Clinton Kabuki

As an Obama supporter, I still found this article to be very insulting in tone, referring to HRC's "explosive" nature etc. That was entirely unnecessary to discuss the FACTS. From all the comments I see on many many blogs, ti would seem the supporters (not all, but a lot, it would seem) of both BHO and HRC have a long way to go in fully grasping the message(s) of both candidates. If Hillary is calling for unity, why do a write in or vote for McCain? If Barack is praising Clinton, why continue to bash her? That's not the way followers of a candidate who ran as a uniter should be acting. We all need to grow up and focus on the issues and the better part of ourselves and on what is best for our collective future, which is to start getting along so we can get things done. That is the "Obama Way."

Well lets see. HRC Won the last 13 out of 15 States- But BHO Gets Delegates that put him as the Democratic Nominee. I don't know any V.P. Nominee that would be Worthy other than H.R.C. - He should offer it to Her -And She should Accept- And We can All Move On to Heal Our Country. Otherwise it looks like John Bush Mccain will Win in November. That's the way I see it. ' The HarleyMan'

Micky, in all seriousness.

Obama has no side.

First he said we should negotiate with Iran, then denies he made that claim---although you can look it up.

He says he was a loyal patron of Rev Wright's church--then denounces his comments and beliefs.

He denies being a friend to Rezco--even though he bought his house from the man.

Nothing this man says gels with consistancy of standing on any side of any kind.

But because he says it so elequontely--you hear the words and not the bs.

Look I have a friend who can read the indgredients off the back of a package of plain rice cake and make it sound like Shakespeare--but that doesn't make them taste any better.

Hillary's over inflated ego must be cut down to size just a little bit. She is still under the impression that she is IT, and that isn't true. She ran a dirty campaign against Senator Obama, with disrespectful comments, mockings, and TV ads attacking him personally and professionally. The 3 AM ad is a case in point.
Now that she has lost, she is still on her high horse demanding the if Obama wants her for VP spot, he has to beg her for it.
She has not conceded gracefully as she should, because she was defeated, fair and square, even as she raved and ranted foul in the Fla. and Micigan primaries, after she had agreed to to abide by the rules of the DNC. She is a sore loser. Her invocation of RFK assassination alone disqualifies her from being considered for the veep spot.
She is now suggesting to Obama not to select another lady for the spot. (It would be too much for her ego to take.)

Obama would do well to consider Kansas' Gov. Kathleen Sebelius or Arizona's Gov. Janet Napolitano, both of whom supported him with respect and enthusiasm with no strings attached, from day one. Senator Claire MCCaskill from Missouri is also an excellent candidate. These candidates are more compatible with Obama than Hillary. Hillary voted for the Iraq war and never retracted herself. She is for the past and Obama is for the future. He must consider a person with whom he could work. Some one that has the same political philosophy and outlook of life, and Hillary is not that someone.

I've heard of kicking someone while they are down, but this article is a complete butchering of Clinton after she has narrowly lost the nomination. It is chock full of highly personal insults and assumptions about her character that are completely unfounded, and of course, all the negative things are based on UNNAMED sources. Hillary Clinton is a "bundle of explosives" and poor Baract Obama has to soothe her. No sexist, biased bent in that phrase (sarcasm intended). Great jounralism there.

I guess we shouldn't be surprised since this guy is a regular on Father Coughlin's, I mean Keith Olbermann's, Hillary bashing show. Nice going Howard. You managed to completely obliterate your journalistic credibility with just a few words.

I've got a great idea: Hillary Clinton narrowly lost the nomination but got an historic number of votes, so LAY OFF HOWARD, and give her a moment's peace without hurling insults her way. Can she have ONE DAY?

Hillary Clinton Running as an Independant- Nothing to lose and Everything to Win !!!! All it takes is Guts & Glory. Possible Running Mates for HRC, Al Gore, Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Dennis Kucinich, Ted Strickland. It's still Hers to Win. A Shot & A Beer and get right back on that horse and RIDE !!!! Godspeed................The HarleyMan

This article makes no sense to me. Why would a presidential candidate who may very well need a woman in the VP slot to win the White House enter into an agreement whereby he cannot put a woman on the ticket? It's one thing to expect to be asked before adding a different woman, but to prohibit a woman from getting on the ticket is ludicrious! If this story is true than my new opinion of obama is that he's the most chronically stupid and unperseptive person in politics.

VP at where. How can 2 people with different ideologies be paired?

Also, it is important to note this fact. The Clintons have blood on their hands and are doomed:

1. http://www.lizmichael.com/clintond.htm

2. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1142670/posts

3. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/BODIES.html

4. http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clintonfriends.htm

I find it telling--and quite amazing--that Dems will find a way to argue anything as to twist it so their weakness is not exposed. Now experience doesn't matter Alvy? LOL Why? Simply because the Mcain has alot more of it than Obama does and it ticks you off. That's why. You're candidate can't argue against that.

Hey Alvy, if experience, or qualifications don't matter, then why don't we just randomly pick our president from a group of people just walking down the street.

Oh, wait--you would've probably have to make sure they were liberal enough first

LOL

Whether or not she wants it or he wants to offer it; whether or not it would be good for the ticket or not good for the ticket is all moot. Hillary Clinton will not be the veep because Bill Clinton won't consent to having his foundation books vetted. There's a good reason why so many of his donors are anonymous and it's not because there are a lot of altruistic billionaires in the world. Clinton's foundation does a lot of good work, but securing the means for that good end is a little like making sausage -- you really don't want to know the details. But I don't think Obama can risk having Bill's more creative donations come to light in the middle of the campaign. Good, bad or indifferent,, Hillary will not be the VP candidate.

Ridiculous, Mr. Fineman. I think that's your media spin again. Hillary wants to be offered the Vice Presidency. She will not agree in advance to decline it. She will either decline it or accept it. There will be no ambiguity there. She will work eagerly to secure the candidacy for Senator Obama in either case. I think you're shilling for the Obama camp with this spin you're giving out. Obama will make his decision and will have to live by it. We eagerly await his choice.

This isn't original, but how about Nancy Pelosi for VP? I would really prefer Bill Richardson.

Now that its all said and done, I must commend Senator Obama for for constantly giving Senator Clinton credit for a job well done. Once fellow rivals now best of friends, I believe that Senator Obama and Senator Clinton will always have a good relationship for years to come.