Obama and Clinton are beginning to resemble contestants in the WWE's Smackdown:

http://thedamedomain.blogspot.com/2008/01/spousal-smackdown-political-show.html

Sent by JaneBecker | 3:33 PM ET | 01-23-2008

I'm glad you brought this up.

I was pretty outraged when Cokie Roberts said Obama would be "marginalized"if he won South Carolina on Morning Edition on Monday.

Did she do any actual reporting, talk to any voter who actually said that? It is only an issue because media pundits (and sadly, NPR) say it is.

And if Obama weren't ahead in South Carolina, pundits would probably be saying how bad that was for the campaign.

He can't win even when he does.

And the media should stop the fetish of the win. The nominee will be the candidate with the most delegates.

Winning does matter in November, but winning a state in the primaries only matters because (again, sadly) if shifts the media narrative (even when there is little or even no difference in the number of delegates won).

Sent by Steve Rhodes | 3:36 PM ET | 01-23-2008

How has he been marginalized so far? He's reported on regularly, as often as clinton is, and more than edwards. I don't see how that's marginalization.

You know who is being marginalized? Kucinich.

This is all reflective of the rather fixated, and warped perspective that the media has of politics.

Sent by Jody Sol | 4:07 PM ET | 01-23-2008

I think Obama's benefiting as much from being an African-American candidate as Hillary is from being a female candidate. There are a lot of people who are getting some sort of guilt-freeing race relations catharsis out of supporting Barak. He has even more of an empathy vote than Hillary. Obama himself frames Hillary as part of the old order and "establishment." But the Cinton's entered the White House with many of the same ideas as Obama has now, and they also have the experience and efficiency of knowing what it truly takes to govern the country, that Obama does not have in the slightest.

I find Obama eloquent and inspiring, and I am extremely happy/proud we have an African American candidate full of promise for future elections. Next time I would consider voting for him, but this time, I am tired of his "Holier than Thou" attitude towards Hillary. And I find him to be full of double standards - finding fault with others for compromising and changing their positions, when he does not take responsibility for the times when he has done the same.

All leaders need to be firm, but flexible. He criticizes the Clintons but he can't take it in return, and then he says he's above it all, but he's not. He's just more subtle about it.

Sent by Lisa | 4:09 PM ET | 01-23-2008

First and foremost Clinton and Obama are both politicians. Each with their respective sets of double standards. Obama's support across racial lines is more than a simple emotional or empathy vote. He in fact has the necessary attributes to lead. Americans should be very concerned if Clinton is elected. If Clinton is elected in 2008, at the end of her first term in 2012, our countries highest elected office will have been dominated by two families over a 24 year period(1988-2012).How can our country move forward if fresh perspectives are not applied to our economy and foreign/domestic policies. Our country could use some inspiration and eloquence in the white house. The Clinton's governed in the 90's. It's 2008 and time to move forward.

Sent by Glenn | 5:27 PM ET | 01-23-2008

Obama gives me no confidence that he is competent to lead this country at this time.

What matters is competency. And he has no proof of it.

And I don't think he has a chance of being elected by a majority with such little experience.

People won't take a chance on him at this time; it's too important that he proves himself first.

Eloquence and inspiration are far from running a country.

Experience is good; don't get hung up on ideas about "two families". The issue and problem is how competent people are, and the Clintons have proven that they are extremely competent.

The country will move forward more effectively and efficiently with proven leadership and experience.

Sent by Lisa | 6:59 PM ET | 01-23-2008

So a Harvard Law Graduate and first African-American to be the editor of the Harvard Law Review, a multi-term state legislator, and the first African-American Senator since reconstruction is now reduced to nothing more than incompetent... Interesting... If Obama were a white male with the exact same eloquence, inspiration, intellectual prowess, and credentials he would be considered a visionary, a change agent...Sounds familiar...This is exactly what was said about Bill Clinton when he ran for office. Granted Clinton was a governor but he lacked all of the necessary attributes to be president. He had no foreign policy experience, Arkansas was not a beacon of economic strength or a shining example of social viability. What Clinton did while in office was surround himself with a competent staff so that his political agenda could be moved forward.

America is not re-electing Bill Clinton. Being first lady does not mean that Hillary has experience governing. She did not govern the country. Hillary is a lifetime political lawyer and is a two term senator with no proven leadership on her own merit that involves governing.

I would contend that being involved in the legislative branch of government at the state and federal levels gives Obama a multitude of experience and exposure to any number of social, foreign and domestic issues. His life's work has prepared him to lead.

The country should be concerned when the presidency is passed around like an inheritance. Imagine where our country would be if two families had governed our country during the height of the civil rights movement. America has only moved forward when new leadership has inspired our country.

Its time for a new generation of change. In American history new leadership is what has moved America forward.

Eloquence and inspiration aid in the delivery of the message. Its Obama's ability to cross political lines and gain consensus that will make him an effective leader.

Sent by Glenn | 11:19 PM ET | 01-23-2008

I'm an American living in Japan. Many people I talk to here ask me questions that at face value seem so stupid. For example, "Do Americans like war?" or "Why do you (without having asked previously) like Bush?". I always get flustered and respond "No we don't" and "I don't like Bush!". But upon further examination, I find that they get these ideas from the media. Similarly, I think Americans get all their ideas and opinions from the media as well, without actively doing anything other than flipping a switch or clicking a mouse button to find out who these electorates really are. I'm not trying to be the 'high and mighty' here but I'm hearing some very strong opinions here with an apparent lack of knowledge of the people they are talking about. Has anyone here even read Barack's book? If you did, you'd understand in more detail what it is that makes him different and a true "breath of fresh air". Additionally, if you had read Hillary's book, "Living History" you'd better understand how she might approach a seat in the white house and how she views politics in general. I'm tired of hearing bloggers' comments, the majority of which are just mutated caricatures ported from the various news channels and online media sources. Everyone wants to blame the media for this or that, but nobody is willing to do their own research! At the very least you could stop over at your local library and check out a book or two, say "The Audacity of Hope". You might find the true answers to many of the allegations made and that your opinions become less pointed. Better yet, you might actually find a leader you can believe in!
Let's stop forming our judgments from media sound bytes, and start actively seeking out what these politicians truly believe and stand for!

Sent by Sean | 11:30 PM ET | 01-23-2008

Quite frankly, I believe our demoralized citizenry needs HOPE. It's amazing how we can respond when we believe in our elected leader. Just as JFK was able to draw us into the view of asking what we can do for our Country, RATHER than what our Country can do for us....Obama can do the same. A leader doesn't do it all. They are first and foremost motivators...whether it be in Congress or with the general population.

My vote is squarely with Barak Obama!

Sent by Christina Daly | 4:19 AM ET | 01-24-2008

The Clintons governed our country for two Presidential terms, and at the end, our country was in some of the best overall shape it has ever been in, and we were respected by most around the world.

During the 1990's the Clintons delivered actual Hope and Change to the majority of Americans.

Just because Obama has currently co-opted these terms, "Hope" and "Change", does not mean he owns them exclusively
by any means.

The Clintons have dedicated and sacrificed most of their lives to Hope and Change for this country, and they made it happen. They are the most qualified, and know what it takes and how to make it happen again. Hillary will be President, but they are a team, they do talk about issues together. They consult one-another, and they always have about important political issues and decisions.

Bill Clinton had governed Arkansas. And I never said that Obama was completely "incompetent". I said he gives me no confidence that he is competent to govern this country at this time. He's a very good speaker, but rhetoric is the easy part.

Being editor of the Harvard Law review, is not governing experience. Please. And he has barely had any federal experience at all.

It would take him forever to get anything done.

It's so easy to say all the right things, but it's not so easy to do them.

Obama has been in the Senate since 2004, and he has not helped them gain consensus.

He's the one saying what people want to hear, but so far he hasn't been practicing a campaign of change, or hope, but a duplicitous campaign of hypocrisy and double standards.
It's easy to talk.

He is a rookie, when we have the most qualified proven comptetent experts available to us in the Clintons.

Choose proven competence over airy rhetoric.

Actions speak louder than words.

We need proven experience and confidence so we can move Forward to real Hope and Change efficiently and effectively.

Sent by Lauren | 6:19 PM ET | 01-24-2008