Comments on: Media-battered Clinton calls for greater scrutiny Tracking U.S. politics Wed, 16 Nov 2016 03:39:51 +0000 hourly 1 By: jackie Sun, 01 Jun 2008 10:08:30 +0000 This is in response to Maile. I am a white, working class woman and I DO NOT THINK that Clinton represents me. I think she represents her power-hungry, murky, selfish motives.

The DNC has made it clear that they have a nominee that represents blacks and college kids and that they don’t care about women and working class voters. Obama’s supporters have made that abundantly clear in their comments to these blogs. What hasn’t yet dawned on women and working folks is that the democratic party no longer represents their interests – which means a new political party has splintered off from the democrats – a working class and women party to be exact. Hillary Clinton represents that constituency. Since the democrats will not be able to convince these voters – the ones that Obama has blatantly and consistently insulted – to accept the lesser of 2 evils – McCain vs. Obama – they will either change parties or vote for the lesser of 2 evils – McCain. The DNC has forced a split in the party – by its reckless disregard for women and working class voters – thank God Hillary is there to represent them.

By: The Truth Is... Sat, 31 May 2008 05:32:28 +0000 I cannot imagine what a lousy president Hilary would make: my mind boggles!

That she speaks with a forked tongue shows her up for what she is: an extravagant hypocrite.

The US does not need someone who does not know her rear from her mouth, or her truisms from her misinformation!

I say retire, Hilary, before you disappear up one of your own murky plots.

We know what your first boss said about you: it speaks volumes on how dangerous you are.

I rest my case.

By: Niels Sat, 31 May 2008 04:51:48 +0000 As an international employee assigned here during your election cycle, I am delighted to see a familiar and trusted face – Clinton. Her intellect and ability is supreme.

For many years, the Clintons were the youthful freshness of the US on the global stage. Their energy was infectious.

I am confused at the media negative bias toward Clinton. Her impressive accomplishments are minor footnotes, large wins are reported as trite. She is badgered to quit an election when the race is debatably closer than reports indicate. The ‘math’ of the popular vote is clear.

It is refreshing to see that the energy is still in her and that the majority of voters firmly support her. This too, is overlooked in news reports?

It would be a pity to put forth a lesser candidate as proof that racial bias is history in America. In the long term, it will intensify racial division. History has shown the world that this method has a disappointing outcome.

Field your BEST candidate. It is the right thing to do.

By: benjamin Fri, 30 May 2008 00:20:49 +0000 Clinton is our best hope.

She has the voice/votes of the people and a stellar public service history.

The brokering of this primary by ‘delegates and party leaders’ is disturbing.
“The delegates will decide” has been the erie chant of this campaign.

Not so. The popular vote is worth fighting for.
That’s what democracy is all about.
… or used to be.

By: Suzanne Thu, 29 May 2008 23:55:49 +0000 First she complains about too much press scrutiny then not enough. Hillary had the same or more access as everyone else and chose to vote with Bush on the war.

By: Araceli Thu, 29 May 2008 20:42:17 +0000 I wouldn’t say sad. I would say it’s scary that no one was investigating or following up on what they were being told. I feel the media is letting the public be lead like sheep to slaughter for not being objective. Everyone is just wanting to keep their jobs.

By: Buck Thu, 29 May 2008 20:38:17 +0000 “Everyone, you know, in his or her own way, basically let the administration get away with it.”
What about the millions of people around the world who took to the streets to say something was not right about the Bush and Co. run to war? The Senate and Congress, along with the media, share the blame. It certainly wasn’t everyone.

By: carol Thu, 29 May 2008 14:52:05 +0000 Hillary too is one who ‘went along’with Bush and she was in a position to scratch beneath the surface and read the entire document provided to the senate. As a Senator, she should have provided ‘better scrutiny’.