She's hired Wolfson, Penn and McAuliffe. For anyone who's on the fence about Hillary, this should tell them exactly what the next four years would look like.

This reminds me of John McCain -- he apologized to Hillary Clinton for an offensive joke he told about Chelsea (but only after it was reported in the media), but didn't apologize to her or the other person in the joke.

Matthews is obnoxious, but I think Keith Oberman has gone out of his way to be fair to HRC.  Don't know about Schuster.

Matthews just seems to hate the Clintons.  He's incapable of being fair to either of them.  Although I will say I thought he was partial to Bush in 04, and gave Kerry a hard time.  

Re Michigan and Florida:  They're disgusting, and I hope this backfires big time.  Anyway, let them spend  their "limited" funds on litigation.  They won't get anywhere, and they'll look like the asses they are for bringing the election to the courts.  Obama can laugh all the way to the win, and should be unsparing in his comparision of the Clintons' campaign that'll basically be Florida Redux.  Every time I start not to mind her so much, she just turns around and acts does it all over again.

Anyway, another pair of Hillary advisers was paid $150,000 a month to represent the big media studios in the writers strike.  Nice.  Shilling for management over labor.

I agree, lymon1. Olberman is no shill for Obama. And in the incriminating interview, it should be noted that Bill Press did a stand-up job defending Chelsea.

Obviously, Chelsea will (rightly) be subject to heightened scrutiny now that it's clear she's playing a significant role in the campaign, but this is pretty unprofessional.

he had me until Florida. Then he lost me. Major league asshole. Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. If they pull any bullshit with that, instead of urging Florida and Michigan to have a proper vote (which Hillary can win in Florida) then I will send McCain money. I will organize for McCain.

The idea that they will try to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates would bring down the Democratic party, I can almost guarantee if she somehow pulled it off then all of Obama's delegates will walk out of the convention, and Hillary will lose in a landslide.

My only caveat is if Hillary has the necessary delegates before Florida and Michigan, then I can see giving them the seats since it will make no difference, but that is an unlikely caveat.

Is this guy so f-ing tonedeaf to bring this up? He had it dead right in nailing Kurtz (and that was despicable, Bill only pimps women out for his own sexual use) Ok, ok seriously it was wrong.

Revote in Florida and Michigan. Someone muzzle Wolfson and Penn

Florida and Michigan should revote (but not caucus).  But I repeat something I've written elsewhere -- what if Clinton wins on total votes and Obama wins on delagates.  In light of all the 2000 rhetoric, wouldn't this be a reason for superdelagates to support Clinton?  

Until this week I was devoted to MSNBC because I felt it offered more balanced coverage.  I still like Keith and Dan Abrams is good, but Matthews is so full of himself that it is painful to listen to him praise himself and his positions.  Until the primaries actually started, I enjoyed listening to the hosts and guests on Morning Joe.  Russert (who has lost all credibility as far as I'm concerned) appeared on the show the other day and was just gloating over Hillary's loan. Shuster has been pretty fair minded so I don't know why he crossed the line with that comment.  The bottom line for me is that I tune in and then tune out the minute Matthews, et al. start spewing venom.  Larry David, QVC, Animal Planet, the Food Channel--anything but MSNBC. I would love to know who these people are polling when they decide that Obama will win in a matchup with McCain.  I'm a life-long, extremely liberal democrat.  I was born to a rabid democrat who will turn in her grave in November when I either don't show up at the polling booth or write in any other candidate IF the nominee is Obama.  AND, I am not alone.  In less than a week I have learned from colleagues who support Hillary (many as a second choice, like myself) that they CAN NOT and WILL NOT support Obama.  I know that this is essentially giving McCain the vote, but I am so fed up with the rock star who wants to president that I can't even watch him for two seconds. His health care plan is not comprehensive. He says nothing about the college loan situation and who cares what he thought about Iraq; he wasn't in a position to do anything about it!  He is going to need more than lofty rhetoric to fix this mess Bush has made. I think that his campaign is trying to divide, not unite the democrats and that they are the ones who infused the racial tone into the campaigns. If I can name 12 people in less than a week who will choose not to vote or will vote for McCain if he's the nominee, where are they finding their focus groups?

blackton -- tonedeaf is the word -- and if all along they had said "let's let michigan and florida vote for real"  not only would have bolstered their cred, I think it would have made their fake wins there somehow look better.  It also reminds me of Al Gore -- if he had asked for all the Florida ballots to be recounted instead of cherry picking, he would have won the presidency (well, presuming the Supreme Court wouldn't have cooked up another Equal Protection Clause bull excuse to give the election to Bush -- the footnote in Bush v. Gore that says the decision can't be used as precedence in the future is one of the lowest points in American democracy.  But I digress...)

Sorry, the "college loan situation"? ??? I'm supposed to pick a candidate based on "the college loan situation"?

Obama beats McCain, and McCain beats Hillary...those are the polls.  Let's be smart.  Forget Hillary.  Go Obama!

Florida and Michigan don't want to re-vote.  And disallowing their delegates a seat at the Convention -- especially if Obama beats Hillary by a negligible margin -- will assuredly cause a backlash in Florida and, perhaps, Michigan, losing the Dems 44 electoral college votes.  Is this a risk we're willing to take?

I think Michigan very much would like to revote -- not as sure about Florida.

I wish people would stop referring to Obama as a "rock star" or other belittling terms. I'm not supporting Clinton, but I don't use diminishing terms to refer to her. She has a work history and I don't agree with her policy agenda. Obama also has a work history - as a community organizer, a constitutional lawyer, a law professor, an Illinois State Senate and now a US Senate.

In every job he's had, he has accomplished impressive things. He has a solid background working for social justice and showing that he can tackle "impossible" issues and bring people together for a resolution.

His commitment to restoring habeus corpus  may be the single most important reason to support him. NO OTHER CANDIDATE has made that pledge.

"Disallowing their delegates a seat at the Convention -- especially if Obama beats Hillary by a negligible margin -- will assuredly cause a backlash in Florida and, perhaps, Michigan, losing the Dems 44 electoral college votes.  Is this a risk we're willing to take?"

(1) If Hillary fights to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates in the wake of what appears to be an Obama victory, there will be a war within the Democratic Party. (2) Trying to get Florida and Michigan in after the fact fits into a very popular narrative about the Clintons -- that they're ruthless and Machiavellian, and that they'll do anything to win. This can't help but harm her as the nominee. (3) Obama supporters (and perhaps black Obama voters in particular) across the country will be furious if they feel like the primary nod was basically stolen from Obama, to the point where a not-insignificant number might refuse to vote for Clinton.

How are THOSE for risks?

Obama should agree to seat the delegates from Michigan and Floriday in exchange for Hillary removing herself from the ballot in Texas and not campaigning at all in Ohio. That should take care of that.

Meantime, Wolfson should put on one of his fancy sweaters and remember his good old days as a fratboy.

BHLnyc leads it off right.  Hillary is basically supported by a lot of the DLC ("we're Democrats who talk a good game, but really want to live like Republicans so don't ask us to sacrifice much") crowd that brought us 8 years of triangulation and tortured logic to defend even the most minute resistance to any type of engagement of the other side.

I'm a moderate Democrat who certainly doesn't endorse questionable taxation and run-away spending, but I also believe that there are deeply held principles that fall to the left of the center to which this crowd has never truly subscribed.

They remind me, at a level, of P.J. O'Rourke's "pants-down" Republicans of yesteryear.  "Hey, you Democrats have the best weed and we'll smoke it with you, but don't expect us to pay for it!"

ritamarlowe: fine, as a swing democrat I can certainly live with McCain. Your threats as a rabid Dem. mean nothing to me. However, my threat as a swing Democrat who will vote for Obama but not Hillary, means everything since it is I (the swing voter) who will determine the election. So your non vote is meaningless because Obama will be up one, and if you vote McCain and he wins. I will be happy too. I win no matter what happens. You lose. Nyah nyah. The only way you can win is if Hillary somehow manages to win, in which case I still win because I am still a Democrat, and will be happy at how Republicans will gnash their teeth.

Honestly, how can you call yourself a rabid Democrat?

scottlooper, so the Michigan and Florida Dem committees don't have to play by the rules set forth by the Democratic national party? Of course they can revote. Don't be stupid. As lymon said, if Clinton had gotten ahead of this issue she would come off looking great, especially since she is bound to win Florida (and it will come at a good time arresting whatever momentum Obama might have, now it is simply divisive) and in Michigan Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot! Revote, and if Hillary wins I will say congratulations because it would have been a fair vote.

I don't know if the rules are different state-by-state, but I do recall that the reason my state is having caucuses (paid for by the party) is because the state chose not to budget for primaries.  Don't know about Michigan, but I can guaran-dang-tee there's no way that the Repubican-controlled Florida legislature will condescend to budget for a do-over Democratic primary (particularly if Charlie Crist is as hot for the GOP VP spot as some people say).  It may be caucus or nothing for Florida.

As for MSNBC, I generally don't watch except for Olbermann and any time Chuck Todd shows up---he seems to be one of the saner parsers of the delegate race I've seen so far, though obviously I have no clue if he's more on-target than anyone else.  These other names mean nothing to me.

ritamarlowe-  I can just as quickly name 12 people who would vote for Obama but not Hillary (though I don't think I amin that bracket).  Our sample sizes- like our posts- now cancel each other out.

ralphnelle

I agree with your general idea but think Ohio is probably closer to Michigan in terms of delegate count so no campaigning at all in Texas and off the ballot in Ohio sound fair.

"Every time I start not to mind her so much, she just turns around and does it all over again."

<sigh> Truer words have never been spoken about Hillary.