of course, do I wish this had been earlier in the campaign. . .yes. . .); and

3) She, like Huckabee, was pretty DAMN FUNNY. Again, I go back to No. 1 -- Anyone who puts themselves out there, I think is pretty awesome.

AND, Oh yeah, just to be true to myself -- if anyone thinks for a MOMENT, change HAPPENS by the number of times you say the word "change", you are DELUDING yourselves. GO HILLARY!!! Let's Have Solutions, Not Words! (And, to be real, does anyone REALLY think Obama tackled Clinton in the debates?? -- particularly, foreign policy????)??

Posted by: goblueboy70 | March 2, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton, tonight on 60 minutes, when asked about rumors circulating about Obama that he is secretly a Muslim and if she tought Barack was a Muslim, she responded, "No, of course not. I take him at his word."

Odd response. Why didn't she just say that's just an ugly rumor and smear that needs to be stopped?
================


Exactly. It was a disgraceful moment. Reminded me of why I can't support Hillary for President at all. She's actually less ethical than George Bush, which I didn't think possible.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

I thought her actual appearance was well done - the old tried and true 'stand next to the person impersonating me' bit. The actual debate skit, however, struck me as lame at best, overt pro-Hillary pandering at worst. Last week, it was funny. Two weeks in a row, it is clear that SNL is campaigning for Hillary. There is plenty you could satirize with Obama's mannerisms, but the 'I'm just a big doofus who doesn't say anything' approach doesn't even make sense if you've ever seen him speak, debate, or in a Q&A forum. I read in the WaPo style section a few weeks ago that Lorne Michaels is one of Hillary's biggest individual donors from Hollywood, so this doesn't surprise me. It also doesn't bother me that much...except that it isn't very funny.

Posted by: jak2 | March 2, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

I think that the skit was very degrading and personified how pathetic Hilary has really become. I also don't think that it will make a significant difference in Ohio, or TEXAS(go longhorns). I live in Texas and will be voting for Obama :), Hilary has proved to me and my community that she will maintain the status quo although any body will be better than Bush, but Texas and America needs a president that can get the young people involved for once and unify the country. The skit was funny in a very unethical way and I was personally was not surprised that Hilary would participate in it, so that she could try to salvage what little hope she has left. Overall I just think that it was a pathetic attempt to once again bash Obama.

Posted by: Dnono16 | March 2, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

I was an Obama supporter before this time not that I can do anything to influence the turnout of the votes. I am swinging to Clinton for the simple reason that now she's being crucified by far too many. A year ago everybody thought it was going to be her. So I felt it wasnt fair to rule out others. Now the same thing is happening in the case of Obama. Now truth be told how many women on earth, have shown the strength and character this woman has shown since we first started seeing her in public life. She does one thing and every one wants to use it against her. In the wake of sept 11 I dare say that whoever did not vote to authorize force in Iraq is the unpatriotic one. Ofcourse we now know better what we didnt know then, but desperate times call for desperate measures. I start to wonder whether we should actually be trusting a man that doesnt want his second name mentioned to be the president of the United states. I begin to wonder when Hussien became a christian name. Clinton has been acused of making a wrong jugdement in the most important decision of this generation, invasion of Iraq, but where was Obama when that decision was being made. It was Frantz Fannon that said 'an unlooker is either a traitor or a coward.
Like someone pointed out earlier, the press have helped us know the candidates better. win or loose, Clinton will remain my champion.

Posted by: tonyigwebuike | March 2, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

wpost4112 posted:

"'I've said all along that I thought this country would accept a black president before it would accept a woman president.'

==============================

I suppose that's why we've had 3 black governors and 29 female governors?

Or 4 black Senators and 35 female Senators??"

Another good point.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Have never seen Hillary look so beautiful!
Beauty, Brains, Personality, Sense of Humor, Experience...How lucky we are she is running for president in America...any other country would elect her in a minute. I just hope we add her to the long list of countries who have or have had female presidents or prime ministers, to say nothing of Queen Elizabeth I and Catherine the Great. We really need someone special like her to save our country. GO Hillary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: PEARLSOYSTER | March 2, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

It's likely that we will look back at Hillary's appearance as the moment SNL finally jumped the shark (and given SNL's many lows over the years, that's saying something.)

Posted by: denisemay | March 2, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

We all remember "There is no one left to lie to". Hillary relies on stunts, intimidation, ploys, crying, self pity, deception, dirty tricks, racial bigotry, fear tactics, Hollywood left wing Clintonistas, feminist temper tantrums, and much more to come. What does she stand on? Two legs?

Posted by: jim_shn | March 2, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton, tonight on 60 minutes, when asked about rumors circulating about Obama that he is secretly a Muslim and if she tought Barack was a Muslim, she responded, "No, of course not. I take him at his word."

Odd response. Why didn't she just say that's just an ugly rumor and smear that needs to be stopped?

Posted by: zb95 | March 2, 2008 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Pretty sad how many people here get so worked up about a piece of sort-of-funny comedy. If you think SNL is TEH EVIL MSM because of this skit, you're an idiot. If you think this will be what really turns out Hillary's campaign, you too are an idiot.

Posted by: novamatt | March 2, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

I have lost all respect for Hillary and NBC. If you are going to be on Saturday night live and post it everywhere, I would think you would not ban your opponents!! I am disgusted that Hillary that she can lie to the public and hope no one is paying enough attention to correct her. She knows that she can say a lie and even if it is not true, psychologically it will seem true to the public. That is disgusting to use this type of political scams against the public.. We are not all dumb. If Hillary does when the election it will just show that the Americans do not have a say in anything. The Clintons are a shame to Americans and that is what Mrs Obama was saying!! As an Educated American Women, I HAVE been ashamed of the disgusting politics, the lies, the deception and un-Americanism (NAFTA) that the Bush's and the Clintons have brought this Nation, I am "For the first time in my adult life... really proud of my country." (Mrs. Obama)

And yes I agree, I have lowered myself and wasted 5 minutes of my life on her ignorance!! Myself, my family and our Nation have way to much to do on rebuild this world and actually make it a better place, than to allow such a waste of a person into our thoughts!!

Posted by: nadia | March 2, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's SNL performance was relaxed, cheerful, and in the full devil-may-care spirit of the show. It paralleled the past performances of Al Gore, Mike Huckabee, Steve Forbes, Paul Simon (the other one), and other pols who, at showtime, accepted that they had no way of winning. It continued the grand tradition of using SNL as the national "first day of the rest of my life" breakout.

Posted by: marktsnow | March 2, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

I did not see SNL since it is a lame show that has not been funny for more than 10 years. I did find a lot of the above comments funny though. After watching this video I think Hillary may have helped herself a little, but who cares? The audience that watches SNL is probably not big enough to make a difference. I am not a big Hillary fan and certainly am not an Obama fan. Maybe the young vote (what age is that, 18-29?) is what they are after by going on SNL. I consider myself young (39)and am not swayed by the silly antics. It does not make any difference to me since I live in TEXAS and thank the LORD we are still a conservative state! While I do agree that we need a change I do not believe the country is ready for Hillary or the likes of an Obama. We will just let them battle it out and then take care of business when November comes around.
Thank you,
An educated conservative.

Posted by: sharkandledo | March 2, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

SNL is the loser here. Participating in a smear campaign - who'd a thunk it - in all their years of political satirizations this is a first, and a new low.

Racism is alive and well. I am WHITE and any fool can see it if their eyes are open. The cartoon was disgusting - we are in a democratic primary and here is SNL helping fracture the democratic party just to suck up to Hillary.

I am also a woman, and you do not have to be a "bitc*" to be successful. I know plenty of loudmouthed pushy people who don't get things done, but they sure get in the way.

I was watching with my three teenagers, two of whom are in college. I turned the channel after the cartoon with their blessing. SNL has taken their audience and cut it into fourths, keeping one fourth for themselves. I felt like a fool for watching it at all, and even worse for suggesting it to others.

Hillary won't be helped or hurt by this. It was for her and her fans anyway. Obama supporters will become more determined to help him win. SNL loses badly, and if you think not, just wait and see .......

Posted by: peacesuccess2be | March 2, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

The Clinton supporters are so desparate that they think a mock show like SNL would make a difference in the voting patterns of the nation. Do they even know that the March 4th Primaries are in TX and OH. Do they seriously think that these States take their queue from New Yorkers???? If your answer is yes, think again!
And one more thing enough with " I always get the first question" strategy. This makes her less Presidential.

Posted by: fwasti | March 2, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Saturday Night Live? Good grief, is that old chestnut still running these days? I haven't watched it since my student days. Not many young people around here even seem to know it. I really can't imagine that an old lady like Hillary is going make them watch it.

Posted by: dunnhaupt | March 2, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

"I've said all along that I thought this country would accept a black president before it would accept a woman president."

==============================

I suppose that's why we've had 3 black governors and 29 female governors?

Or 4 black Senators and 35 female Senators??


Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

foomonkey wrote:
"I think that a good leader would take responsibility for the troubles of her campaign, not point at the media. What kind of president would she be when something she supports does not pass? Who will get the blame? I also think a lot of the scrutiny comes with her history in public life. It has been riddled with scandals (hers and her husband's), so the media has reason to focus on her.
On the other hand, I heard a reporter interviewed on CSPAN after the debate, and she put it well that the media has actually helped keep her in the race by giving her the attention. The reporter argued that if another candidate had lost such a lead, or lost so many primaries/caucuses in a row, the media would have written them off as done..."

Great points, foomonkey.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Succinct, humorous, and effective - are three words that best characterize her message on SNL. Yet, ironically, not the same can be generally said of her campaign speeches which have, for the most part, lacked all three.

Given SNL's rather obvious leaning to HRC, and how poorly she has done of late on the campaign trail, one is left to wonder who really needs the comic relief more - America or Hillary?

Posted by: dieder345 | March 2, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was terrific, and who the hell cares who it helps persuade? She is a remarkable woman who can stand against the wind and have fun despite it all.

What did former U.S. Senator Gene McCarthy say about the media? To paraphrase, he said the media are like birds on a wire: One lands on a wire, another comes, then a couple more, then many are all landing and sitting on the wire. After a period, one flies away, then another, then two or three and suddenly the whole flock takes off.

McCarthy's analogy is accurate as time is long.

Posted by: Politicalpuck | March 2, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

miteypen wrote:
"I've said all along that I thought this country would accept a black president before it would accept a woman president."

I agree. In this case, though, she is just the wrong woman. The last name concerns me more than gender. I just wish she were a woman who had made her way to this stage on her own - all of the experience she cites was gained through being the wife of the Governor and the wife of the President. She has no unique experience of her own. There are plenty of women in the Senate right now whose credentials outshine Clinton's by far - but they are not running.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

How long will it be before SNL has that great defender of democracy Terry McAuliffe on? You know, the guy behind sabotaging the Nader for President campaign four years ago.

Posted by: sebtree | March 2, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Hilary was great. Funny skit.

Posted by: tourayg61 | March 2, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Barack is great on 60 Minutes.
Esp on the "time out" trade issue.
Hillary is a rumor-monger...Barack isn't a Muslim..."as far as I know."
Disgraceful. Deceitful. Disgusting.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

It was actually ok, but there wasn't a lot to it...
It's nice to see her with a sense of humor, laughing at herself a bit, but that's about it.

What I find a bit annoying is the claims of media bias. There has been a bit of bias... But do her supporters think that this is the reason he is winning and she is losing? I mean, to blame her loss of support on media bias is actually a bad thing for her campaign. I think that a good leader would take responsibility for the troubles of her campaign, not point at the media. What kind of president would she be when something she supports does not pass? Who will get the blame? I also think a lot of the scrutiny comes with her history in public life. It has been riddled with scandals (hers and her husband's), so the media has reason to focus on her.
On the other hand, I heard a reporter interviewed on CSPAN after the debate, and she put it well that the media has actually helped keep her in the race by giving her the attention. The reporter argued that if another candidate had lost such a lead, or lost so many primaries/caucuses in a row, the media would have written them off as done...
I think these are a few of the things that her supporters should consider.

Posted by: foomonkey | March 2, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Zogby is a DNC superdelegate and influential member on the DNC who has publicly come out for B.O.

----------------

evidence?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

I admire Sen. Clinton's perseverance, but it will take a miracle to obtain 57% of all delegates available next Tuesday. Her partake in SNL was really funny. She was relaxed and looked optimistic. It must have given her a few extra votes but, will it be enough to take the lead? Probably not. I saw her segment in SNL as if she was gracefully saying: "so long, we'll see each other soon". The NY Senator entered the race "full of grace", and she will get out of it in the same way. She is not going home empty-handed. She will fight until the end. If her campaign does not work hard on "getting out the vote", that end is really close.

Posted by: wobatista | March 2, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

leichtman wrote:

Zogby on his bio states he is on B.O.'s steering committee.
==============

where?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

indyjnz wrote:
"Bottom line, if anyone really believes that "change" is going to happen in DC from either political party, I've got the deed to the Brooklyn Bridge and I'm taking bids. Let's get realistic..."

Good point, and funny. But if that's the case, why have an election? What other reason to vote if not to change? Whether it comes from Clinton, Obama, or McCain, the process is about change. We can move from the status quo of the Clinton and Bush Dynasties and try a new approach, or we can sit on the pot and complain about how messed up everything has become. Your choice. OUR choice.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

I personaly thought it was a good idea for her to to be on SNL, It shows that she has a good sence of humor AND the ability to run the country. I really do think that we as a whole need a "person" in the white house that can understand all of us and not just all those pencil heads that are in office. We need a president that looks after our country first instead of getting involved everywhere else in the world and leaving us defenseless. I feel that Hilary Clinton could actually get this country back on it's feet again! we are all tired of the same old s#@! .

Posted by: viperbob2002 | March 2, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

co host on CNBC's Morning Joe Mika's Brazinsky's dad Is B.O. foreign policy advisor and Zogby is a DNC superdelegate and influential member on the DNC who has publicly come out for B.O. Can we spell conflict of interest? Its not whining to discuss these obvious conflicts of interest in the media and confused that others don't appreciate this conflict.

Should Repubs be allowed to vote in our primary. Not those who then laugh and say they have no intention of voting for the Dem nominee in Nov and realistically you can t get them to sign loyalty oaths. I just have a problem with B.O relying on these primary voters. I would prefer that Dems pick our nominee but unfortunately Texas does not have party registration like other state

Posted by: leichtman | March 2, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

You can examples of bias going EITHER WAY in the media. However, some of the bias against Clinton is the same kind of bias seen everywhere against women in general. It can be very subtle, but it's there. I've said all along that I thought this country would accept a black president before it would accept a woman president. People don't want to admit their bias against women leaders and often honestly don't think they have any. That's because it is socialized into us at such an early age and so pervasively that we barely notice it. Ask yourself who you would vote for if Clinton's and Obama's sexes were reversed. I think you might be surprised at your answer IF YOU'RE REALLY HONEST.

Posted by: miteypen | March 2, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

cowyard wrote:
"Gloria Steinem is a paleo-feminist, and is regarded as a hack by contemporary feminists, especially in academia. Her article in the NYT does not pass the smell test among the current crop of women writers, intellectuals. She was, notably, taken to task on Pacifica Radio over her weak line of inquiry. And so it's very amusing to see her still at it, using myriad and all manner of logical fallacies--from false dillemas to red herrings--to make her case now, on the stump for Texas."

Yep, she has as much credibility among educated women and feminists as a woman who would ride the coattails of a man to the Senate or (possibly?) the White House.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Obama's color is a shield of impenetrable armor protecting him from even the slightest bit of scrutiny, and thus putting all of America and the world at risk.

In addition to receiving Mr. Farrakhan's endorsement, Mr. Obama's church gave Mr. Farrakhan a "humanitarian" award a few months ago. Mr. Farrakhan is a racist, a hater of Jews and white people, and someone who should be feared, reviled, and perhaps even pitied. If, for example, Hillary Clinton belonged to a church that gave the KKK a "humanitarian" award she would be forced out of office. However, Mr. Obama appears to have been given a most disturbing pass on this by almost everyone in the media. Talk about a double standard. Talk about disturbing. Talk about hypocritical. I almost choke when I hear him talk about UNITY knowing this fact. At the very least, Mr. Obama should have left the church based on their support of this racist, but as we all know he did not. This FACT alone should force him from public office.

Let's talk about some other facts. Mr. Obama has expressed open dislike, almost hatred, for this country. I want a President that LOVES this country. Mr. Obama has never done community service or volunteer work of any kind, so when he talks about change it is empty rhetoric. Furthermore, he recently purchased a MULTI-MILLION dollar house with the proceeds of his book making him look even more the hypocrite. The Houston Press just ran a story about Mr. Obama showing him to be a politician's politician, quoting him on pork barrel spending in Chicago as saying he doesn't just get pork he gets "steak" implying that he is better than your average politician at lining the pockets of his supporters. He has avoided every single potentially controversial vote EVER, except the one regarding whether we should invade a Muslim country suspected of hiding Muslim terrorists that took over 3,000 American lives on 9/11 and he voted AGAINST invading that Muslim country. He is, by his own words and actions, a hypocrite and a racist. The only real question is why you are not talking about these facts. Hillary Clinton has spent 35 years helping poor people--many of them people of color. Real change would be electing someone who really cares about America and Americans. I am proud to be an American and I will proudly vote for someone who might actually effect change--Hillary Clinton.

Posted by: jennifer | March 2, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

I found it delightful and again convinced of Hillary as a multifaceted individual who can function in any given situation. She has my vote, but had it prior to this show!

Posted by: mliebesman | March 2, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

How pathetic to try to ask SNL for an endorsement - I hope that was part of the joke too, although she presented it quite sincerely. The Clintons appear to place a bit too much value on SNL's take - remember Bill referring to SNL in his critique of Gore? It's only a comedy show after all.

Posted by: jcschopf | March 2, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

kfrederick55 wrote:
"And please stop with this nonsense of accusing Clinton of playing the victim card. She's one tough fighter and her resilience to come back again and again is why I want her in the White House..."

I do not deny that she is tough, but the whining has got to stop. That little statement she made at the beginning of the last debate was shameless. Walks like a duck, talks like a duck...

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 6:54 PM | Report abuse

Whoever has to read all the posts that precede and include this one would probably prefer to be sitting at a bar with a drink in hand by now. It feels like we're in the midst of a high school election for class president or maybe class-clown.

Put up the circus tent Set up the lights. Turn on the cameras. Cue the music. Bring in the elephants and the monkeys, lions and tigers and bears.

Hey folks it's all show-biz now. We Americans have been so dumbed-down by TV and the glitz and glam of the celebrity culture in a post-literate world that this election is looking more and more like just another episode in the ongoing popularity sweep-stakes. And the Oscar goes to....

It's Saturday Night Live! It's American Idol. It's a national smile-a-thon and all-night slumber party where the candidates never sleep and the talking-heads never shut up. It's about racism and sexism and ageism. It's about power, prestige, money and elitism. It's about a place in the sun and the oval office.

So hooray for Hollywood and take me to the Emerald City right away. I'm being followed by lions and tigers and bears, oh my.
(Lions and tigers and bears, oh my...)


Posted by: jbratter | March 2, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

I have been torn between Hilary and the other fellow (Edwards was my favorite) however this SNL appearance has caused me to leap off the fence into the HEN yard.
The most endearing quality of Americans is not only our ability to laugh at ourselves but to completely immerse ourselves into and enjoy the laughter. This is something that is ALWAYS absent from the White House when a Bush is in residence.
Here is another vote from North Carolina. YOU GO GIRL!!

Posted by: soap_fear | March 2, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

leichtman wrote:

Zogby on his bio states he is on B.O.'s steering committee.
==============

where?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is intelligent... and funny. And she's a WOMAN! But she can be a fighter, too. What more can we ask for?
--------------------------

4000 lives back. 100,000 whole bodies and brains.
All American soldiers. She is co-responsible.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Gloria Steinem is a paleo-feminist, and is regarded as a hack by contemporary feminists, especially in academia. Her article in the NYT does not pass the smell test among the current crop of women writers, intellectuals. She was, notably, taken to task on Pacifica Radio over her weak line of inquiry. And so it's very amusing to see her still at it, using myriad and all manner of logical fallacies--from false dillemas to red herrings--to make her case now, on the stump for Texas.

Posted by: cowyard | March 2, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is intelligent... and funny. And she's a WOMAN! But she can be a fighter, too. What more can we ask for?

Posted by: rosecc | March 2, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

So funny to hear L whine about Barack's spending in Texas to buy the primary....Hillary made history when she spent 30 million to win her Senate seat in NY against a nobody.

And yes,it was with the same campaign manager she has used this year.


http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/blog/2006/11/hillarys_absurd.html

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Waa waa waa all you Obamaniacs. Can we get you a pillow? Or maybe a (baby) bottle would be more in order. SNL hit the nail on the head as far as the media goes, I think reporters have dropped any pretense of objectivity since this is a blue v blue contest, and they can team up with the Repubs who hate Hillary even more than they do.

Posted by: jrm700 | March 2, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was great. Obama keeps referring to her vote on the war.. If he would have been in the Senate at that time he would . Have entered his vote as present... Come on people is this what you want for a President. He is going to answer that red phone at 3:am and say (PRESENT) Where will our country be then... Wake up and listen to what the man is saying .. He wants change and he wants your help to get it. How is he going to communicate with each one of you for your help .. Are you going to call him and tell him what needs to be done so he knows what to do each morning.
Lets make him Vice President for now in 8 years he will be ready to be President.. By that time he will have established himself he will learn the ropes .. He will realize being present isn't what gets things done.

Posted by: NJOY46 | March 2, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Our state office is on Ben White and I35. Seriously I made 50 calls into the Lakeway and Roundrock area myself 512 area code on Wed and Thur but its a numbers game and we are probably doing both its a numbers game.

Posted by: leichtman | March 2, 2008 6:38 PM | Report abuse

Zogby on his bio states he is on B.O.'s steering committee.
==============

where?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

I THINK THIS WAS FUNNY, I LIKED IT WEATHER PEOPLE WANNA SEE IT OR NOT MOST AMERICAN'S CAN SEE THAT OBAMA GOT A FREE RIDE WITH THE PRESS AND YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT THE MEDIA HAS HELPED HILLARY LOSE DECREASE HER VOTES IT HAS NOT BEEN FAIR FOR HER AND POEPLE KNOW IT SHE'S HATED ON FOR NO REASON AND I HOPE THAT ON TUESDAY THING TIRN AROUND FOR HER BECAUSE SHE WOULD BE THE RIGHT ONE TO FIX AMERICA GOD BLESS HILLARY. HOPE YOU WIN GIRL.

Posted by: badlizzard1 | March 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

I don't believe two favorable SNL shows have in any way balanced the absolutely skewed and appalling coverage of the mainstream media toward Clinton. I keep hearing them wringing their hands at the slightest uptick in her chances of securing the nomination, repeatedly wondering to each other, what can the Obama compaign do to effectively one-up her campaign?! How do the Obama people fix, respond to, counteract the smallest advantage she may have stumbled upon? To say that they have not been actively promoting, encouraging, foisting his campaign on the viewing public is to say my lying ears are betraying me. I greatly resent their spin on the debates, their "advice" to the campaigns, and their concerted efforts to act as king-makers. Dear God, they influenced the 2000 elections in an identical fashion, propelling the more likeable (and unknown) Bush over the wooden but vastly more knowledgeable Gore. You know, I didn't like it a bit when Clinton promoted herself as the pre-eminent nominee at the beginning of this interminably long primary season, and I actually thought the drubbing she took was a healthy wake-up call. No one should be given a free pass into only the most important job in this country, in the WORLD, for that matter! It sickens me now to hear Obama talk as if he has the nomination sewn up. Even if he wins all four upcoming events, I hope Clinton sticks it out to the bitter end, and makes him sweat blood and tears to EARN the nod, if he gets it. He needs to be thoroughly examined and vetted before we put him forth as our best shot for the White House, and before the Republican attack machine gears up to grind him down. By and large, compared to what lies ahead in the general election, Clinton has hardly laid more than a velvet glove on Obama. To say any criticism toward him has been motivated by racism is patently absurd!! To hold his feet to the fire and insist he have the courage to withstand harsh political scrutiny, if anything, shows a respect for his stature as a worthy opponent. And please stop with this nonsense of accusing Clinton of playing the victim card. She's one tough fighter and her resilience to come back again and again is why I want her in the White House tackling the almost insurmountable problems we are now facing on all fronts.

Posted by: kfrederick55 | March 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Objective Media means Fawning over B.O.
SNL got it right and that is probably why so many B.O. are squirming because it hurts to know that they have been caught in this media lovefest, but give me a break, MSNBC's Mika Brazinksky's dad is B.O. foreign policy advisor and Zogby on his bio states he is on B.O.'s steering committee. Would you listen to or believe a judge who had so obvious conflicts of interest?

Posted by: leichtman | March 2, 2008 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Incidentally Zogby is on B.O steering comittee so I have a real problem with this obvious conflict of interest.
===================

huh? where did you read this?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

leichtman, I wondered if the Austin experience was repeated elsewhere in TX and OH and I asked for your input. I take it from your experience that HRC is using volunteers in Houston. I certainly was not "lying" about the experience here.

It could be explained by targeted phone calling, I suppose, if HRC has volunteers in Austin and they are only calling certain exchanges, but I am trying to get a feel for this, by asking, not trying to score points, by "telling".

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

I thoroughly enjoyed Hillary's appearance on SNL. I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one who recognized the media's partiality to Obama. Then, last Saturday SNL did this hysterically funny paradody on the debates that was right on target. Yesterday's show was equally as funny.

There comes a time when we have to recognize the 3-ring circus this Democratic campaign has become. It's time to lighten up and quit letting the media control us. Apparently in a couple of days we'll all know who will be in the Presidential race. The main thing is that when this is decided we all support the candidate of our choice - and pray.

Posted by: momagazine | March 2, 2008 6:32 PM | Report abuse

Excerpt from Gloria Steinem editorial, "Women are Never Front-Runners" (Jan. 8, 2008 New York Times)

"But what worries me is that he is seen as unifying by his race while she is seen as divisive by her sex.

What worries me is that she is accused of "playing the gender card" when citing the old boys' club, while he is seen as unifying by citing civil rights confrontations.

What worries me is that male Iowa voters were seen as gender-free when supporting their own, while female voters were seen as biased if they did and disloyal if they didn't.

What worries me is that reporters ignore Mr. Obama's dependence on the old -- for instance, the frequent campaign comparisons to John F. Kennedy -- while not challenging the slander that her progressive policies are part of the Washington status quo.

What worries me is that some women, perhaps especially younger ones, hope to deny or escape the sexual caste system; thus Iowa women over 50 and 60, who disproportionately supported Senator Clinton, proved once again that women are the one group that grows more radical with age.

This country can no longer afford to choose our leaders from a talent pool limited by sex, race, money, powerful fathers and paper degrees. It's time to take equal pride in breaking all the barriers. We have to be able to say: "I'm supporting her because she'll be a great president and because she's a woman.""


I agree.

Posted by: tarawheat06 | March 2, 2008 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Thank you very much for your posting.

Hillary deserves vote from more than just 20% of African female living in the US. It looks really bad on those African female voters when they are in the job market. Recruiters may see them from 80/20 vision which is not good for America.

=========================

I'm an African female living in the UK and I love Bill and Hillary Clinton,Bill has been a friend of the Africans and Hillary has ALWAYS fought/spoke for the good of common people right from when she was in school-imgine that.
I beleive she's a born leader and will retore America's credibility.
Obama has charissma, yes, but he only talks-he has never been tested and he is a politician-he knows what the people want to hear.Hillary has admitted her mistakes many times and has always been direct about her polices but Obama only gives motivational talks..motivation to do what..we need to know how he can bring those things through for the ordinary American.
If were an American I'll vote for Clinton.
I pray she gets the nomination and then go on to win.


Posted by: tolmol | March 2, 2008 05:40 PM

Posted by: kat7 | March 2, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

"I wish all you Obama supporters would just shut up."

----------------------

Oh, they do that in Russia and Iran all the time. Try there.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

What amazes me is the extent to which the Clinton campaign's special pleading & whining about "unfair" media coverage has succeeded. Like guilty schoolboys the media - & especially MSNBC & CNN - have abandoned anything approaching objective journalism for fear of being accused of anti-Clinton bias. Witness the rash of stories surfacing in recent days rehashing the Rezko non-story (taking their cue directly from Clinton talking points). In comparison there is virtual silence about Clinton's refusal to make public her tax returns & her evasiveness regarding the $5 million campaign loan she made herself. Why isn't the media pursuing these stories with equal vigor? Media bias indeed.

Posted by: salmonsc | March 2, 2008 6:27 PM | Report abuse

AFTER SPENDING AN HOUR PLUS READING THE ABOVE POSTS, IT IS A GOOD FEELING THAT MOST ARE HONEST AND SOUND LIKE AMERICANS WHO KNOWLEDGEABLY CARE ABOUT THE USA.
HOWEVER, SOME HAVE BROUGHT UP THE NOT-SO-OBVIOUS NEWS. MEDIA ITSELF.

MEDIA IS LIKE THE LITTLE BOY WHO IS SUPPOSED TO TELL DADDY WHAT MOMMY SAID. MOMMY SAID, "WE NEED TO GO SHOPPING FOR FOOD AND THINGS." LITTLE BOY SAID TO DADDY, "MOMMY SAID I AM A GOOD LITTLE BOY AND WE NEED TO BUY SOME CANDY AND TOYS FOR ME."

MEDIA HAS NOT EVEN YET EXPOSED THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE CLINTONS AS TOLD IN A BOOK WRITTEN BY A MAN HIRED TO DO SOME OF THE DIRTY WORK. REFRIGERATOR DID HAVE FOOD TO THROW OUT.

MEDIA SHOOTS OFF THE MCCAIN REPLY TO TEXANS,THE AMERICANS NEED TO GIVE CREDIT TO BUSH WHO HAS NOT ALLOWED AN ATTACK UPON AMERICA SINCE 9/11. THEN DOES NOT CONNECT THAT OSAMA BEN LADEN IS LAUGHING IN THE CAVE KNOWING THAT AMERICA IS ATTACKING ITSELF INTO BANKRUPTCY UNDER GEORGE'S DICTATORSHIP. BUYING TOYS IS EXPENSIVE

MEDIA IS HYPING OBAMA LIKE HE IS A SPORTS STAR OR MOVIE STAR - CANDY AND TOYS. HE IS A FINE MAN, BUT NOT YET READY.

MEDIA WAS PURCHASED BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AFTER SPENDING "WISELY" ON PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH. GEORGE IS A GOOD LITTLE BOY IS ALL WE COULD HEAR INSTEAD THAT HE WAS AN ALCOHOLIC WHEN HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RESPONSIBLE YOUND FATHER. THE LITTLE BOY'S SMILE AND SINCERITY CAN CONTROL THAT SOFTY FATHER.

MEDIA HAS CONTROL OF PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT ASK LIKE PAUL HARVEY SUGGESTED "WHAT IS THE REST OF THE STORY?" IF I ASK THE LITTLE BOY, WHAT WERE THE WORDS MOMMY SAID...

AMERICA'S FUTURE WILL BE PUT INTO THE HANDS OF THE WHOEVER THE MEDIA DECIDES BECAUSE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL NOT TAKE THE TIME TO ASK QUESTIONS AND THINK FOR THEMSELVES

Posted by: byronoccor | March 2, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

"CTV (Canadian Television) aired a news story about how Barack Obama has LIED to either the Ohio voters or the Canadian government about NAFTA. Watch below. Do we really want someone like that in office? Someone who will lie to the American people to further their own agenda?
================================

The same television station has made the same claim about Hillary. Both camps and the Canadian gov't have denied the story.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

thanks fitch, you are not alone. I have spoken with numerous local lawyers this week who are all supporting Hillary and who have no idea why there are educated people who have not bothered to even read and compare the 2 healthcare plans and tell me that they are being pressured by their kids to support B.O.

Incidentally Zogby is on B.O steering comittee so I have a real problem with this obvious conflict of interest.

mark stated Hillary is using only robo calls, that is nonsense. I have made over 100 calls today in Houston as have many of our volunteers for H.C. and many families are truly split. B.O. has run hundreds of SEU paid for commercials, which he savaged John Edwards for in Iwoa and Nevada. Apparently B.O. thinks he can but this election. Texans are not that gullible and know hypocrisy when they see it.

Posted by: leichtman | March 2, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

So this skit must be another reason why Hillary is too busy to release her tax returns or the records from the first lady's office. Let's cut the comedy and get some real insight into her character and fitness to govern.

Posted by: acrame | March 2, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

I just find it funny she appeared on the show she took serious effort to belittle during her debate last week. And another thing, does anyone else find it strange that in the past year we've suddenly seen Hillary's "emotional" side with the tears, and now her attempt at comedy on SNL, when she was such a stoic ice queen those eight years when she was already in the White House?

Posted by: mikla2 | March 2, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

I wish all you Obama supporters would just shut up. You've had the media on your side for over a year now. If Obama wins the nomination the press will turn on him and he'll be dead in the General election. He's as shallow as a saucepan. Any plan he comes up with is just copied from Hillary.

Posted by: starcevich7 | March 2, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

from KHOU:

If the Obama campaign is looking for a signal that things are going their way, here is a strong signal: On our first two nights of polling, half the voters who cast ballots early told us they voted for Clinton, and half for Obama.

On the third night, our cumulative total shifted Obama's way, 53 to 47 percent.

On the fourth night, things shifted so much that our exclusive 11 News Belo Texas poll now shows the early vote is running 63 to 37 percent, in Obama's favor.

Our pollster, David Iannelli of Austin-based Public Strategies, Inc., warns that one cannot use this data as an "exit poll," or a hard-and-fast indication of what the early vote total will eventually look like. "It's a small number of people" in the overall sample, he said, "but it gives us an indication of what we've seen in other states for Barack Obama, and that is his ability to mobilize his voters."

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:15 PM | Report abuse

CTV (Canadian Television) aired a news story about how Barack Obama has LIED to either the Ohio voters or the Canadian government about NAFTA. Watch below. Do we really want someone like that in office? Someone who will lie to the American people to further their own agenda?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0

Posted by: tarawheat06 | March 2, 2008 6:13 PM | Report abuse

The shamelessness of the so called "inevitable Democratic Party nominee" (Hillary) has (once again) been thoroughly exposed and her candidacy self-discredited. The problem remains, however, that she still occupies one of the highest elected offices in the land. WHAT were you thinking New Yorkers? How long before you will rectify this mistake?

For the good of our country and the welfare of our citizens, in 2008 and any year henceforth, I say ANYBODY but Hillary!

Posted by: retroag70 | March 2, 2008 6:05 PM | Report abuse

if you ask me it was not the right decision for her to make. i am not saying that she is funny or not but it is getting on my last nerve that every time i turn on the television all i see is political advertisements. if i want to see and hear the negative remarks that these candidates have to say about each other i will when i choose to. another thing, i don't believe it is right for the wealthy, such as actors and musicians to get involved to try and influence the average American. this is not Hollywood.

Posted by: blackteshirts | March 2, 2008 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Put Ron Paul on Saturday Night Live!!! Vote Ron Paul 2008!!! Wake Up America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Chiefs129 | March 2, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

OK FIRST OF ALL I'M NOT A CLINTON FAN AT ALL. NOW OBAMA I CAN GO ALL THE WAY FOR HIM RIGHT NOW ! I DON'T THINK THAT OR BEAUITFUL COUNTY IS READY TO BE RUN BE A WOMAN AND IS A WOMAN EVEN ALLOWED TO RUN !!! I TOHOUGHT IN THE BIBLE IT STATES THAT A MAN IS IN CHARGE OF THE HOUSE HOLD THAT SHOULD GO FOR THE USA AS WELL ! I JUST DON'T THUINK WERE READY FOR THIS ! I THINK EVERONE SHOULD GIVE OBAMA A CHANCE AT LEAST HIS A CHRISTIAN AND HE DOES NOT BELIVE IN SAME SEX MARRIAGES !!! SO AS OF NOW HE NUMBER 1 IN MY BOOK !!!!!!! SORRY IF YOU'LL DON'T LIKE THIS BUT I ITS FREEDOM OF SPEECH !!!!!

Posted by: nanafreeman61 | March 2, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Hillary appearance on SNL was a positive for her that couldn't have hurt her campaign. It has always helped in the past when Hillary relaxes & shows some of her real self.

Posted by: chriszick | March 2, 2008 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Gloria Steinem at a Clinton rally in Texas:

"Suppose John McCain had been Joan McCain and Joan McCain had got captured, shot down and been a POW for eight years. [The media would ask], 'What did you do wrong to get captured? What terrible things did you do while you were there as a captive for eight years?'" Steinem said, to laughter from the audience.

McCain was, in fact, a prisoner of war for around five-and-a-half years, during which time he was tortured repeatedly. Referring to his time in captivity, Steinem said with bewilderment, "I mean, hello? This is supposed to be a qualification to be president? I don't think so."

Steinem's broader argument was that the media and the political world are too admiring of militarism in all its guises.

"I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn't been trained to kill anybody. And she probably didn't even play war games as a kid. It's a great relief from Bush in his jump suit and from Kerry saluting."

To the Observer, Steinem insisted that "from George Washington to Jack Kennedy and PT-109 we have behaved as if killing people is a qualification for ruling people."

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Her presence on SNL did not have any effect
on my conviction that Obama is the best candidate this election year and in a very
long time. The difference that it may have had was to spoil SNL. Last week when they did the skit about the CNN debate, I laughed. I thought it was funny, but last night I despised it. Yesterday it felt to me it was a political propaganda on Senator Clinton. I find ironic that Senator Clinton has repeatedly many times said that "She is vetted, she is been tested", but she can not even handle the media.
She has insinuated that they discriminate her base on her gender, and blames the media on her lack of campaign success.
I disagree. The media is conducting itself as usual. But what I think is that she may really have to deal with these types of gender issues in contries where women are regarded very low, and I don't see her
handling the situation effectively.

Posted by: pascuala_espinoza | March 2, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Plain and simple, a Liberal Facist.

Posted by: devil_dog4_life | March 2, 2008 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Not making me a Hillary-lover:

The Dallas Morning News gets hold of Clinton caucus "training materials," in which supporters are instructed to fight for procedural control of caucuses.

The materials say in part, "DO NOT allow the supporter of another candidate to serve in leadership roles."

It goes on to say, "If our supporters are outnumbered, ask the Temporary Chair if one of our supporters can serve as the Secretary, in the interest of fairness.

"The control of the sign-in sheets and the announcement of the delegates allotted to each candidate are the critical functions of the Chair and Secretary. This is why it is so important that Hillary supporters hold these positions."

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

apelbaum wrote:
Dear maj, everybody, just everybody, who wants the end of war mongering policies, is obliged right now to become Hillary's hater. This woman , pertinent to her own ungrounded ambitions, is running the future democratic nominee out of finances and strength, diminishing the chances of democratic victory in November. This woman is not the worst enemy of anybody and everybody who wants democratic victory; and she should be treated correspondingly!
--------------------

oh dear! Pastor Hagee's church must have just let out.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

"Not only that, Obama at one point defended Slumlords as an attorney in Chicago"

===========================

Proven false weeks ago.
Next?

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 5:52 PM | Report abuse

-- IMPORTANT --

- When the Emergency Phone Rings at 3am -

Hillary Rodham Clinton is FAR more trustworthy than Barack Hussein Obama!

The ONLY reason WHY Hillary Clinton voted to go to war with Iraq is because President George Bush clearly said that he had RELIABLE sources telling him that Saddam Hussein had NUCLEAR WEAPONS that were ready to be used in acts of terrorism against the United States and its allies!

ANYONE who voted NOT to go to war against Iraq under those circumstances should be considered a TRAITOR to the United States, because NOTHING is worth the risk of having our people or allies have NUCLEAR WEAPONS used against them!!!

Barack Hussein Obama often dresses up in Muslim outfits when he visits the Middle East. And yes, his middle name IS "Hussein."

It kind of makes you wonder if those could have been reasons "why" Barack Obama would have irresponsibly voted "against" the war in Iraq, despite the FACT that President Bush made it clear that his reliable sources indicated Saddam Hussein was doing all that he could to develop nuclear weapons, which obviously would have been used against the United States and its allies.

Bottom Line:

* Anyone who votes AGAINST going to war when reliable sources say that a terrorist dictator probably has NUCLEAR WEAPONS is NOT someone that should be leading the United States!

In other words, Barack Hussein Obama should NOT be leading the United States!

* Hillary Clinton is a democrat who obviously didn't want to go to war in Iraq, but when the President made it clear that reliable sources said Saddam Hussein had access to nuclear weapons, Clinton didn't take any risks; she voted to put Saddam Hussein out of commision, because she cared about what was best for the American people!

Hillary Rodham Clinton doesn't want ANY room for risk! Barack Hussein Obama IS willing to take careless risks with nuclear weapons being in the hands of people in Iraq or other terrorist countries!

We would NOT feel safe with Barack Hussein Obama as the President of the United States.

Hillary Clinton ISN'T willing to take those risks with nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists!

That's why Hillary Rodham Clinton is much more skilled at answering an emergency phone at 3am than Barack Hussein Obama.

Posted by: michaelzoran | March 2, 2008 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Dear maj, everybody, just everybody, who wants the end of war mongering policies, is obliged right now to become Hillary's hater. This woman , pertinent to her own ungrounded ambitions, is running the future democratic nominee out of finances and strength, diminishing the chances of democratic victory in November. This woman is not the worst enemy of anybody and everybody who wants democratic victory; and she should be treated correspondingly!

Posted by: aepelbaum | March 2, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Wpost4112; et al.

rjclay pretty much plagiarized the outline of his comments of "You Might Be An Idiot!..." from a comic routine by Jeff Foxworthy.

Foxworthy's "You might be a redneck" jokes can be rather amusing, but rjclay's remarks on Obama were not.

Meanwhile, to add to my previous post, I must agree with several other people that 'The Obama Files' portion of SNL was simply awful.

I'm a fan of satire and comedy, but that 'cartoon' (if you can call it that) was not funny, and made me and my partner cringe. For us, it wasn't about race (for those ready to pounce on my post), but just painful and distasteful to watch.

After watching all of SNL last night (my mistake), I wondered if maybe their writers went on strike for that particular show, as it was - in its totality - a bust.

That, along with Ms. Clinton's blatant attempt to humanize herself, makes it likely that I'll probably not make an effort to watch SNL again. It's just not funny.

Posted by: CaptainJohn2525 | March 2, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Everyone in the US and especially those posting negative comments against Hillary need to STOP!!! Regardless of what Obama is trying to "SAY" because I can never see him "doing" something is that she has EXPERIENCE!!! Not only that, Obama at one point defended Slumlords as an attorney in Chicago. Now out of nowhere all you Obama supporters expect him to completely change 360 degrees and defend the poor or even the Middle-Class. Give me a break. Hillary's SNL skit was exactly that, a skit that portrayed her as a REAL person with a sense of humor, therefore, why are you all making more of that than it is.

Posted by: jeri42000 | March 2, 2008 5:48 PM | Report abuse

It didn't change my view of her as a candiate. However, it did take me back to right before New Hampshire when I had been rooting for her to win, instead of Obama. I was an Edwards supporter at the time, and knew that the #1 and #2 spots would be occupied by Hillary and Obama. Coming out of Iowa, the media was falling all over itself over Obama. I thought that if Clinton won NH, the playing field would be level. She won NH, and then the Democratic race turned for the worse. Bill Clinton made some unfortunate remarks about Obama that absolutely turned me off. To the point that I jumped ship to Obama's campaign, spending my time, energy and money to "defend" Obama. I wish I had seen more of the Hillary on SNL on the campaign trail since NH. I bet it would have been a great competition with Obama we would all have enjoyed, regardless of the outcome.

Posted by: cile92 | March 2, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

In Austin, HRC's campaign is robo-calling, only - recorded messages from three Clintons.

BHO's campaign has live humans, who are calling from the tel directory. They ask if one is voting for BHO, and politely thank one for the time if one says "no". If one answers "yes", the volunteer runs through where to vote, how to caucus, and asks whether the voter would walk the neighborhood for BHO.

There is more money and there are more volunteers in Austin for BHO, rather clearly.

I am interested in how this plays out across TX and OH. "Leichtman"? Judge Crater? Bobby W-C?

This advantage, if repeated, is worth more votes than a SNL appearance.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 2, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

I didn't watch it. Didn't watch Obama either when he was on SNL. or Leno or Ellen. I might watch these candidates if they came onto the Colbert Report of Jon Stewart because throw two hosts can throw good curveballs that require the candidate to think, respond and relate more spontaneously.

Unless the candidates are outstandingly good or bad on these comedy and late night talk shows, it wouldn't influence my vote.
I can get enough information from watching them while their campaigning. I don't need to have a beer with them or know their favorite color. I just want to know that they can articulate their message, work well with other people and get things done.

Posted by: Anadromous2 | March 2, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton has already hinted that she is not going to concede after 3/4/08, no matter what. I am sure that supporters of Obama in NY and Howard Dean as DNC chairman should start the preparation for the emergency re-election of fully ineffective, pertinent to her permanently running presidential campaign, senator of NY-Hillary Clinton. This wonam doesn't want to admit the obvious defeat and running the future democratic nominee out of his strength and finances, diminishing democratic party's chances to win in November. DNC and its chairman duty is to protect the party from such damage. NY senator-Hillary Clinton should be immediately recalled, therefore, and re-election should start.

Posted by: aepelbaum | March 2, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was hilarious and for her to be able to face her mockery and even join in shows she is the shiznec. The actor who was portraying obama made me laugh so hard. good luck to both parties but more luck to hilary

Posted by: jecuboy | March 2, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

I liked the skit in many regards, although they did go overboard on trying to make Obama look dumb for comic effect - that part was a little too much. I think the main point is that the press has been ridiculously biased pro-Obama, and anti-Hillary. If you watched the original debate, the skit had some great parallels, with Hillary getting many of the tough questions, and Obama just following up with the equivalent of "yeah, that sounds good". In the original debate Obama looked like an amateur next to Hillary. She is obviously more intelligent, and puts much more detail and insight into her answers (based on the debate, not the SNL skit).

Obama is just peddling "change" for the sake of change - which is a good political stance to take after the history of Bush. I think Obama is dangerous though because he doesn't seem to have any depth of insight, and no real plan for what he would actually do outside of "change things". He wavers on so many issues, and seems a master of doublespeak. He "opposed the war in Iraq" but when asked about Afghanistan said he would defend our country with whatever means necessary. Obama will cater to the strongest public opinion, just like Bush answered the bloodthirsty call of the American public when we entered Iraq. Obama isn't any stronger or any different - heck he couldn't even fully denounce Farakhan because he didn't want to alienate that segment of votes. Everyone acts like they forget how it was after 9/11, but I remember a public that wanted a name and a face put on terrorism, and they wanted a tangible war we could fight. I don't agree with the war now, but I do remember back then that I was like so many other people who wanted it to happen, just so we could feel safe. Don't elect Obama just because you hate Bush. Put someone in the position who knows what they are doing. This isn't an entry-level position, it's the presidency.

Posted by: terribellj | March 2, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Obama cultist are know trying stop SNL from making fun of Obama.

Truly Truly Pathetic, moronic, racist, cult like, and sexist.

When you get made fun of on SNL it is not supposed to be flattering OK.

The press does not like Hillary because the talking heads are by and large stupid males and Hillary reminds them of that fact everyday.

Posted by: mul | March 2, 2008 5:44 PM | Report abuse

wpost14112 wrote:
"It always puzzles me why Hillary surrounds herself with men who victimize women. Beginning with her husband and now Jack Nicholson.

How this empowers Hillary, I see. How this empowers other women I fail to see."

I agree completely. She has done nothing to move women's rights forward in this country, except to get us talking about whether or not we can accept the idea of having a woman in the White House. I think we can. She just isn't the right woman.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

I absolutely loved Hillary's intro to SNL. Show's she's interested in the lighter side of life. Who really cares if it'll affect the election, she was having fun and you could see that she genuinely enjoyed herself. Wouldn't we all like the opportunity to laugh at ourselves?

And after all, if the truth be known,...the only good thing to EVER come out of Texas is an empty bus, so disregard their comments.

Posted by: artistforsaleorrent | March 2, 2008 5:42 PM | Report abuse

I'm an African female living in the UK and I love Bill and Hillary Clinton,Bill has been a friend of the Africans and Hillary has ALWAYS fought/spoke for the good of common people right from when she was in school-imgine that.
I beleive she's a born leader and will retore America's credibility.
Obama has charissma, yes, but he only talks-he has never been tested and he is a politician-he knows what the people want to hear.Hillary has admitted her mistakes many times and has always been direct about her polices but Obama only gives motivational talks..motivation to do what..we need to know how he can bring those things through for the ordinary American.
If were an American I'll vote for Clinton.
I pray she gets the nomination and then go on to win.

Posted by: tolmol | March 2, 2008 5:40 PM | Report abuse

In response to the last part of the comment from RICHARDRAPI.
Did you ever here the saying (you catch more flies with honey then vinegar?)

Posted by: malomw | March 2, 2008 5:39 PM | Report abuse

It always puzzles me why Hillary surrounds herself with men who victimize women. Beginning with her husband and now Jack Nicholson.

How this empowers Hillary, I see. How this empowers other women I fail to see.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Facinating comments from most everyone here.
I thought I would've been the first/only one to remember Nixon's "Sock it to me!" mugg on "Laugh-In" so many years ago.
That's one of the interesting things about HRC's TV shot last night.
SNL continues in its decline as a factor in American TV folklore.
When Nixon made his appearance, L-I was at the top of its game, and the viewing public was not only laughably stunned, they were agog by what they'd seen in numbers so large that Nielson's audience share rating for that show would've put L-I's numbers up and off the chart.

So this won't affect the Tues.Primary much, if at all. Except for the headline that I could see HRC's bit here on the internet, I don't watch SNL anymore.
Does anyone here know what kind of audience share SNL still commands? It seems to me that the show as it has become should be relegated to some NYC cable-access channel.

Begging your pardon Lorne. Your show's genuine Golden Years are a part of history, and until you cultivate a more capable staff of writers/performers who can once again stun the American viewing audience, you ought to "pass the torch" gracefully, and get the Golden Years of SNL into syndication on a few stations nationally. There are lots of people out there who have seen but glimpses of SNL when it was hysterically funny.

This is something Mrs. Clinton will have to do within the next couple of days too: "pass the torch."

If we are to judge HRC's ability to be an effective leader of the Nation, everyone really ought to take a look at how she and her staff pretty much gave her nomination away with both hands. The time can be measured in a couple of months between the day she declared her nomination to be "inevitable," and what is likely to happen by sunrise next Wednesday morning. She may decide to hang on until Pennsylvania, but by then it'll be all over but the shouting.

For the record, I'm a registered Republican who did not vote (twice) for the present administration. I knew George was the wrong guy back in 2000, and I said so to anyone who would listen. I do believe Gore was robbed of the Presidency, but that too is an item in the history books.

For this new term, I wanted to see Christoper Dodd as the Democratic nominee. But it seems that fate and the will of an attentive American public wants someone like Barack Obama. If I couldn't have Dodd, Obama should do just fine. A good leader creates a vision, then puts the right people in the right places to try to make it happen. A good leader also asks something of a Nation's people. Sure, we all know JFK said that, but it's because he said it with such style and class. By contrast, notice how "W" never asked anything of the American People? He merely unleashed a bunch of nitwits, and we have what we have now. Perhaps it's more accurate to say that the guy's pulling his strings are the ones who unleashed the nitwits. Their names are well known.

I only hope that Obama does not, as one of the other commentators here wisely mentioned, truly believe he's going to alter the landscape of Washington D.C. politics as Bill Clinton may have thought he might have.
If Bill thought that, his problems began by having too many younglings with snotty attitudes such as Dee Dee Myers as part of his initial starting line-up.

Obama would be wise to bring the wealth of deeply experienced, level-headed people such as Dodd, Joe Biden, and the handful of other true "elected servants of the people" into his circle, so he can field a team of United States leaders that can begin to first clean up the wreckage left behind by "W," next re-establish our Country's name as an honest broker in world affairs, and third to work with rolled-up sleeves to open the books for new business for America, both at home and abroad.

There's a lot of work to be done, and WHOEVER gets elected this November better understand that they're not going to inherit some garden party atmosphere.

"W" took a country in relatively good shape and figuratively destroyed it all while a cowboy-fiddle version of Popeye music played on. Between the insipid music and the "fear" speeches as a political tool, it's about time for a change.
Governor Tarkin from Star Wars Episode-4 would have been proud of the "W" group.
It's too late for impeachment, but I'll bet there are a lot of people out there who would love to see many in the present administration tried as war criminals and for their utter arrangance in their trespasses against the letter and spirit of our nation's Constitution.

For all the folks out there who fear having a guy like Obama at the helm, I can tell you that if this guy takes what might be his new job seriously, there won't be time for fooling around; like trying out ANYONE, even within his campaign group, at a job they're not 100% ready to deal with. This is one time a newly elected candidate won't have the luxury of handing out "gift appointments" to those who served him/her well during the campaign days.

I respect John McCain, but he'll do better as one who assists the new administration with his Support, rather than think he'll keep the White House flying the GOP flag out in the back yard. He's not going to win this election, and that's about it.

Anyway, the most HRC can hope to get out of the SNL bit is the appearance of the start of a graceful exit from the contest. It was "not good enough," and far too late to influence present events.

Finally, a word about the Media. For those who think broadcast news is wonderfully entertaining with all its present glitter, may I suggest you rent a copy of the film "Network."
The only part that wasn't a dead-on accurate prediction was the Black Pantherish group that found its way into programming.
Everything else, most notably "Sybil the Soothsayer," was chillingly on target, to say nothing of the performances of Ned Beatty, Robert Duvall and many others.

In fact, here's a suggestion: If you're watching broadcast news coverage over the next few days, soak it all in. Then rent "Network," and the film will make more of an impression. As always, the book-version by Paddy Chaefsky was probably better!

Posted by: beejar | March 2, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

The SNL skit was very funny! She is showing she is human and has a funny bone. Hilary Clinton is a necessity in the White House for Americans and the nation. All the republican's and so called democrats who voted for the Bush's are headed down a same path of more trouble. The young people are talking about (we want change and new blood) in the White House. Think about those words if you elect someone who denies their heritage of being a muslim and when it affects his campaign, he's a non-defined religion. Hillary Clinton is a women, a former first lady and has a positive track record. Who could ask for a better combination in the White House. Bill may have stumbled, but he did turn our economy around and increased job's for the American people. If you have a man like Bill backing our future president wouldn't you assume our economy would turn back to the positive and our boys would come home alive and safe from a war. We would also not have to worry about a foreigner watching the interest of the AMERICAN PEOPLE!

When you think about your so-called new blood, think about denying who you are and your way of life.

Posted by: ksather222 | March 2, 2008 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Are you kidding me or what! Obama, an idiot airhead? Hilary, the balls to recapture the White House? Give me a break! If you'll recall the debate preceding this last one in Ohio, Hilary was gushing all over Obama. By the end of the debate she was so thrilled and honored to be on the same stage as the man. I thought she was about to get up and kiss him right on the mouth. A couple of days later, she was up in arms because he dared to attack her on her health care plan and brought up her flip flopping on her stand on NAFTA. "Enough of the speeches " she said, throwing down the gloves. "Let's have a real debate. I'll see you in Ohio." But when they meet in Ohio, it's another love fest. What happened to all the tough talk? Is this the kind of President we want? Someone who can talk a good fight, but when she comes face to face with her adversary, who may be the president of Iran,China,Russia etc. she backs down and plays nice? That's not what I want from MY President!

Posted by: RICHARDRAPL | March 2, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Has anyone seen the video Rob Reiner did with Jack Ncholson endorsing Hillary? It's on You tube. It is really fun. Even if you don't support Hillary, you'll enjoy it.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=tsweXFpfa28

Posted by: badger3 | March 2, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

ANYBODY but BILLARY!

Posted by: retroag70 | March 2, 2008 5:21 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is a worn out cog of the DC political machine. I have nothing against a woman in the White House - just NOT this one. Damaged goods? Political baggage? A meddling husband? If you want to vote into office an instant soap opera, go for it. She's one of the last people who will actually affect any change - she staunchly represents the very self-interests she purportedly chastises; in short, an utter hypocrite (but then most politicians are at some point).

As for Obama, he wins the charisma contest hands-down over Hillary. He has all that "vibe" that makes those with "change on the brains" attractive, yet I concur with many here that he's woefully unprepared for office. He'd likely have to get his own version of Dick Cheney to mentor (i.e., control) his actions in order to wallow through.

Bottom line, if anyone really believes that "change" is going to happen in DC from either political party, I've got the deed to the Brooklyn Bridge and I'm taking bids. Let's get realistic...

Posted by: indyjnz | March 2, 2008 5:19 PM | Report abuse

To answer the question, based on my previous post, Clinton's appearance showed me how low she is willing to stoop to continue the Clinton dynasty. Shameless. No, it did not change my opinion about her, but it did reinforce my existing opinion. Earlier in the week, she was quoted as saying, "Shame on you, Barack Obama!" Well, I say, "Shame on you, Hillary Clinton!"

I don't know if her appearance will influence voters in TX and OH - the proliferation and popularity of reality TV shows has me questioning the ability of most Americans to see through the BS. Unfortunately, this is probably just the boost she needed to increase her campaign's ratings, but then I am a cynic who is daring to believe in the hope of change presented by the Obama campaign.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was "president" before I don't think we need her again.
Obama is not what the country needs right now either.
I work in an industry which enables me to hear "people choices" over 100 a day. Neither candidate is wanted in this area of Texas.
In my opinion I think Hillary thinks too highly of herself to be admired by the public. On the SNL what I found to be funny was the comedian who portrayed Hillary. To leave her campaign trail to go on a show such as SNL was irresponsible to the public. I think as a president she would seek to be in the limelight as much as she could. I do not think other countries would take her seriously just as the USA doesn't.

Posted by: monkeydoboofoo | March 2, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Great Laugh by Amy...

Are shows such as "Saturday Night Live" helpful to candidates?


http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1818

.

Posted by: PollM | March 2, 2008 5:17 PM | Report abuse

oh please. Hilary is a -loser.- Not only does she have stupid Bill Clinton by her, she's unable to get many votes for herself. Maybe she should focus on keeping her man at home before she focuses on running the country. This skit was unfunny. And SNL really needs to stop being so deprecating to obama. He's a great guy and an amazing speaker.

And we were "looked up to" in the Clinton era because there was nothing going on. We didn't have a september 11 in the clinton era. We didn't have to go fight a war to bring freedom to others. So that's ridiculous.

She can have a sense of humor all she wants. Perhaps her calling is in TV and not running the nation. She can't handle it.

Posted by: trumpet_leader_chs | March 2, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

"Oh - and not to play dirty - but to those who rag on Hill - see NYT today - REZKO stuff. Those of us in Chicago - even those like me who voted for Barack Obama for senator find his denials re REZKO to be hollow and wonder what was Barack thinking when he defended the man and seemed to do some shady deals with the man and his wife.

REZKO is slime - and it was known by all including BO for sure - so why did BO get in the sandbox with him? I honestly can not figure it out = cause I know his civil rights law firm did some mighty fine work."


================

More bother and blow.

Chicago papers have combed through this Rezco biz for years and found nothing.

And it's nothing compared to the lawsuit Hillary and Bill are facing with their fund-raiser.

If this is all you've "got" on Barack, he's pure as driven snow compared to the Clintons.

Not, as you say, to play dirty.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Clinton is the only one I'd be proud to call my president.
She's a woman who is a tested fighter, cool, calm and collected under pressure, truly cares and will work hard for us, will take her job seriously, will want to prove those against her wrong.
Sen. Obama is young, naive, inexperienced, but, in 8 years he will be our best choice.
I agree 100% with the post of beverly.morisset of March 2, 2008, 1:05 pm.

Posted by: btzoumas | March 2, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

"I wish everyone would stop thinking of Obama as the 'second coming', its VERY annoying."
=======================

The only thing more annoying are people claiming that everyone thinks of Obama as the second coming.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 5:11 PM | Report abuse

HOPE is in the hearts of supporters of all the candidates - no-one owns it. CHANGING Washington is what every candidate plans to do and what all voters want and expect -no-one owns it. ELOQUENCE and CHARISMA are gifts but require work to translate plans into accomplishments. Senator Obama has a wonderful future; but first, please: learn, build, experience and, perhaps most of all, develop the wisdom to know what you can accomplish and how . . . just as Senator Clinton has done. America is blessed to have a potential 16 years of excellent leadership ahead and, as qualified Republican candidates emerge, that would enrich us even more. In the meantime - GO HILLARY!

Posted by: rcomko | March 2, 2008 5:10 PM | Report abuse

As a New York native and constituent of Clinton's, I am not surprised to see her face the same struggle she did in this state in her bid to become senator. She has won many people over in my state, notably in Upstate New York, where we have struggled for the attention Sen. Clinton at long last gave us. She has consistently battled to develop new economies even in my native Finger Lakes. She has won over many conservatives here, I'm sorry she has not yet managed to do that nationwide. She only needs a chance to prove herself; I'm afraid a successful SNL opener is not enough to do that.

Posted by: marystone11 | March 2, 2008 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is the symbol of change : simply look at her life and her accomplishments and how often she has faced challenges with immense courage and determination. And to see her find a sense of humor in such a tough race is so much the credit for her. So glad she came to SNL. She is a well recognized and repected person on the international level and lets face it: When the Clintons were in power, the world looked up to us,the world respected us and our economy and dollar were strong. America was a "reference" of a "dream come true" and the "land of opportunity" : So I have a dream : HRC for President!

She is the best vehicle against fundamentalism and the best symbol for future peace and prosperity : Her election will create a wave of hope in the middle east and in particular for woman in the middle east. Hillary symbolizes the true forces of change that bases its source on a solid foundation :a wife, a mother, a professional, a politician, a first lady and soon a President.I hope people realize the positive impact she would have on this coutnry and on the world. Go Hillary and may you win!

Posted by: shirazdreams | March 2, 2008 5:07 PM | Report abuse

uziel18,

Nice over-view. pretty much agree. Obama fatigue is peaking I think.
Have you factored in weather? Imo, forecasted nasty weather in Ohio is not good for Hillary top demographics (senior citizens, rural poor).

Can you explain what "Yahoo Buzz" means, how quantified? Thanks.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Upon retrospect of themselves I think they media has turned on Obama in the last fews days. Perhaps it will make a difference.

Posted by: unclebraddah | March 2, 2008 5:06 PM | Report abuse

I believed this to be a good light-hearted skit to show Sen. Clinton has a sense of humor with all that gets said about her. It is true that Obama gets handled with kid gloves and she can do no right when she really does. I for one do not want a President that has been coddled all through the elections only to find that when the going gets tough no one is there to hold his hand. Sen. Clinton has seen the tough times and is stronger for it. Way to go Sen. Clinton for doing SNL. Great job!

Posted by: melissa.jones40 | March 2, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Hillary as always was awesome on SNL...I am voting for Hillary as she is the only candidate with the heart and soul and knowlege to really run this country effectively where ALL Americans will prosper...I urge All Voters to check out Hillary and Barracks Resumes on Wikkipedia,you will be shocked by the puny resume of Obama...Also check out the new website obamatruth.org
Please vote for Hillary and remember she will easily knock the socks off of McCain in the General Election,this is the year of the Democrats...

Posted by: kathyrogers11 | March 2, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Oh - and not to play dirty - but to those who rag on Hill - see NYT today - REZKO stuff. Those of us in Chicago - even those like me who voted for Barack Obama for senator find his denials re REZKO to be hollow and wonder what was Barack thinking when he defended the man and seemed to do some shady deals with the man and his wife.

REZKO is slime - and it was known by all including BO for sure - so why did BO get in the sandbox with him? I honestly can not figure it out = cause I know his civil rights law firm did some mighty fine work.

Posted by: uziel18 | March 2, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

I thought the skit was great. It shows that Hillary does have sense of humor and she can laugh at herself. That's good, makes her approachable.

Posted by: SPIRITOFTEXAS | March 2, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Hillary as always was awesome on SNL...I am voting for Hillary as she is the only candidate with the heart and soul and knowlege to really run this country effectively where ALL Americans will prosper...I urge All Voters to check out Hillary and Barracks Resumes on Wikkipedia,you will be shocked by the puny resume of Obama...Also check out the new website obamatruth.org
Please vote for Hillary and remember she will easily knock the socks off of McCain in the General Election,this is the year of the Democrats...

Posted by: kathyrogers11 | March 2, 2008 5:02 PM | Report abuse

If you want to read about what is happening to the Democrat party and what a win for Hillary or Barack really means, beyond the competition aspect,
this ia an excellent analysis:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080317/berman

Also check out "Postcards from Ohio" for a brutally frank look at some Ohio voters.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I thought the skit was funny and I have always liked Hillary so nothing changes for me. She always had my vote and always will. And on a side note, I wish everyone would stop thinking of Obama as the 'second coming', its VERY annoying.

Posted by: amara50 | March 2, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

OH - and re trending in polls - I think with a one day reporting lag - BO hit his high SAT - and its down from here for a while - unless something big happens Monday. Tuesday is shaping up as Hill by 2% in Ohio (51-49) and a statistical tie in the VOTE in Texas (egads who gets the .0111% lead?) - RI to Hill and VT to BO

yahoo buzz is the best for this type of tracking with buzz - sorry to plug a different site: start - yahoo news -then US then Elections - then Yahoo billboard buzz - the % nationwide then by Ohio and by Tx by clicking on the states. As I read it - non scientific - since last Wed the end numbers sort of lean in support of my supposition but not yet support it. Will need to await the MON numbers

Will be close - I figure the factors working for HIll to get an extra percent or two this time :
1. Some fatigue for BO (yes already)
2. Some news cycles that went the way of HIll vs BO
3.The undecided in most polls (part of the new Keith factor) is LARGE say 10% still - and I think MORE of that - say 7 of 10 will in this case break for HILL. I sugget for consideration it that say 2 in 10 of the 10 undecideds - will give a vote for HILL to not kill the race prematurely - that vs the usual break 50-50 in a close race could make it 70-30 of the undecideds as this is not a final vote (or is that just a HILL fan hoping?)

Hang in for the ride and vote DEM no matter what this time - IMO

Posted by: uziel18 | March 2, 2008 4:59 PM | Report abuse

"I'm sure the Obama mania is STAGED!"

You obviously weren't in Iowa for the Jefferson/Jackson days... I was there as an Edwards supporter, and we all pretty much agreed, if you could bottle that Obama unthusiasm, you could sell it.

You can't fake something like that, as a former outsider who watched it from another camp, I can only say, it isn't fake, it is contagious.

PS You might be an idiot;
if you think the kind of K-Street experience DC has offered up for the past ten years somehow qualifies Hillary to be our president.

SOme "experience" isn't good, and being a Washington insider fits neatly in that category this time around.

Posted by: JEP7 | March 2, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Uh, didn't Bill appear on SNL when he was running for president? Perhaps that appearance helped him garner a bit of the youth vote---I believe he played saxaphone on the show. I forget, is that where he was asked re: boxer or briefs?---what I do recall is that my friend and I were flabbergasted that someone running for president could be attractive enough for us to realize we'd ...uh...do him. (though that wasn't the word we used). I mean, we sure didn't think of Jimmy Carter, Ronnie or George Sr. in those terms AT ALL.

Alas, that was 16 years ago, when Bill and Hill were the age Obama is now, and though that probably did help Bill out--and despite the absurd Monica based impeachment, he's still my favorite of those who've been elected during my lifetime (for what that's worth)--- but even then, my friends and I rarely watched SNL anymore (i'm old enough to remember when it first appeared as cutting edge on TV with Gilda and Jane and Belushi and Chevy, et al, BTW).

I didn't watch the show, haven't seen any of the skits you reference, but upon seeing the little link when I logged onto AOL, I was pretty amazed that Hillary played a card that worked for BIll many years ago, when the country and its youth, the media and politicians in general were quite different.

Posted by: dorfk | March 2, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

JEP7 wrote:
"The Clintons represent their own ambition much more than the aspirations of the new, young and growing Democratic Party. That is reason enough to find an alternative. That we have such a young, dynamic, and different kind of candidate in Barrack Obama makes it that much easier. Obama alone, in all his splendid quality, is worth supporting, but Hillary and Bill's ambition just makes it so much easier to do that."

Yep, I agree. You make excellent points throughout your post, but this one sums it up. Her considering legal measures against the Democratic Party in the midwest and in Texas is further proof of this. The Clintons are all about the Clintons - not the party, not America.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

I am under 45 (24 to be exact), and I found the SNL skit to be very amusing. I admit, I don't watch SNL very often, I prefer Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert and I'm usually asleep by 12:30 on a Saturday night but I stayed up especially last night because I heard HRC was to be on SNL. The skit was amusing and I liked that SNL ridiculed BOTH Clinton and Obama. But, of course, the Obama supporters have to play the race card AGAIN(why is portraying Obama as stupid considered racist?? Makes no sense to me. I never knew that the stereotypical black man was stupid...). Not to mention that the skit was right on - of course the Obama supporters don't see that - the media has been so biased in favor of Obama, it's disgusting. What happened to objective journalism? All SNL is doing is portraying (through hyperbole and satire) what's been true all along. Hillary DOES get the harder questions in the debates and Obama gets fawned over. He is so vague in all of his answers (except for perhaps healthcare) that it amazes me that rational, intelligent people are supporting him. That's how important charisma is in a campaign. Look where it got Germany.

Posted by: tarawheat06 | March 2, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

It is interesting on how "unfair" the media is to HRC. I'm watching the rebroadcast of the debate and it is, well fair. It is great to see so many of you have bought into the BS...

Posted by: rhinohide | March 2, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Very similar to when her husband played the saxaphone. It helped him a lot.

Posted by: badger3 | March 2, 2008 4:54 PM | Report abuse

I did a research of the last week's press (including TV) coverage and found that it is disproportionately biased but *against* Obama. Clinton got about 79% vs 21% of press coverage, and every dirty little line of attack, every false rumor that she or her camp have thrown on Obama got multiplied and repeated over and over in the press and on national TV.
I think the "chicken dirt" attack strategy of Clinton PR machinery works, and media is happily playing along, while in the same time not challenging her completely unjustified cries of a "media bias".

Posted by: penroseandrea | March 2, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

No impact. I will still throw myself into the Potomac River should she be the nominee.

Posted by: ehealy | March 2, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Yes, coverage of the primaries has been tainted by prejudice of various kinds from people of all idealogies--even people that consider themselves "openminded and fair." Yet, because a white lady and a black guy are serious, sincere and possible contenders for POTUS, I am led to believe that we, as a society, are inching away toward the most blantant acts of prejudice. We are attempting to see people for their merits rather than the labels placed on them.

We may never get away from certain knee-jerk reations (some readers of this message may read into the fact that I mentioned the white lady before the black guy; this would still be true if I mentioned the black guy first), but this election shows that we are trying to respect the first and greatest idea of the Declaration of Independence--that all (wo)men are created equal. I hope this respect sticks past 2009.

Posted by: al2509 | March 2, 2008 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Most astonishing endorsement for Barack I've seen on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGW38Zy4bJo

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

1. The skit was funny
2. Hill being there in person was a kick
3. It should win her a few votes from the undecided - where every vote counts
4. The Obama Files was hilarious - I am surprised NBC had the balls to put it on. Those objecting - the few - should ask - When was the last time you saw Obama together with Jesse or Al?
5. The show won - lots of buzz and I 4 one watched the entire show - first time in say 5 years - and thought most of it was funny - again for the first time in 5 years - and will watch again
6. Please - please - tell your buddy KO over at MSNBC that I love his hits on Bushy but that his overt childish favoritism for Obama discredits him - his network - and diminishes the punch of his great Statements

PS
I will vote for Obama if HILL loses the nod for DEM candidate - but I do think he is not ready for prime time. IMO that is his main shortcoming - as he is a fast learner - just look at how fast he learned from HILL to be a regular good old fashione politician.

Good Health to all who are fair

Posted by: uziel18 | March 2, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

LOVED IT !!!!!!!
By Hillary appearing on SNL I think it showed just how much she actually enjoyed doing what she does! I havent seen her smile that much since before her campaign began!
Besides, if Obama can do it, why cant she??
You Rock Hillary and YOU GOT MY VOTE!!

Posted by: marciet33 | March 2, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I agree with previous posters that the above clip is only a fraction of what took place last night and that we need to consider the twisted portrayal of Obama and, most of all, the twisted cartoon. The endorsement (let's face it, it was an unabashed endorsement) of Clinton did not consist solely of this one clip, but three: the debate skit, her statement, and the anti-Obama cartoon. Context is everything.

The fact that Clinton was associated with the show on a night when such a horribly distorted portrayal of her opponent was displayed (by both the cartoon and the horrible impersonation) shows just as much lack of responsibility on her part as McCain showed in allowing Bill Cunningham's remarks to be made before his appearance.

Claim all you want that you did not know it was going to take place, but it is your responsibility as the head of that campaign to communicate your expectations of those who speak on your behalf. At least McCain had the guts to apologize for it after the fact, more than can be said for Clinton.

It is shameful that Clinton and SNL are playing the victim card and distorting the facts regarding the press coverage of these candidates. What about the relentless pursuit of "dirt" on Obama's supposedly secret Muslim past? Further, it has been reported that Clinton has only been given the first question in slightly more than half of the debates, so that point is moot. Give me a violin.

She has been playing the victim card since one of the early debates when all the men supposedly "attacked" her (hmmm, could that have been because she was the front runner and presumed nominee at the time?). Further, she has repeatedly implied her own victimization by Bill and the victimization of women in general as testaments to her own strength to fight the good fight. It isn't that these are not good points, but come on: she chose to stay with the guy knowing what a slimeball he is, and I can only assume that it was to propel her own ambitions. If she wants me to vote for her simply because she is a woman who has endured more struggles than the typical man, she will have to get to the nomination on her own, without riding the coattails of a man first. That is so Victorian era.

Furthermore, it is shameful that Obama has been put on the defensive about his Muslim name and the question of whether he has ever been a practicing Muslim. I understand the importance of the question for Middle East foreign policy, but Obama has said that he has never been a practicing Muslim. Enough said. But his critics keep on pushing the issue, as if he is trying to hide something, suggesting that their interest is driven more by paranoia than a concern for foreign policy. Since when is religious freedom in America exclusive of certain religions? The whole debate is an insult to Muslims in America.

Obama is being attacked for his Muslim name and his African heritage - but he is the only candidate who has not reduced himself to using the physical and/or cultural attributes of his adversaries to sell himself. Finally, do you hear him whining today about the attacks on his person last night? Nope. He just keeps focused on the task at hand, no unnecessary distractions, no drama. Talk about a class act. Think about that.

Posted by: artemis26 | March 2, 2008 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I personally never want to see somebody who could be our DPC on SNL. Politics these days are already as much a spectacle as the WWE, next thing you know were going to be seeing a Clinton on MTV, wait... This also makes her look desperate, she acts as if she doesn't get enough PR from CNN and NBC getting on Obama's A.S.S. every chance she gets. The presidency used to be sacred, now we have actors and comedians going for it. Sorry, but to me, she lost some R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

Posted by: blablablaa | March 2, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

1. The skit was funny
2. Hill being there in person was a kick
3. It should win her a few votes from the undecided - where every vote counts
4. The Obama Files was hilarious - I am surprised NBC had the balls to put it on. Those objecting - the few - should ask - When was the last time you saw Obama together with Jesse or Al?
5. The show won - lots of buzz and I 4 one watched the entire show - first time in say 5 years - and thought most of it was funny - again for the first time in 5 years - and will watch again
6. Please - please - tell your buddy KO over at MSNBC that I love his hits on Bushy but that his overt childish favoritism for Obama discredits him - his network - and diminishes the punch of his great Statements

PS
I will vote for Obama if HILL loses the nod for DEM candidate - but I do think he is not ready for prime time. IMO that is his main shortcoming - as he is a fast learner - just look at how fast he learned from HILL to be a regular good old fashione politician.

Good Health to all who are fair

Posted by: uziel18 | March 2, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

It will take more than one SNL skit to stop the Obama express from steamrolling right into office.

Maybe we need a Second City rebuttal?

Can't imagine that there would be Clinton partisans on SNL just because they LIVE IN NEW YORK CITY!

The real problem here is that the choice between Clinton and Obama is like picking between two very similar political creeds. So we must look at character to discern who we might support, much more than policy because they are actually so similar.

I won't belabor the here and now with all the trivial issues that are being used to separate Obama and Clinton.

But in essence, we are voting for two degrees on a political thermometer that are very close together, like choosing whether you prefer 70 degrees over 72 degrees for your room thermostat. And the parsing of that difference has reached an historic fever pitch, never have two people with such similar political bent been so drastically dissected, putting a lot of rhetorical and contrived real estate between their common ground for the sake of political advantage and media profits. The more division between them, the more compelled they are to spend their money advertising those subtle differences.

But there is one factor that every one of us should consider, one major difference that we all need to take into account when we make our choice. I think there is one very good and irrefutable reason to vote for Obama, with all else being equal.

You probably think I'm going after Hillary as the war enabler, which would certainly be worth considering. But I have always held the opinion that she took this politically unpopular tack because she is willing to represent her constituency, rather than her own self-will, as their elected Senator.

So while I agree with Obama that she was wrong to give Bush his power, I must commend her for representing the voters of her district, who for obvious reason wanted Saddam taken out as a threat to Israel and the whole middle east. I disagree with all of them, but I'm in Kansas and they are in New York.

No, it is not Hillary's war policy that tilts my scales in favor of Obama.

It is her blind ambition, particularly evident in her media-obscured failure to get behind John Kerry in the 2004 election. She and Bill were notably absent from that election scene, the media never mentioned it despite their very conspicuous absence from the process, and to be very honest about it, I think there can be only one reasonable explanation.

Bill and Hillary DID NOT WANT THE DEMOCRATS TO WIN IN 2004 because it would have scuttled her chances to run in 2008!

Hillary did not have the political capital to run in 2004, and if Kerry had been the "official" winner instead of the "actual" winner, that would have meant her chances of running and winning in in 2008 would have been dashed before they ever got started. It doesn't take a Sherlock Holmes to figure it out... the Clintons' absence from that campaign contributed to the end game that fell short.

Bill and Hillary could have made a huge difference in that outcome, if they had put even a particle of the effort she has managed this year with her own campaign, into getting ANY Democrat elected in 2004.

So I guess, all things considered, that is what inevitably turned me into an Obama supporter when John Edwards dropped out. (I have to say this, if Hillary had really been as mistreated by the media the way she now complains, the way Edwards actually was trivialized, Edwards would still be in this race. Hearing the Clintons complain about the media is absolutely laughable to anyone who watched the concerted media effort to push Edwards off the front pages in this election, and Howard Dean in the 2004 election.)

The Clintons represent their own ambition much more than the aspirations of the new, young and growing Democratic Party. That is reason enough to find an alternative. That we have such a young, dynamic, and different kind of candidate in Barrack Obama makes it that much easier. Obama alone, in all his splendid quality, is worth supporting, but Hillary and Bill's ambition just makes it so much easier to do that.

If for no other reaon than the Clintons' blind ambition, our tidal-wave of support for Obama is justified. The fact that he is a great orator, a dedicated civil servant, and a devoted Democrat FIRST, just makes it all the more agreeable.

As I first stated, the actual political differences between Clinton and Obama are negligible, but their character qualities are graphically exposed in this comparison.

The Clintons are in it for the Clintons. The 2004 campaign is pretty much proof of it.

Yet through it all, Obama seems quite sincere in his dedication to the public will.

Do we need to know any more than that, to make that choice between two close degrees on the same political scale?

Posted by: JEP7 | March 2, 2008 4:44 PM | Report abuse

I can't imagine that her appearance in the skit would influence anybody one way or another. People either like her or they don't and there was no purpose to her appearing on the skit other than for more national exposure. Why Texans, or residents of any other state for that matter, would be drawn to her because of the show is a mystery to me. I never view her as having a sense of humor unless she thinks the occasion calls for it.

Posted by: randallbank | March 2, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Hillary showed great delivery skills, personality and timing. She's not a bad commedienne, which brings to mind a few concerns: 1)in her 35 (?) years of government experience, she learned great comedic presence, which worries me when I think of her and a red telephone, 2)while she's in the oval office, what will Bill be doing in the family quarters that will further hone her ability to cut up while she's losing, and 3)perhaps she'd be a better addition to SNL, doing political satire. But I dunno....

Posted by: karenbibeau | March 2, 2008 4:43 PM | Report abuse

To me it showed that Hilary Clinton isn't a quitter, that she is a strong, capable woman, with many different sides to her personality. I am hoping it will help her out on Tuesday!

Posted by: artismylif | March 2, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton is trying hard to show that she is a good sport and not whiny and not stiff and stodgy. God forbid we would ever have a president who didn't appear warm and fuzzy and friendly all the time. Hillary Clinton is a good sport, she is kind, she is what generally is called a good person. However, right now she has to play all the music all the time and NEVER drop the impenetrable facade that blocks showing she is sad, tired, perplexed or angry. The one time she did, her public opinion went up because she showed her "womanly" side. I don't understand. Why can't she be just the best person and candidate for President? Hopefully, Saturday Night Live helped.

Posted by: mommabrown4 | March 2, 2008 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton is to be admired for all the hard work she has done in the past; her intelligence and grace, after what she has endured--undeserving criticism and attacks by many, aided by constant negative media.

I am voting for her not bcs she's a woman, but because she's been in Washington long enought to KNOW what can and cannot be done; I TRUST HER to be the best to deal w/HEALTHCARE ISSUES, and bcs I appreciate what she has done for children and the underpriviliged in the past. I'm voting for her bcs of what she did many yrs ago to REGISTER ppl to vote, and for her work on behalf of poor migrant workers. I'm voting for her bcs SHE KNOWS what can and cannot be done, unlike Obama, who thinks he can do anything and everything, but hasn't proved ANYTHING yet. I'm also voting for her because she will BRING BILL BACK to White House.

Posted by: yellorosatexas | March 2, 2008 4:39 PM | Report abuse

It made me cringe! When is anyone going to cite how unfairly Obama is portrayed in these skits? Probably 99% of the viewers did not see the debate they are parodying and believe that this is an accurate reenactment. Too bad!

Posted by: kls9331 | March 2, 2008 4:36 PM | Report abuse

Hillary missed her calling. She belongs on SNL. The only Presidential race I'm interested in is the one between Cynthia McKinney and Ralph Nader.

Posted by: coolhanduke1029 | March 2, 2008 4:34 PM | Report abuse

"A VOTE FOR OBAMA IS A VOTE TO KILL AMERICA"

--------------

LOL.
Come on Tina, you can always put this in next week's sketch!

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 4:33 PM | Report abuse

The amazing turnout is a reflection upon people who have not had a lot of experience following politics. They are overwhelmed by Obamas charming performances. Their apathy in previous elections is countered by thier frustration with the current administration and enthusiasm with this one. Are they easily bought? with a promise and a poem. Seemingly so.

Posted by: unclebraddah | March 2, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

A VOTE FOR OBAMA IS A VOTE TO KILL AMERICA

Posted by: cottoneye_jo3 | March 2, 2008 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I will remember this for a long time. I have a hard time remembering anything Obama says 45 min after he says it. I agree with SNL: What's wrong with two intelligent people running the country? Michelle O. wasn't proud of her country until her husband ran for office, Obama can't answer a question without Hillary talking first. Sheesh, Florida gave us George II and then Ohio gave George II to us for a second term. Will the voters in those states PLEASE give the rest of the country some help? I would vote for Hillary any time. She is one tough lady and loves this country.

Posted by: bldhd | March 2, 2008 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Well, she has talent to do short skits. Maybe after she drops out of the race and out of sight, she can be a regular on SNL.

The skit just proved that she will do anything to get the votes in Texas and Ohio.

Posted by: smile4mona | March 2, 2008 4:27 PM | Report abuse

I thought Hillary was great and the sketch to me is how the media does treat her so I think that was closer to the truth than fiction!!! Especially after witnessing the reporter who tried to put words in the delegates from Ohio's mouth!!!
Hillary is a class act and how nice to see her family out campaign with and for her!!
You go Hillary!!! Bill was a great President and our country went downhill when he left - Give our country back to us Hillary!!!

Posted by: mvehrs | March 2, 2008 4:26 PM | Report abuse

I think she did darn well. I am from Texas and while I may respect Obama that does not mean I have to blindly follow along with the flock and vote for him. I feel Senator Clinton has the best chance to get America back on track and whether most people will admit it we do need someone in office who has seen how it works from the inside. Hillary has the right ideas if only the men would get off their fear wagon about having a woman in charge. I think she is great and will vote for her in November. God Forbid she doesn't get the nomination I will vote for McCain if she doesn't I trust him more than I do Obama.

Posted by: brenda_morris16 | March 2, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a fake. Beware you lemmings. Just as usual gullible Americans going for the fluff. I'm sure the Obama mania is STAGED! Just like all the speeches he has been giving with the cue of someone fainting in the audience and Obama asking if they are okay.... What a crock. Same part of the speech, same time each time. God, what is with you people? Can't you see through the BS?

Posted by: jube21bo | March 2, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

I don't know what the big deal is because Hilary has been treated unfairly by Barack and most of the media. I totally enjoyed the SNL skits and thought they portrayed Barack accurately. Even in the debates, at times, Barack didn't have to come up with any answers because Hilary already answered the question and all he had to do was piggy back on her answer. I think that many people are swayed by his looks and manners, but having looks and manners does not mean you have the experience or knowledge to run a country. I hope that Hilary pulls out the nomination because if she does, I will be able to sleep better at night, knowing she is in charge!!! GO HILLARY!!!!

Posted by: madiro45 | March 2, 2008 4:23 PM | Report abuse

"Pollster John Zogby says today's (Mar 2) tracking poll shows more consolidation of Democratic presidential canddiate Barack Obama's base with little movement for Hillary Clinton."

From Feb 26 thru Mar 1

Obama 48 to 45 to 47.
Hillary 42 to 42 to 43.

-Houston Chronicle

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

"I am one of those voters that Sen. Clinton is not supposed to get, if you believe the pundits. I am a white, male Catholic, and middle aged..."
====================

Actually, you are considered prime Hillary demographic.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

It was a good move.

Posted by: llong51 | March 2, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

rjclay writes: "You Might Be An Idiot!..."
---------------

What's that old saying from Mark Twain???

Oh yes!

"It is better to remain quiet and thought a fool than to open mouth and remove all doubt."

Well, rjclay, you've certainly removed all doubt in my mind.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

I am one of those voters that Sen. Clinton is not supposed to get, if you believe the pundits. I am a white, male Catholic, and middle aged I hold a PhD, am center-left in my politics, and have spent most of my life in Ohio. Sen. Clinton had my vote before this, and her willingness to appear on SNL only reinforces my opinion of her. Don't count the lady out yet America. We need a person of her substance, intellect, maturity, grace and gravitas in the White House.

Posted by: fitche | March 2, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

YOU MIGHT BE AN IDIOT:-)

If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.

You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an better than Hillary
Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched
battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) went to war
only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a
nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest
amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose ;-) husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary's than they had ever been
before or since.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already
on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.

You Might Be An Idiot!

If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..

Posted by: rjclay | March 2, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Of course,one of the reasons that Hillary always bounces back is that women feel sorry for her. Americans love to defend the underdog.

It's possible that the new Hillary lovefest and Obama-bashing by SNL and other media will elicit the same sort of defensive vote for Obama.

After all, what's good for the gander is good for the goose.

Most ironic is the "cult" argument used by many a Hillary supporter against Obama. And yet the polls reveal that Hillary's supporters have no or little doubt about their support, whereas Obama's supporters have healthy doubts. The irony is that healthy doubt about the "leader" is absent in cults. Hence by the evidence, the supporters of Hillary are more cultish in actual behavior.

We all overlook weaknesses and faults in those we love. It is a necessary ingredient for successful relationships. But the evidence shows that it is the Hillary supporters who overlook more. I'm glad Obama's supporters have a healthy doubt concerning him...much more realistic. His supporters vote for him aware of his weaknesses, whereas Hillary's supporters are unable to admit to her weaknesses. Which may explain the fervor, at times blindness, of her supporters here.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 4:08 PM | Report abuse

Just another attempt by the "Ice Princess" to make people think she is human. If you would really like to know what she is like, read the books written by those who were assigned her security detail. You can also read Dick Morris' column at dickmorris.com

Posted by: higginsp676 | March 2, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Saturday Night Live is still on the air? I thought they cancelled it after all of the funny people left in the early '90s. Oh, and christiedey, to which president Clinton are you referring? The one who actually was president or the one who is about to get knocked out of the contest?

Posted by: coupland12 | March 2, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

hillary will be our next prez thank goodness !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: travelerandrea | March 2, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Go Hillary!!!!
Come on people... wake up!
You know she is better than Obama... she is way more qualified. He is just full of rhetoric and empty promises he can't deliver.

Great SNL appearance!
President Clinton!

Posted by: christiedey | March 2, 2008 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton was funny and it was a fun relief from the campaign trail. I have always had a favorable opinion of Mrs. Clinton. To doubters this should show a lighter side to her exceptional intellect and perhaps be a wake-up call as to how biased and unfair the media has been toward her.

Posted by: Kansas28 | March 2, 2008 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, Hillary should have hired the SNL writers while they were on strike.

Posted by: cnield | March 2, 2008 4:00 PM | Report abuse

I'm not a Hillary (or Obamania) fan, but I saw her appearance on SNL and it was funny. I still think she's stiff, overly rehearsed and just way out of place as a public speaker (in any forum) - so my opinion hasn't change at all about her, but she did a good job on SNL. In fact, it seems that most political figures on SNL do a good job - they loosen up and seem a bit more "real", as opposed to their carefully managed images on the campaign trails or in office. Ever see Al Gore or John McCain's appearances on SNL? They were hilarious! (McCain's impression of John Ashcroft was priceless).

Posted by: indyjnz | March 2, 2008 3:57 PM | Report abuse

Clinton was good. Surprising relaxed.

The skit not so much. It completely shows a bent of Lorne Michaels & SNL towards Hillary (with or without an endorsement). It is clear in how they did the entire skit. Making HRC a victim of 2 white men & turning Barack into something more like we would relate to Al Gore in 2000, instead of the man we have seen.

If you get into the conspiracy theory - this is planned move to create a negative perception of Barack amongst SNL viewers then mock something based on reality. But that is if you are into conspiracy theories, and not just bad biased writing.

Posted by: rhinohide | March 2, 2008 3:55 PM | Report abuse

"A friend of mine lives in San Antonio, and she has told me that three of her friends have now decided to vote for Hillary on Tuesday after seeing that,"

-------------------------

If that were true, which I doubt, it's a pretty pathetic commentary on why someone votes for Hillary, man or woman. Of course, I just received an email from a friend (feminist lesbian) in Texas who drove her mother to vote early for Obama. I'm sure we can all supply similar stories.

I found something else on TV a bit more revealing: James Carville on this morning's Meet The Press. I've never seen him so nervous and defensive...I know he's quirky, but this morning he was positively wriggling out of his skin, as if he knew how desperate Hillary's position really is. He's usually pretty cool...but seemed that 3am call ad left a real bad taste in his mouth.

I think it's fair to say that Dems/Indies are equally divided on Barack and Hillary. Pretty exciting given our history. Very exiting seeing that the yuoth have worked beyond race and gender to the issues. That's good news for our future. Next comes the huge force of Hispanic voters...and hopefully more hispanic candidates. But what of Asian-Americans? They seem out of the picture somehow. Why?

I'd be content with any of the three candidates....because for me they all have major strengths and weaknesses.

Each could be either a unexpected great success or a dismal failure.

I think the more important question is how the final victor will deal with Iraq, economy, healthcare, and immigration...,because the most important election will be in 4 years...after we see what Hill or Barack can actually do...the pressure to perform will be enormous on either. Since McCain is not campaigning on change, he gets a pass...and may set up Jebb for 2012.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 3:52 PM | Report abuse

I haven't watched SNL for ages. This bit has no effect on my vote. I do find it refreshing when a canidate can laugh at herself.

Posted by: arrba_traree | March 2, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

OMG, America! Chill! I'm 55 years young and not a Clinton fan/supporter, but I thought it was great. You go, Hillary! Life, not just in politics, necessitates that we exercise a hearty sense of humor. Obama is too secure to let this get to him, so why should it get to anyone else? Besides, if politics doesn't involve showmanship, then why isn't the most qualified candidate still in the run--Senator Edwards?!!

Posted by: slowshop | March 2, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Well as funny as this was, it appears the loser of the nomination for the party is the one going on SNL for a last ditch effort. Hillary is a funny and intelligent woman but she needs to go out as gracefully as she slid into her humor last night. Good luck and God Bless Hillary.

Posted by: robin_lux | March 2, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

I'm no political junkie, but shouldn't Obama have had a segment on the same show, for balance? It did appear that SNL sold out to the Clintons.

Posted by: atopgun52 | March 2, 2008 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Well its nice to see that Hillary is actually getting some good press for a change. She doesn't deserve most of the negative that the media puts out there on her. This skit is just one example of her nature. All the serious posts on here about SNL and the skits is rediculous. The idea of these shows is to make fun of pols. Those who take such offense on the skits making fun of Obama need to chill. Honestly the fact that they showed him as an empty suit was political satire. Due to his speaches being nothing more than inspirational words and nothing on ideas or actions allows that. But its done all in good fun. They have been doing this since Nixon. Hillary has been facing it for years. First as 1st Lady and then as a Senator. I like both candidates so all of you people out there that can't take political satire need to just crawl back into your shell and just get over it and learn to lighten up and laugh every now and then.

Posted by: paguido8 | March 2, 2008 3:47 PM | Report abuse

I do not approve of either Clinton. They were far from forthcoming abou numerous events in the past. (Whitewater is one good example) The only time they are completely honest is when t benefits them. They both can be very personable when it suits them, I must admit.

Posted by: rondwilli | March 2, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

You know, I've watched the coverage of the elections for sometime and if you think people are not biased by race or sex you live in a dream world.
People who can make fun of themselves are easier to take as whole. They know what is being said about them, they know their short comings. Personally, I like Senator Clinton, a lot, I think she truly understands the plight of the normal person.

I'm tired of hearing about everything Mrs Clinton breathes or jokes about as being wrong, while the other guy struts around saying nothing, but getting so much positive publicity for nothing.

The news is not objective. Not any more. Maybe it never was. So how is anyone to be correctly informed about anything. How does the American vote really work? Does it work? Is this what the founding fathers had in mind? A political machine with money for oil.

We would all like to believe that the world is fair, that the average American counts. Hard to explain how Bush then was re-elected--or was ever President in the first place.

Go figure.

As for Clinton, I say go for it. I liked her as first lady, I like her now. She is a real person, a real lady, a smart lady.

Posted by: humor_dog | March 2, 2008 3:46 PM | Report abuse

has there ever been a more pathetic figure than hillary? if there is karma in the world, those who stay married and keep a daughter living with a known rapist and sex predator, will be rewarded with the kind of public rejection she is receiving...to go from inevitable to nfw is justice....may she slither away in peace..

Posted by: 1barker | March 2, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

I think it will help her with people that are picking a candidate based upon how they feel. She showed that she can be engaging, which is refreshing from her.

Posted by: jcs79 | March 2, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

I do believe Clinton's appearance last night had a positive effect on how I view her as a candidate because she never misses an opportunity show America just how much she wants to be the next president. If America is about a person trying really hard so that one garners the support to achieve one's aims, then she's to be admired and definately an American. No matter what the end outcome is, how can her great effort and her star status on Saturday Night Live star, not help her? In fact, I asked Texan friends (and I will ask Ohio folk too) if they noticed how she directly looked into their eyes, urging them to pretty please (with a cherry on top) be there for her; they reported that they did notice, and that she "got them." She's definately going to garner the support of some more of them, if she already has not. ;-), JL

Posted by: jackil50 | March 2, 2008 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Thank you neecee for the post, especially after the one posted by bschick20. I know one thing, I won't be visiting his/her site, even after Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination and bschick20 changes his/her tune and supports Senator Clinton after the Democratic convention.

Posted by: txslatino2003 | March 2, 2008 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was just great!

What a class act -- and what a fantastic president she will be.

We are truly fortunate to have someone this smart and talented who wants the job.

Posted by: GeorgeMcD | March 2, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was hilarious. It's refreshing to see politicians poke fun of themselves. I think it was a smart move, especially after the lousy video ad of Jack Nicholson's endorsement. Using crooked characters such as "The Joker" endorse Hillary put her in a bad light and it felt like you would be tricked into something.

Obama still has the magic momentum, but Clinton did well on SNL!

Posted by: misterzkane | March 2, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Hillary was great! SNL is brilliant and got it right 110%. Go President Hillary Clinton~!

Posted by: foxy01dd | March 2, 2008 3:41 PM | Report abuse

I do believe Clinton's appearance last night had a positive effect on how I view her as a candidate because she never misses an opportunity show America just how much she wants to be the next president. If America is about a person trying really hard so that one garners the support to achieve one's aims, then she's to be admired and definately an American. No matter what the end outcome is, how can her great effort and her star status on Saturday Night Live star, not help her? In fact, I asked fellow Texans (and I will ask Ohio folk too) if they noticed how she directly looked into their eyes, urging them to pretty please (with a cherry on top) be there for her; they reported that they did notice, and that she "got them." She's definately going to garner the support of some more of them, if she already has not. ;-), JL

Posted by: jackil50 | March 2, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

It may have been a wash, had negative impact, or positive influence(like Huckabee's Chuck Norris commercials); but it appears she had fun performing this sketch, and the hits on most web sites posting it will go through the roof! News programs, talk shows, and the campaign trail will be a-buzz with Hilary's PR stunt. Good for her, good for those that support her, and a reasonable laugh for all. (I'm still a McCain fan.)

Posted by: Mark.Doty1 | March 2, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Nice try but "ya can't make chicken pie out of chicken pooh pooh!"

Posted by: werthr | March 2, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

Hillary did great! SNL is brilliant. They got it 110% right!!!! Loved it!!!
Go Hillary~ You've got what it takes to be the next President!!!

Posted by: foxy01dd | March 2, 2008 3:37 PM | Report abuse

This whole thing makes me wonder that if shows like SNL, the Daily Show, and the Colbert Report weren't reruns due to the writers strike, perhaps Hillary would be the clear winner by now. Those shows have captured the opportunity that main media has sorely lost - ie, what are Obama's plans? He's all talk with no substance. Sadly, perhaps Rush Limbaugh is right - so, Obama is pro-life, pro-gun, pro-war, etc. - meaning - he's a blank canvas and you can paint whatever view you have on him because we just don't know what he will do. SNL captured the media's love affair with Obama and his lack of substance and knowledge on important issues like foreign affairs quite well. Kudos to SNL for standing up against mainstream media and the pundits!

Another thing - the muslim connection is an issue when voters of Texas are being threatened by muslims when they state they are not voting for Obama. Of course this election process has been tainted from the beginning, if the DNC doesn't count the MI & FL delegates, rest assured, those two states WILL go for McCain.

Posted by: neecee | March 2, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

I'm from Ohio. In short, no, this will not have an effect, and any effect it may have, will be away from Hillary. The sketch was funny, and she showed herself to be personable, but then it ends with her doing the lead in to the show, shouting, wide-eyed, and with the camera zooming in on her scary face. While watching the skit, she is at her best and you're thinking to yourself, maybe she isn't so bad, but then it ends by reinforcing, at a gut level, everything you have been predisposed to. My wife audibly said 'ewwwwwww' when that close up happened. As one of my readers pointed out, "If SNL, fear, and media bias is all the Clintons have, Barack Obama supporters should feel pretty confident about Tuesday".

Keep up the good work, Chris.

Brian
http://www.politicalinaction.com

Posted by: bschick20 | March 2, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

This skit on SNL was just that, A SKIT! It wasn't at all serious, in fact, it was quite funny. Anyone in their right mind would take this skit in jest.
For those of you screaming the race card...AGAIN!...that's how the whole race card issue began in the first place. Not because Senator Clinton or President Clinton were inciting race into the campaign, but because people MADE it the issue.
Quite honestly, I hate to burst people's bubble, but the truth of the matter is that African-Americans are always so quick to scream racism (and it continues to happen in this country against ALL minorities) when they are one of the most racist groups in this country, but everyone seems to turn a blind eye to that fact because of the history of white America's racism towards African Americans, and continued racism today not only to them but to other minorities, especially Latinos. However, I don't feel it's ok for one group to be racist or make racist remarks because it happened to them and for Americans to be afraid to say so. The fact that no one wants to admit it or talk about it publicly only keeps that hatred going.
It's time to stop racism ACROSS the board!
Oh and by the way, I LOVE SNL and will continue watching it.

Posted by: txslatino2003 | March 2, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

I do believe Clinton's appearance last night had a positive effect on how I view her as a candidate because she never misses an opportunity show America just how much she wants to be the next president. If America is about a person trying really hard so that one garners the support to achieve one's aims, then she's to be admired and definately an American. No matter what the end outcome is, how can her great effort and her star status on Saturday Night Live star, no help her? In fact, I asked fellow Texans (and I will ask Ohio folk too) if they noticed how she directly looked into their eyes, urging them to pretty please (with a cherry on top) be there for her; they reported that they did notice, and that she "got them." She's definately going to garner the support of some more of them, if she already has not. ;-), JL


Posted by: jackil50 | March 2, 2008 3:36 PM | Report abuse

In one appearance she was funnier than Maya Rudolph!

Seriously, as long she's not my President, she has the ability to make me smile.

Posted by: batleft | March 2, 2008 3:34 PM | Report abuse

I am no Clinton fan. I have to wonder why the dems are in love with Usama, I mean Obama... I mean, whatever. He ain't got a prayer. That's ok, the dems probably don't want the White House back this next 4 years anyway.

Posted by: WmJLePetomane | March 2, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

The loud clapping at the beginning was an homage to her candidacy -- and her. As in, "nice try, Hill, but we love Obama." Now quit giving McCain, Hagee and the rest of the Republican "base" more ammunition with which to attack Obama in the general election. This skit was harmless and will have absolutely no impact on those voters like me who want to see someone different, fresh and brilliant in the Oval Office. That would be Barack Obama.

Posted by: randy.shiner | March 2, 2008 3:33 PM | Report abuse

I found the follow-up mock debate to the previous SNL skit lacking in humor. It seemed the characters were trying too hard, and it wasn't funny. The first mock debate was new and funny, and the characters had their 'acts' together.

That said, Ms. Clinton's appearance was a surprise, but SNL didn't really give her any time to say or do anything funny - which I figure would be the point of her appearance.

Personally, I'd have had Ms. Clinton play herself in the mock-debate, which might have played much better. Or had a red phone next to her on the desk.

So she showed up on the program that made fun of everyone (including Ms. Clinton) in the Ohio debate? So what?

I'm not sure she gets any points for showing up in what some have said was hostile territory. Sports teams do that all the time, as do many world leaders.

It also seemed a bit of a desperate move to take her away from Texas and Ohio to say "Live from New York..." It also solidified the view that she was a senator from New York, not necessarily a presidential candidate.

That said, did her appearance on SNL help or hurt Ms. Clinton? Most likely it was a wash. Did it affect anyone's vote? Probably not.

Posted by: CaptainJohn2525 | March 2, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

I do not know if it will help or not. I do know that if it does not then we well have the first president of the United States that was elected due to the Press. I am 65 and a staunch Democrat since I was old enough to voter. I do know that I will not vote for someone simply because he is a personable and likeable individual. I know many of those and none fit to be president. Due to the lack of the press' ability to report on the real qualification OR lack thereof of Mr. Obama. I will not vote for him - - He may well end up being as bad as Bush. If HRC is not on the Ballot, then I will for the first time in my life vote for a Republican - - At least then I will know what I'm getting.

Posted by: biloxitj | March 2, 2008 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinto does certainly come off warmer that usual, which may get her a few votes -- particularly from those who haven't been following the election and the debates. For those of us who have been mired in the public accounting of her fallibility and humiliation, this will not change a thing. However, a few votes may count so, as an Obama supporter, I do hope that he too will get an SNL nod. Hmmm, isn't it odd that only Hillary Clinton has been asked and poked fun of -- twice before the important Super Tuesday elections in the crucial states of Texas and Ohio? Isn't this better than offering her a cushion or letting her answer questions in the debates following Obama?

Posted by: conncat | March 2, 2008 3:30 PM | Report abuse

This Presidential election is a matter of life and death for America. Yet the media care only about entertainment and ratings. The media are the enemy of America's future. The people who run the media need to be removed by whatever means necessary and replaced by patriots who care about this country and its welfare. Until this happens America will continue to deteriorate until Al Qaeda or someone else comes in and takes over.

Posted by: Andersod7 | March 2, 2008 3:29 PM | Report abuse

OK, cute. But so what? I can find her likable sometimes but I can't imagine an INTELLIGENT undecided voter will say "Wow THAT tipped me over the fence to her side!" Or even more unlikely, someone who has already decided suddenly seeing the "light" after watching a cute sketch and ignoring all the fear mongering, desperate rhetoric and politics as usual in the last few weeks. Note I said INTELLIGENT.

Posted by: wwhite4141 | March 2, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

Obama is currently riding a wave first invented by the german media eighty or so years ago, also accompanied by a recession and also reflecting the machinations of the war industrialists of that nation. They got what they wanted and we will too since very few of the voters and a smaller percentage of the peoples actually know what is happening or what is at stake. So the media carves out theri territory, their book deals their endorsments and so forth and the people get dreck, the leftovers. But Hillary isnt over yet, and showed last night that she could see herself in reality rather than some iconized doll with baggage but no experience. I wont go into the kind of things that excite young people today because if you dont already know you wont believe it, so a pop tart president cant be any worse than say Nixon, reagan, Bush 1 and 2, and all the gay senators in all the stalls in all the airports around the world where the dissemination of insanity is played out in symbol overload and simple is the only path that has a majority. Ya'all attract what ya' want now!

Posted by: nzo.nelson | March 2, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

I think Clinton is the best. Obama has no experience, Talk to much and looks to weak to become president of the United States.

Posted by: magie2313 | March 2, 2008 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Re: meangirl0204

Please note Washington Post. This is a COMMERCIAL SOLICITATION. Please remove this post.

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | March 2, 2008 3:23 PM | Report abuse

America loved the eight years of peace and prosperity we had during the Clinton years. We can have those great years back again. America needs two, intelligent, experienced people in the White House, like Hillary and Bill Clinton, to clean up Bush's mess. Voting for Senator Hillary Clinton is an easy choice for me.

Posted by: snagel | March 2, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

txgall,
you certainly DON'T speak for all Texans. I'm a proud Texan and I'm, without a doubt, a HRC supporter, so really, you should speak for yourself and not all Texans in general.
This skit on SNL was just that, A SKIT! It wasn't at all serious, in fact, it was quite funny. Anyone in their right mind would take this skit in jest.
For those of you screaming the race card...AGAIN!...that's how the whole race card issue began in the first place. Not because Senator Clinton or President Clinton were inciting race into the campaign, but because people MADE it the issue.
Quite honestly, I hate to burst people's bubble, but the truth of the matter is that African-Americans are always so quick to scream racism (and it continues to happen in this country against ALL minorities) when they are one of the most racist groups in this country, but everyone seems to turn a blind eye to that fact because of the history of white America's racism towards African Americans, and continued racism today not only to them but to other minorities, especially Latinos. However, I don't feel it's ok for one group to be racist or make racist remarks because it happened to them and for Americans to be afraid to say so. The fact that no one wants to admit it or talk about it publicly only keeps that hatred going.
It's time to stop racism ACROSS the board!
Oh and by the way, I LOVE SNL and will continue watching it.

Posted by: txslatino2003 | March 2, 2008 3:21 PM | Report abuse

I am revolted (yet again) by Obama fans that are using Hillary's appearance to make her into something she is not.

NEWS FLASH guys - Hillary will end up with over 10 million votes. I have nothing against Obama - but his supporters are ridulous - and the writers at SNL see right thru u lololol - good eye SNL.

Not fun being exposed is it? You rode a wave of hatred - you will feel the backlash in Nov - what comes around goes around LMAO at you not with you.

Posted by: infoseekspace | March 2, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

I love spontaneous, unrehearsed humor. Please notify me when you find a sample.

I found her answering the 3AM call in makeup, jewelry and fully-dressed a hilarious(Hillaryous?) sketch...was that Monica on the phone?

Only the Oscar presenters are more wooden...

Posted by: lionel.libson | March 2, 2008 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Obama plays big on the solo stage with a preachers cadence. Quite another story when he is one on one. Notice how he deffered to Clinton on the Medveded question poised by Russert to both of them as a "Jumpball". He will be deffering alot I imagine. We need a president of thier own mind who boringly has studied the issues. Someone who knows what thier talking about rather than someone just talking.

Posted by: unclebraddah | March 2, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

She did a great job. Some of these posts and "letters" to Networks are ridiculous.
Go Hillary!
Come on OH, and TX...

Posted by: blevins20061 | March 2, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was a very cute intro to SNL. I think she showed she can let her hair down even when she is working hard to get the nomination. she shows she is human and not all politics. I liked it and yes I would definately say it left a positive impression of her on me.

Posted by: ranfk | March 2, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

the skit was right on the media has done everything to hurt clinton,it's about time someone showed how the media has been unfair to clinton.if you think new york will say a democate state if she lose to obama thing again new for hillary and not for obama

Posted by: crazycoolkid | March 2, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

the skit was right on the media has done everything to hurt clinton,it's about time someone showed how the media has been unfair to clinton.if you think new york will say a democate state if she lose to obama thing again new for hillary and not for obama

Posted by: crazycoolkid | March 2, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Amen for HRC!!! Yes maybe she has come across by many as unfeeling, but I have no doubt she can get the job done. It's pretty ironic that those characteristics in a male would be viewed as honorable and strong, why can't a women have them too.
Do you want her to appear weak and tearful?? It seems a women can't win either way.
But she is right, this is no time in this country for "TRAINING" or "MOVIE STARS" we need action and you can say what you want about her personality but I want someone to WORK for us.

Posted by: zanybarb | March 2, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

I am revolted (yet again) by Obama fans that are using Hillary's appearance to make her into something she is not.

NEWS FLASH guys - Hillary will end up with over 10 million votes. I have nothing against Obama - but his supporters are ridulous - and the writers at SNL see right thru u lololol - good eye SNL.

Not fun being exposed is it? You rode a wave of hatred - you will feel the backlash in Nov - what comes around goes around LMAO at you not with you.

Posted by: infoseekspace | March 2, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

As Samulson wrote:.."Repudiating racism is not a magical cure all to the nations ills."

Posted by: unclebraddah | March 2, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Sjobs - you haven't been reading the editorial page of the Post. There have been multiple editorials in the Post calling for just that. Of course, they're always prefaced by the facetious claim that there would be calls from all for Obama to leave the race if he had a similar losing streak. Here's a question. Why are there calls for a candidate in a nearly tied race (100 delegates out of >2000) to get out of the way? How about, oh I don't know, LET THE VOTERS DECIDE? If he wins Ohio and Texas, Clinton will bow out. If the net result of Tuesday is a delegate split, then the race should continue.

merganser - If the only use you think for parsley is a useless garnish, you need to get some better cook books or go to some good Italian restaurants. Don't use the curly stuff though, go for the good flat (Italian) parsley. A generous amount of basil and parsley makes a terrific risotto.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | March 2, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

A friend of mine lives in San Antonio, and she has told me that three of her friends have now decided to vote for Hillary on Tuesday after seeing that, while another friend is Austin is going to do the same. That is great news, and this race is not over!

If she can win both OH and TX, even by one vote, then I think she'll also get the FL and MI delegates reinstated to be right back in the contest. It would then be difficult for the superdelegates not to support her since she would have won eight of the nine largest states, with the exception of only IL.

Posted by: Stephanie78 | March 2, 2008 3:10 PM | Report abuse

She was beautiful and funny. What is really appalling is people 's comment about the show being racist. If Obama was the next president. We have four years of tiptoeing on race issues. Senator Obama appeared to distance Jackson and Sharpton for fear of attracting only certain race to his compaign. Now after Senator Obama becomes president.We will witness limited freedom of speech. Anything that is said against the president will be viewed as racist! This is how he will unite this country !

Posted by: dinainva1 | March 2, 2008 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Fred Armisten is Hilarious in anything he does. His movie parts are pretty dang funny. He nailed Obama. I thought it great how Obama just mimicked Moderators and Clinton without seemingly a mind of his own.

Im sure Obama laughed at it. He is said to have a good sense of humour. Afterall he is a target. Any frontrunner is.

It is pitiful that people cant get beyond thier blinders for a laugh. If Obama goes all the way you had better get used to it. You will have four years of it.

Posted by: unclebraddah | March 2, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse


I am a beautiful woman from US. Internet is a quite good place to meet friends and even find whatever your need. i am just

in the beginning of my career and want to find a rich man, maybe to be my sugar daddy. so i uploaded my hot and even sexy

photos on . S e e k i n g u n i f o r m . c o m under the name wantadaddy, maybe you want to check out my photos firstl

Posted by: meangirl0204 | March 2, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse


I am a beautiful woman from US. Internet is a quite good place to meet friends and even find whatever your need. i am just

in the beginning of my career and want to find a rich man, maybe to be my sugar daddy. so i uploaded my hot and even sexy

photos on . S e e k i n g u n i f o r m . c o m under the name wantadaddy, maybe you want to check out my photos firstl

Posted by: meangirl0204 | March 2, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse

Fred Armisten is Hilarious in anything he does. His movie parts are pretty dang funny. He nailed Obama. I thought it great how Obama just mimicked Moderators and Clinton without seemingly a mind of his own.

Im sure Obama laughed at it. He is said to have a good sense of humour. Afterall he is a target. Any frontrunner is.

It is pitiful that people cant get beyond thier blinders for a laugh. If Obama goes all the way you had better get used to it. You will have four years of it.

Posted by: unclebraddah | March 2, 2008 3:07 PM | Report abuse


I am a beautiful woman from US. Internet is a quite good place to meet friends and even find whatever your need. i am just

in the beginning of my career and want to find a rich man, maybe to be my sugar daddy. so i uploaded my hot and even sexy

photos on . S e e k i n g u n i f o r m . c o m under the name wantadaddy, maybe you want to check out my photos firstl

Posted by: meangirl0204 | March 2, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

I did not watch SNL, but I did watch your short clip of Senator Clinton. I think she did a great job and I have to give her credit for fighting till the finish. This is the kind of person we need as the leader of our nation -- someone who is strong, committed, and tireless.

Posted by: swinglow88 | March 2, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

No one, not even SNL can help HRC. She's an all round loser. I would rather have satan on the ballot, at least I would know what I was up against.

Posted by: nicksgallery2000 | March 2, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

The combining of truth and comedy is done well by Hillary and the SNL staff in all the skits. The important thing about these types of shows, intended or not, actually did show how favorable and biased The Media have been throughout this campaign. Remember "Truth is often portrayed as Comedy."

Posted by: lylepink | March 2, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was great! Hillaryarious! And she'd make an awesome president because she'd HAVE to! She'd be the first woman pres of this country and just like any first woman of anything, she'd have to do 10x as well as the others. Well, Barak would have to face that, too if he gets in. Either way, it's time for a different gender or color in DC! Honestly, I think whichever of them gets in will be a welcome change!

Posted by: englishtnscones | March 2, 2008 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Let me get this straight. Millions of voters simply do not like HRC. They view HRC as cold, unfeeling, thus, unable to connect on a human level. HRC, by all accounts, has a major "likability" problem.

While HRC's camp struggles with HRC's personality issues, her arch enemy, the incredibly likable Obama, plays to overwhelmingly large crowds. Obama packs house after house; venue after venue--rock star like crowds stand in line for hours to hear him speak. Likability might as well be Obama's middle name.

So, in the hours before the next big primary day, SNL's cadre of professional entertainment writers script a skit in which the main character is a fictitious, but more "human", more likable HRC.

While the ink is drying on the script, HRC secretly hops a jet to NYC to play the lead role of this fictitious HRC on SNL.

Now the question posed is whether or not HRC's portrayal of her fictitious self on SNL will sway the voters in Texas, Ohio, RI, and Vermont to vote for her in 48 hours.

HRC's camp needs a reality check--not to mention a psychiatric check. I can't speak for folks in RI, Ohio, and Vermont, but being a Texan, I feel I speak for some of us.

Certainly, we Texans are not considered the sharpest knives in the drawer(and W. has proved that everyday for the past 8 years), but we Texans are surely not total nincompoops who can be swayed by a silly SNL skit.

Texans may be considered a bunch of dumb southern hicks, but I got news for ya all: we know the difference between good reality TV and plain ol' lame politickings--and SNL was plain ol' lame politicking.

But you can't hold it against the SNL folks--they be New Yorkers and HRC is their senator.

Posted by: txgall | March 2, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

It was excellent adn exactly what the campaign needed --- 6 weeks ago --- very sad to see it as an example of how bad her campaign has been, how poor the advice has been, how limited their strategies and tactics have been, and how erratic her judgment has been in terms of what advice to follow. WHOEVER chose SNL for her last night, coached her on what to say and do (and deliver the lines) --- THAT is the person whose advice she should be following. I'd like to know - for real - whose idea it was to go on the show and poke a little fun at herself. Sorry Hillary - too late, I fear!

Posted by: MassamachusettsWoman | March 2, 2008 3:02 PM | Report abuse

The appearance didn't hurt Sen. Clinton, and SNL's continued critique of unbalanced MSM coverage has helped her cause.

But here's the question: Would Sen. Obama's campaign have morphed into a phenomenon in the first place if not for the writers' strike?

Posted by: BrawleyHall | March 2, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Fred Armisten is Hilarious in anything he does. His movie parts are pretty dang funny. He nailed Obama. I thought it great how Obama just mimicked Moderators and Clinton without seemingly a mind of his own.

Im sure Obama laughed at it. He is said to have a good sense of humour. Afterall he is a target. Any frontrunner is.

It is pitiful that people cant get beyond thier blinders for a laugh. If Obama goes all the way you had better get used to it. You will have four years of it.

Posted by: unclebraddah | March 2, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

i love hillary! she was my first lady in arkansas when i lived there. i loved her then i love her now.i think her being on snl gave her time to laugh and have a good time. i enjoyed it very much.i would love too see a clinton and obama ticket but devided americans are jumping on too many band wagons that are going no where...want something to judge? put down ?GO LOOK IN THE MIRROR !! by the way,republicans are gonna loose!!!!

Posted by: zajadia | March 2, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Egads! SNL lost it's political edge years ago! I don't even bother to record SNL anymore. Waste of hard drive space. The skit was just "OK".
I switched to "The Daily Show" a long time ago for clever political humor.

Posted by: degeorge | March 2, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

HRC has effectively been providing free advertising SNL for a week now by plugging the pretty unimaginative skit they did last week (& basically repeated this week) at every possible opportunity. So it's hardly a surprise that they would return the favor & ask her to appear this week. At this point both need all the help they can get!

Unfortunately for HRC, no-one watches SNL anymore - or at least no-one of voting age. Unfortunately for SNL, an explicit political endorsement further diminishes the chance that their show will ever be considered cutting edge again.

I doubt her appearance will do the fortunes of either much good.

Posted by: salmonsc | March 2, 2008 2:51 PM | Report abuse

What I find funny about it is SNL's pandering to Sen. Clinton - for two weeks in a row! Was Amy getting ready to offer her a soft pillow? As an Obama supporter, the whole thing makes me queasy. How will affect undecided voters? We will see if SNL's style, and Hillary's emotional charges, triumph over Obama's substance.

Posted by: johnsonc2 | March 2, 2008 2:45 PM | Report abuse

it will however never undo her failure of nerve and vote to give George Bush carte blanche to wage war wherever he pleased. Nearly 4,000 American men and women dead and counting for nothing. Nothing will change that.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 2:37 PM | Report abuse

Hillary's Appearance on SNL is in line with her new campaign strategy-"The Rope a Hope." Her comedy skit helped to disprove the public image the media has created of her and Obama. She's showing us that she is human and can be funny."Hopefully" voters will discover in time that that she is not the wicked witch of the West and that Barrack is not the Messiah.

Posted by: alfred.placeres | March 2, 2008 2:33 PM | Report abuse

Dole, Gore, and now Clinton have made the unfortunate mistake of being funny when it was "too little, too late" (in Gore's case, AFTER the election). I have never been inclined to vote for Hill, but I feel that if she had done this skit a few months ago, she wouldn't have to be doing it now (ie - she would have had the nomination locked up by now).

Posted by: ewexler1 | March 2, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

As several comments have noted, the clip you are showing is out of context. Clinton came on as the finale to an opening skit that continued a wooden, ugly portrayal of Obama -- whose rise in real life has been fueled in part by his smart, articulate, personable manner. So far, so dicey. But then the opener that she headlined was followed a bit later in the show by a race-based cartoon that didn't even reflect Obama's public relationship with Jesse Jackson, who in fact has been serving as a surrogate in the national media lately. The cartoon also showed Obama repeatedly giving electric shocks to Al Sharpton through a dog collar. By pulling out only the innocuous HRC video here in the Fix video, people who didn't see the show are getting a very cleaned-up version of what happened. No wonder they think it went well and was funny, if they are judging only by this clip.

I'm not sure how much of this I blame on HRC. On the one hand, she may not have seen the cartoon in advance, though she did see the Obama portrayal...on the other, she has been publicly embracing SNL for a week and hasn't said a word against the show since.

Posted by: fairfaxvoter | March 2, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Given the celebrity obsessed culture we live in, it would not surprise me that a person of any age would allow himself to be swayed by a late night sketch comedy show. If we were not such a celebrity obsessed country, there's no way that Obama, with his vacuous message and obvious lack of experience would have been propelled this far into the nomination process.

Posted by: harding68 | March 2, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

It's all about likability. Last night made her more likable. But she still needs to win Ohio, Texas and pA by a wide margin to legitimately argue for superdelegate votes. I am a Obama supporter and would acknowledge her argument if she took all three convincingly. Anything less and her argument fails.
SNL makes her more likable but the phone ad undercuts that. Seems too little too late.
i think she'll win in Ohio and Texas but not by enough to make her argument but by enough to motivate Barack to come from behind and take Pennsylvania convincingly.

America benefits however it turns out...never have we been so involved politically. Everyone knows the difference between a primary and a caucus and that was not true 2 months ago.

And the press has received a major blowback...good for it and us too.

It's all good.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 2:19 PM | Report abuse

I didn't have a problem with Hillary's appearance. I agree it humanized her some more and was mildly amusing.

However, I was aghast at the caricature of Obama during the opening "debate." For it to be funny, the actor needs to portray Obama in recognizable, if exaggerated, fashion -- and I did not recognize Obama in his moronic portrayal at all. Racist, and not remotely funny.

Chris, how about posting the Obama performance in a separate blog and letting people comment on it? Thanks for considering!

Posted by: cbk22 | March 2, 2008 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama/Bloomberg: that makes me sick on so many levels.

1. Obama now wants to put a Republican in as V.P. that sure is comforting.

2. Perhaps you should stop measuring for curtains;

3. I am glad to know that your campaign now wants somebody in his administration with more military expertise.

Obama is attempting to win the nomination on the backs of Republicans who at least in Houston have admitted to our local news station that they are clearly playing mischief in our primary process and have no intent of voting for Obama in Nov IF he should be the nominee. But again its a BIG IF so you might not want to rush to measure for curtains so you can bring a Republican into office, second in command. As a Democrat that really makes me sick to hear. I have a weird concept, I want Dems who will be voting Democrat in Nov. selecting our nominee, not Republicans who want to meddle in our primary and believe me I have run into quite a few here in Houston who giggle when I ask them what they will then do in November.

Posted by: leichtman | March 2, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a sissy airhead. Clinton has the balls to recapture the White House and fix the mess made by that other airhead Bush.

Posted by: princeps2 | March 2, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I don't think SNL is being fair to Obama. They're really ranking on the guy and they got national media last week that had a political impact to Clinton's benefit. They're continuing to get more political mileage this week for Clinton. They even featured her on their show right before the pivotal primaries. What more could they do for her?

But where's McCain on SNL? Perhaps, in the same vein as "Obama Girl," Lorne Michaels should call himself "McCain Boy." We'll see after the democratic nomination gets resolved. In past years I thought SNL was way too lenient on Bush especially during the first election-- almost like Lorne liked the guy.

Finally, I thought the cartoon skit seemed racist and degrading. I think the characterizations were sheerly insulting. It seems SNL may have a real problem with the concept of a black president.

Posted by: baldjim | March 2, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

I'm sick to death with all of you Hillary haters. Get over yourselves!!!!! She's brilliant and is the best candidate by far. The Press, esp. MSNBC, (Tim Russert, Loud mouth Matthews, Schuster, Keith, et al), white men over 50 that still think women should be in the kitchen....and women that only vote like their husbands tell them too have ruined her chances. You will be so sorry that you did this. What simpletons you all are.

Posted by: maj | March 2, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Why is anyone young and/or hip even watching SNL? Shouldn't they be out clubbing, dining and having a good time on a Saturday night? But for this link I would not have seen Hillary's ability to poke fun at herself and, for those stay-at-homes who did see it, I think it would have a positive effect on voters. Way to go, Hillary!

Posted by: Showrex | March 2, 2008 2:08 PM | Report abuse

As to whether this could swing 20,000 youth and thus swing Ohio or Texas, let me assure you - No one under the age of 45 could care any less about what happens on Saturday Night Live. Not even Will Ferrell could save that embarassment of a show. Moreover, I can't speak for female voters, but I think that the whole "woe is me the media is beating up on me" is getting thin with the male crowd. You had every advantage going into this election, there's no way it should have even got to this point. Oh, and the idea of portraying the first African-American editor of the Harvard Law Review as a buffoon is idiotic beyond belief.

Posted by: gabriellerner99 | March 2, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse


Hillary's appearance on SNL to introduce the show--"Live from New York it's Saturday Night" was...well...fine. It had a sequal feel to it: trying to ride the wave of the previous skit a little too far. It wasn't really that funny. It was kind of cute.

What was awkward and maybe even a little painful about Hilary's appearance last night, was that it came on the heels of SNL's mock-up of the second debate where, Amy Poehler, who plays Hillary says:

(In talking about fighting the special interests of the oil companies)..."It's going to take a fighter, not a talker. Someone who is aggressive enough, and relentless enough, and demanding enough to take them on. Someone so annoying, so pushy, so grating, so bossy and shrill. With a personality so unpleasant that at the end of the day the special interests will have to go 'Enough. We give up. Life is too short to deal with this awful woman. Just give her what she wants so she'll shut up and leave it to peace.' And I think the American People will agree that someone one is me."

Ouch! Brutal.
I wonder what the real Hillary was feeling when she listened to that line just before making her appearance with Amy Poehler.

Last night's SNL appearance of Hillary just didn't have the same "I've got to tell me friend Chris about this" effect on me as did the SNL skit featuring Obama after Halloween (remember, the one that staged a Clinton Halloween Party with all of the Democratic nominees represented, then someone walks into the party wearing an Obama mask and when he takes it off it's Obama himself). That skit created a lot of buzz. It was witty and clever and shocking. Friends from around the country were emailing me You Tube links.

...But then again, Obama was not painfully satirized before his appearance on that show.


Posted by: jonvdaniel | March 2, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Reading way too much into this...

Some sketch on a show I haven't watched since 6th grade shouldn't influence the vote. I really hope people won't walk into the voting booth on Tuesday thinking, "Well, I like Obama's stance on Cuba and NAFTA, but Hillary really cracked me up on SNL!" Go America!


Not likely with the miniscule percentage of dedicated issues voters. But the ones that applaud when Obama blows his nose...well, what can be said -- we're more or less in uncharted territory here, folks.

Posted by: elayman | March 2, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Some poster here actually had the nerve to state that SNL's campaigning for Hilary is offensive. Please!!!! What about the black Op-Ed writers for the Washington Post, Robinson and King? They gush and foam at the mouth for Obama, all while working for what is supposed to be an objective newspaper. NOW THAT is offensive. Who the heck cares who SNL is campaigning for. Their shows airs at 11:30PM on a Saturday night. They are not mainstream media.

Posted by: harding68 | March 2, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

It was a good sketch and Hilary handled herself supremely: 1 part I have a sense of humor and now how to deliver comedic lines and 1 part I know how to laugh at a caricature of myself and roll with the punches. I live in California so I already voted for Hilary in the CA primary. Will it influence voters in Texas or Ohio? Ohio maybe. But Texas? Talk about a state where residents take themselves waayyy too seriously. I can't imagine Texans would be swayed by a New York based show written by creative talented writers. Their minds are probably already made up.

Posted by: harding68 | March 2, 2008 1:49 PM | Report abuse

I guess it was Nixon who started all this with his "Sock it to me" appearance on Laugh In. I don't remember any politicians hamming it up on comedy shows before that.

The SNL stuff came across as pretty lame compared to the riffs of Dick Gregory at the State of the Black Union in New Orleans. I saw that on C-SPAN. Incredibly funny and politically acerbic.

Posted by: optimyst | March 2, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

As someone who has spent a lifetime in
radio and television , I find SNL's
aggressive and open campaigning for
Clinton appalling--that's not satire,
it's prostitution.Arneson's clownlike
poereayal of Obama is degrading and openly racist. If NBC doesn't have the guts to
kill what is still a high revenue show--
General Electric should at least fire
Lorne Michaels--I'm 70 years old and
even to me , his work is not clever--simply dated.

Posted by: JFrank7863 | March 2, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

How come it's OK for Senator Obama to do his"dance" on the "Ellen Show" and not OK for Senator Clinton to do a "SNL" skit? It goes both ways and quite frankly shows that both candidates have a fun side to them. But Obama supporters just don't give an inch. He is so full of himself it is sickening. He may be getting a little ahead of himself already talking of his administration. Slow down the Obamacans!!!!

Posted by: kathleenstinnette | March 2, 2008 1:40 PM | Report abuse

Nothing Hillary does is "just for fun"

Who is stupid enough to swallow that garbage? She's desperate, would give O'Reilly a backrub or Oprah a full-body massage if she thought it would garner a few votes.

And she isn't getting mine.

Posted by: daveque | March 2, 2008 1:31 PM | Report abuse

She didn't embarrass herself, but ironically enough, her "performance" (such as it was) was still upstaged by Rudy G's appearance later in the evening. He's comfortable in the world of making fun of himself; she seems to be "working very very hard" at it, to borrow her own terminology.

Given her chillingly clumsy reference to the previous week's bit at the debate in Ohio, I'd have thought that SNL would want to try and balance the picture a little more. They have yet to rise to the level of wit in the Slate "Election" send-up of HIllary's problems this year.

Oh well - that Ellen Page is sure a cutie, and Wilco was fine. But aside from that, it was yet another lame outing for SNL, the show that refuses to die.

Posted by: Marcus3 | March 2, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Her appearance on SNL was slightly amusing but "The Obama Files" cartoon was NOT. It was highly offensive and borderline racist. Furthermore, her appearance on the show implicitly accepts this type of satire. I was so disappointed that I wrote a letter to NBC. Here is an excerpt:

I appreciate good political satire and thought the debate skit aired the week before was effective, even with the use of black face by the Obama character. It exaggerated the perception that the media is slightly fond of Obama. I understand the hyperbole and thought that it was funny.

However, "The Obama Files" is NOT funny because there is no hint of truth to it. The cartoon is a gross transformation of political satire into overt racism. Jesse Jackson is not a stupid man who can be led astray into make-believe countries in Africa (interesting how you used Africa instead of Europe, Asia, etc)?!!! The man was a viable presidential candidate in the US and has traveled the world round so he is readily versed in foreign relations. There is no hint of utter cluelessness that the cartoon displayed. Furthermore, Obama has, in no way, distanced himself from Jesse Jackson's help but accepts his help wholeheartedly. Jackson has started to speak as an Obama supporter on national news networks.

The stereotypical characterization of Rev. Al Sharpton leaves me speechless and full of disgust. Rev. Sharpton has been purposely neutral throughout the primary process and has expressly said so many times. Of course, he is proud of Obama's accomplishments and how he has been able to connect to Americans but what good person wouldn't want this. He has also worked with Hillary Clinton in the past like most of the older black politicians who still show their allegiance to her after Obama's surprise rise. Like with Jesse Jackson, I see no reason why Obama would not reject Sharpton's help since he is an important voice in America.

It appears to me that this skit attempts to minimalize and emasculate the efforts of black leaders who strive for civil rights of all people, regardless of color. This whole cartoon is just blasphemy and shows how utterly unconnected Smigel, the SNL staff, and, dare I say, Hillary Clinton are connected to USA circa 2008!! The representations of Jackson and Sharpton are the product of racist stereotypes, NOT of the reality of their relationships to Obama so far.

Posted by: krrichard1 | March 2, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

Hillary put in a good performance!
Unfortunately for her, Tina Fey is not a superdelegate.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 1:18 PM | Report abuse

Reading way too much into this...

Some sketch on a show I haven't watched since 6th grade shouldn't influence the vote. I really hope people won't walk into the voting booth on Tuesday thinking, "Well, I like Obama's stance on Cuba and NAFTA, but Hillary really cracked me up on SNL!" Go America!

Posted by: sgurd0187 | March 2, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

Between this and the Daily Show on Monday she's clearly angling for the young, hip look. Skit was well done and funny but I'm afraid it's too little too late, Obama's hold on the youth vote is far too firm.

Posted by: jallenba | March 2, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

The skits illustrate quite well that the mainstream media has become the punchline. The so-called "journalists" have also totally missed one of the biggest stories in this election...them. Never before in the history of presidential elections has the media capitulated to such an unqualified candidate. Their constant build up and defense of the Obama campaign has surpassed the invasion of Iraq as the Greatest Story Ever Sold to the American people. The public is catching on though and thanks to the internet, many are doing their own research and the underlying outrage is very real. There are already books being written about the media bias in this election and what is behind it. In short, the joke is on the media. They just don't know it. They are too busy trying to influence the election.

Posted by: joep1 | March 2, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Like many people older than the shows 15 year old target audience, I haven't watche SNL in years. For satire that's acutally funny I tune into the Daily Shown and Colbert. As far as Hillary goes, I seriously doubt that it will help her for 2 reasosn.

(1) The whole notion of screaming biased from the media comes off as desperate, whining and very unpresidential - "Vote for Hillary becuase she's a victim." - This is President of the United States not president of the senior class. She has ALL the name recogniton, media favoritism and money ($150 million) two months ago and she lost it. Not becuase people ganged up on her but because in her first Executive Position she managed a horrible campaign.

(2) This episode follows the same patern of an endearing "performance" from Hillary, followed by an ugly swipe at Obama. The latter completely contradicts and underminds the former.

It's time for a change.

Posted by: swalker3 | March 2, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse


Hillary was really funny. What a class act. She is a great candidate and will make a great president.

For those of you who are Obama supporters, I would like to point out that when Hillary and Bill arrived in the White House for his first term, they too expected to change the way Washington works. Obama will change nothing in Washington. Hillary learned the hard way how to work with Washington and continues to do so brilliantly as a Senator. She is the best candidate for President I have ever seen. She has it all.

As a Democrat, my view is - why not vote for Hillary now. She can be president for 8 years, and then after 8 years we can vote for Obama who can serve for 2 terms. We could have them both! - 16 years of Democratic leadership to get our country back on track!

Posted by: beverly.morisset | March 2, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton continues to impress me with her fortitude. Earlier in the month, she spoke at the State of the Black Union in New Orleans to a crowd who largely supports another candidate. Tomorrow night she'll appear on The Daily Show, in front of a crowd who largely supports another candidate. Last night, appearing on SNL, she found a receptive audience and it went very well but it certainly wasn't a sure thing. In the past SNL has skewered her mightily and the show's musical guests, the band Wilco, are huge Obama supporters (no doubt with fans in tow). She takes it all in stride because she's really got guts. Hopefully the voters, be they from the great state of Ohio or Texas, from Rhode Island or Vermont, Pennsylvania or any of the other states, will come to her aid because she'd certainly fight for us.

Posted by: Vnd22 | March 2, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Hillary and Ellen Page were the part of the show last night. I think it will be a long battle, all the way to the convention, as it should be in a democracy.

Posted by: kbtoledo | March 2, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

If shedding some tears will get Hillary some votes, she will shed some tears. If laughing will get her some votes, she will laugh. If attacking will get her some votes she will attack (even if the attack is absurd). If standing on her head for 24 hours would get her some votes, she would do that to.
Personally, I was extremely disappointed in SNL. While they got her to say that their skits were not an endorsement of her, their timing was far too convenient for her to be anything but an endorsement. At a time when she is not getting enough financial support from the people to compete with Obama's ability to buy airtime, SNL gave her two weeks of extreme exposure. I enjoy comedy as much as anyone, but this was not comedy and not meant to be comedy. This was free airtime at an absolutely critical point in the campaign. When she cried, she won New Hampshire. Her obvious calculation is that laughing at herself may give her Ohio and Texas.

Posted by: Arjuna9 | March 2, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Saturday Night Live's ratings are way, way down from the levels of national attention the show commanded, in its hayday. You see, time was when a candidate appearing on SNL was a big deal, because so many people were watching. Now, it's a story that the media can refer to--but--you generally cannot refer to the event as something a lot of people experienced, in actuality. So what we've come to now is that this is another Media Reporting on the Media, story. It's sort of like one of these little outbursts that occur on the cable TV shows every week, with some host like Tucker Carlson, and so on. The media tells you about it. But, you can hardly find anyone who actually witnessed it.

The bottom line is that Hillary Clinton enjoyed a huge, and widespread structural advantage throughout the entirety of 2007. You could nary find a pundit on the Left or Right who denied she was the presumptive nominee. MORE IMPORTANTLY, however, there was zero investigative or probing or challenging journalism of the WJC Foundation, her tax returns, or even her positions. The fact is this: the MSM was "totally in the tank" for Hillary Clinton until she lost Iowa. And I believe that can be shown to be true objectively.

Posted by: cowyard | March 2, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Highlights of SNL of late:

Barack in black face.

Tina Fey's comments last week that: "b*tch is the new black" (e.g. n*gger) in her 'endorsement' of HRC (note: never denounced OR rejected).

Highlights of HRC of late:

Quoting this SNL sketch on national television during a PRESIDENTIAL debate. Later in that same debate HRC insisted that Barack 'reject' the racist remarks of Farakhan.

So impressed with the sketch, she makes the SAME JOKE of her joke of the previous week's JOKE! Maybe it would be funnier the THIRD time if HRC came out and put on some black face and played Obama. Ha!

Time for SNL = time to release those tax returns.

Posted by: muaddib_7 | March 2, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse


In some respects, it was risky. Comedy is not easy to do, and what seems hilarious in rehearsal can sometimes fall flat, or worse, when things go live.

If she hadn't been absolutely spot on in tone, demeanor and material, there would have been hell to pay today.

That said, I thought she knocked it out of park. She came off as what I've always perceived her to be--though it doesn't seem to fit with the media's narrative-- likable, funny and charming.

Touch 'em all Hillary.

Posted by: monk4hall | March 2, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Hillary, SNL, and this blog: Pandering--just what appears to be shaping the outcome of the presidential campaign season.

I'd personally like to hear the candidates explore the theme of patriotic sacrifice. Bummer! Not funny.

Posted by: bussag | March 2, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

Does not hurt, does not help. It was like parsley, a harmless garnish.

Posted by: merganser | March 2, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Hillary is great and has shown so much resilient. I am very surprised that somoeone out there had the guts to go against the flow, and show Obama for once as his silly self. He is against Washington and politics as usual, not sure if he intends to join his fellow muslins and blow out Washington and all the old fart politicians like Ted Kennedy, which he is so critical of. But greater fools are most fools behind him that are ready to give this man the country on grounds of talk for the hopeless, OBAMA and his circle for the hopeless, please come one, come all and join in, lets get to the promise land. YEAH MAN!

Posted by: wmaster | March 2, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

If her campaign could get her make up to make her look that good everyday she would be ahead by 23 points

Posted by: alaskareader | March 2, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

HRC wasn't funny.
HRC wasn't endearing.
The impersonator however was both.


Posted by: annabelledickson | March 2, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Thinker,

Did a bunch of you Ron Paul guys jump over to Obama or what?

At least try to pretend your transparent shilling is vaguely on topic.

Posted by: anon99 | March 2, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

It's fitting that Senator Clinton should appear, at the end of her campaign, on SNL--the same night Rudy Giuliani also makes an appearance. Hillary's Super Tuesday strategy failed--so then she developed a Super Delegate Strategy. When that failed she developed the Ohio and Texas Strategy--which is the analog to Giuliani's Floriuda Strategy.

Oh, I almost forgot to mention her Kitchen Sink strategy!

Posted by: cowyard | March 2, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Why do I have the feeling that if you click that link you'll get some subterranean propaganda against Obama?

This has been going on in a concerted campaign on TX media message boards.

Posted by: not_that | March 2, 2008 12:35 PM | Report abuse


I found a great video on everything Senator Obama means to us and will bring to this country. It says it all. I believe strongly that Martin Luther King Jr. would want everyone to see this video - to see the truth that will set us free :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuB_W8o_UsU

Enjoy!

Posted by: Thinker | March 2, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I thought it was great. She was fun, funny, self-deprecating and relaxed. Now, if only Mark Penn and Patti Solis (not that HRC is not to blame too) had let all of these sides emerge--along with, and to dovetail with, her incredible intelligence, deep and firm grasp on key issues large and small, iron will and vast abilities--we would not be where we are today.

Seriously--it is an absolute no brainer that Hillary Clinton is ready and able to be an excellent president. If anything, she is much more disciplined, far less distractible, and steadfast then her husband ever was. If--as is pointed at again and again, is her Iraq vote--that is her major flaw, it is easily explained, at least on the surface and in easily communicable terms: she was lied to and misled as this entire country was by the Administration. No more, no less. I wish she had said that from the beginning.

I also wish that the media had not taken it upon themselves (THE FIX excepted!) to play judge, jury and hangman--they have have had in in for her--and, over the past several months, their arrows have made their mark as, political junkies aside, voters only gain knowledge of candidates through the media's sieve.

I also wish that Democrats would not wring their hands in fear over the horrible specter of the portended onslaught of the Republican attack machine. Quit being a bunch of babies. Be proactive, don't run for cover and react. What about a Democratic attack machine? Then maybe you'll win national elections. Confidence shows.

But, I'm getting ahead of myself-- that is for another time!

Posted by: jonreinish | March 2, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

This is the type of moment she needs more of. She seemed energized, humble, self-deprecating and funny. Instead of trumpeting machinelike inevitability and experience, she should continue to be more open about the true underdog factor that comes from being Hillary Clinton. After all, isn't her campaign, as a woman, a Clinton, and a survivor of ugly battles really about hope in the face of adversity? Her handlers should be fired.

Posted by: scottfkramer | March 2, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Absolutely a net plus. She made me laugh three times and I actually hate HRC.

Swinging 20,000 under 30s from Obama to her might be enough to give her Texas. Her SNL appearance is already getting big media play -- Chris did a special edition about it! -- and it will get more on Monday. Is it enough? We'll see on Tuesday. But if she gets the nomination, her SNL appearance and the 3 a.m. ad will be viewed as the turning point for her campaign.

Posted by: anon99 | March 2, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

I thought she was great on SNL - very funny and human. I am a Clinton supporter so I thought this was really just another confirmation of why I admire her so much and want her to be our next president.

Posted by: MAB2 | March 2, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

For all the hoopla about media bias in the primary, I've yet to see any evidence that one candidate is systematically being favored over another. I've certainly seen examples of poor coverage- badly written, implied sexist/racism. But systematic? The one figure I've seen pointed to is the Pew data that Obama received more coverage in February than Clinton. Yes-- but isn't this when he was winning a long string of primaries and caucuses in a row? Wouldn't we expect more coverage for the winners of these contests?

So to rectify these supposed bias in coverage, in steps SNL. Clinton, who is in a make or break contest in both TX and OH, makes a decision to fly away unannounced to make an appearance on SNL. But this isn't a gamble-- SNL had already shown, in last week's show, that it was firmly in Clinton's camp. So she's guaranteed a half-hour of positive political coverage. A free campaign commercial two weeks in a row--worth millions. Of course she'd fly out. But this isn't media bias, is it?

Whatever the reasons for the coverage, there's no evidence to suggest that the media have really been harder on Clinton than Obama. But it's interesting that one campaign has chosen to cry 'unfair!' at this moment-- (certainly not before when their candidate was the presumptive nominee) and on the basis of so little evidence. But why not? Playing the victim gets sympathy and news coverage. But it doesn't make for a good president.

Posted by: mj64 | March 2, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Well I thought it was great!!
Since when has it become cool to mindlessly follow a pied piper around. Obamania ain't it.

The lady can take a good laugh at herself, now that's cool. I hope she wins, but if she doesn't, she comes out of this campaign as a real force in her own right, not Bill's wife, but her on someone.

I remember 1968 and the RFK campaign and how RFK started the campaign as his brother's brother but through the course of the race, particularly after losing Oregon, RFK came into his own as his own person and just as we came to know that good man, he was taken.

This year, Hillary started out the same way, as her husband's wife. But the losses have transformed her into a more thinking, caring person, able to laugh at herself in a way that she could not during the 1990's.

I think she would make as good a president as Bill, or RFK would have been, but still a little better because she has been knocked around so much and has come back every time.

I like that in a President, but more, I like it in a person.

Posted by: pkmc83a | March 2, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

If Hillary had hired some SNL staffers to write her speeches instead of the crew she has, she might have done better earlier in the campaign.

I'm still hoping for a brokered convention that chooses Gore/Bloomberg...

Posted by: johnsonjrbm | March 2, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

With Ohio's older population being the key for H's hopes, I don't think the SNL skit will help. I would assume that many, many young voters have already used the early voting option.

It definitely humanized H but how much can a 3 minute appearance on a late night comedy show help any national candidate? From what I hear from my friends in Ohio Obama has opened local campaign offices weeks before Hillary and the energy for him is almost uncontainable.

Posted by: jb326200 | March 2, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Clinton's appearance was painfully unamusing, like pretty much everything else on that washed-up show. And the show's moronic caricature of Obama -- a former president of the Harvard Law Review -- as an empty-headed clown came very close to out-and-out racism. Hard-core Clinton partisans may have enjoyed that pathetic spectacle, but I would be very surprised if anyone else did, or if it changes any minds. And since when are so-called "comedy" programs in the business of trying to get a particular candidate elected?

Posted by: lydgate | March 2, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

I thought Hillary was wonderful on SNL. We have heard she is a "fun person" to be around. Hence why not a follow up SNL skit: Hillary and Billy and their CPA about going public with the Clinton Joint Tax Return for 2007. I bet they could generate some memoraable one liners from that baby....Ken Wooden

Posted by: kenwooden | March 2, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Hillary, what a class act!

Posted by: lmilton | March 2, 2008 12:11 PM | Report abuse

It helped her, but not enough.

The skit humanizes her, but just as she's getting traction as a combination national security Robocop and health care vending machine.

Is she up at three am to answer the red phone because she's already on the pink one talking to Tina Fey?

Posted by: not_that | March 2, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

The skit was obnoxious and heavy-handed. Hillary came across as human and sympathetic, however. I'm an Obama supporter, and I found myself liking her in that moment.

It may help her slightly at the margins, but I don't think it will get the same free airtime or have the same impact as the 'tearful' moment just before New Hampshire. Maybe it foreshadows the 'good loser/team player' Hillary persona we hope to see in a few days, as opposed to the 'woman scorned/scorched earth' persona we fear may be coming next.

Posted by: nickylyons | March 2, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

SNL has had a problem (even more pronounced since Fey has left) - one joke skits. The opening skit didn't add anything funny or insightful to last weeks (the media is in the tank for obama and is after clinton). Having said that it was an endearing appearance. It will be interesting to see how she performs on the Daily Show (which has been harsher on her than the near fawning on SNL) on Monday.

I just can't see this translating into anything meaningful on Tuesday.

Posted by: dig_duggler | March 2, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Winner:

Hillary Clinton - This was an ingenious manner of bowing out graciously. She managed to salvage what remains of her dignity while somehow avoiding a 1962-you-won't-have-Nixon- to-kick-around-anymore speech. Mrs. Clinton has pulled off the most sunningly original swan song in American political history.

Loser:

SNL - How could a show this unfunny still be in the air?

Posted by: TheTruth | March 2, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Her "3am" ad and this SNL appearance have done pretty well for her, getting her attention in the last days before the big primary vote. The recent election news was being dominated by Obama momentum articles and the McCain/Obama back-and-forth. This gets Hillary back in the news --I'm not sure how they'll play out, but I give her and her team credit for grabbing the current news cycles.

Posted by: max | March 2, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Hillary is still losing based on the Internet Indicators and that is 40% of the young vote (18-29) or those that primarily watch SNL:

Barack vs. Hillary- The Google Effect:
http://newsusa.myfeedportal.com/viewarticle.php?articleid=47

Posted by: davidmwe | March 2, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

She did a great job. I like when pols poke fun at themselves. She seemed to have really enjoyed herself.

Posted by: larmoecurl | March 2, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I thought Hillary showed some of her real self, much of which has been lacjing during her campaign. However, I simply don't understand why Obama was made to look like an empty suit.

It sure seems like the Clinton's campaign spin has so influenced the press that the viscious attacks against Obama's patriotism, religion, character and intellect is what qualifies as going soft on him.

OUTRAGEOUS

Posted by: BadBilly | March 2, 2008 11:51 AM | Report abuse

Hillary has always had a hearty sense of humor, so it was nice to see it on display. The New York audience showed their love for their own, both Hillary and Rudy, who appeared in a later segment. Doing SNL must have been refreshing for Hillary, and it gave voters some relief from the desperate earnestness of the campaign.

Posted by: pundito | March 2, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse


It was funny, she did good. Some of the comments are so serious on this board-- never watch SNL again?-- give me a break!

No matter who you support SNL is just good fun. Frankly I like seeing all of the pols make fun of themselves.

Posted by: ams40 | March 2, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse


It was funny, she did good. Some of the comments are so serious on this board-- never watch SNL again?-- give me a break!

No matter who you support SNL is just good fun. Frankly I like seeing all of the pols make fun of themselves.

Posted by: ams40 | March 2, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Clinton's performance won't affect any primary votes, but it will help smooth things over and help unite the Democrats if Obama is the clear winner on Tuesday. It's part of her segue from the angry "Meet You in Ohio!" meme to the party requirement of uniting behind one (1) nominee.

Hillary's part in the show was fine, and I expect a lot of people only watch the opening anyway. The later 'humorous' Obama sketches were appalling and insulting - although not surprising, considering the source. Yet another demonstration of why The Daily Show and Stephen Colbert have grabbed the old SNL audience.

Posted by: TomJx | March 2, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Senator Clinton is definitely on the comeback trail. I think she'll win in Ohio and win or come close enough in Texas to give her strength to move on to Pennsylvania. Dems should not disenfranchise Pennsylvania along with Florida and Michigan!!!

Senator Obama's people should start measuring for curtains at the Admiral's residence on Massachusetts Avenue.

I vote of Clinton-Obama!

Posted by: WillNewYork | March 2, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

I might have helped, but I can't help thinking that she's doing it only because SNL coddled up to her in the last episode and made jokes in her favor. The best humor is self-depreciating, but I think this is more an attempt to make her shine and try to put down Obama in a friendly audience.

Posted by: freedom41 | March 2, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

If Obama was 0 for 11 and had dropped 20+ points in the polls, the MSM would have called for him to drop out of the primaries before Texas and Ohio "for the good of the party". When will that happen with Hillary and Bill?

Posted by: SJobs | March 2, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

I think it is too little, too late. She is also doing the Daily Show on Monday. I think it is a last ditch effort to appeal to the youth vote. I think that this type of media blitz (which, that is what it is) would have been useful immediately after Super Tuesday.

Posted by: cluka | March 2, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

I don't think it will nudge any young undecideds in one direction or another. Mostly because nobody watches SNL anymore.

If she had done a funny skit on Colbert or the Daily Show, it might be a different story.

Posted by: ASinMoCo | March 2, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

All politicians are consummate actors...it's apparently part of the job description. That said, if her humanizing self-deprecating performance last night had been used on the campaign trail the last six weeks, we might be looking at a different race. Of course, that's assuming that such a performance could have convinced the slim majority of Dems who prefer judgment and inspirration to experience that in fact experience is more important. IMO it is not. There are three prime considerations in a President, in this order: judgment in decision-making, inspiration (the ability to lead people, rather than to follow the polls), and experience. Obama is better on two and a half of those...experience is a draw.

But they are both good actors...too bad Clinton's script (at least until last night) was such a dog.

Posted by: flarrfan | March 2, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

The SNL skit was degrading. Obama was made to look like an idiot, and an ugly one at that. The way they emphasized the racial aspect by exaggerating his features to me was a very uncomfortable race-baiting tactic. I absolutely was revolted by the whole thing.

If I were teetering on the edge toward Clinton, I'd have been offended enough to decide for Obama. The whole thing, including her little appearance, was just revolting. Yuck.

Tell you one thing, I won't watch SNL again!

Posted by: baileywick | March 2, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Her comic timing was comparable to MDH's last week. She was very good.

When we see pols deliver comic lines, the most difficult to time correctly, as well as she did, as well as MDH did; we realize how similar to acting public political presentations have actually become.

We who are old enough cannot imagine HST or DDE participating in a skit as if he were a natural stand-up comedian.

I am sure her performance will have some small positive effect for her campaign.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 2, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

It was a brilliant idea given the circumstances - it showed grace under pressure. It could nudge young undecided voters towards Clinton.

Posted by: marzullo | March 2, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

I have never been a big fan of Mrs. Clinton's, made even more true by her unwillingness to play by DNC rules.
Having said that, I thought her appearance on SNL went well. It humanized and softened her in a way she has not been able to sustain. The question is how many undecideds who don't rely on "serious" news outlets were watching. I think her appearance has the potential to get a few votes in a race where every vote (should) matter.

Posted by: burge_nicole | March 2, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Skits were goods. She was funny.
An excellent consolation prize for her eventually losing the nomination.

Posted by: wpost4112 | March 2, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company