Armstrong doesn't even try to hide his contempt for Obama.

Hey, Jerome, at least be honest, like your fellow anti-elitist Lady de Rothschild, and come out in support of John McCain, that champion of "rednecks."

with the assumption Palin was anti-birth control. I got half way through writing it and did research and found somewhere that Palin is actually pro-birth control, which sort of shot down the premise of my diary: should we ask Palin if she uses birth control? But now that it seems she may at least in a limited way be against birth control, would it be appropriate to ask if in fact she does use birth control? She currently has five children. Should the voters know whether she might get pregnant if she ascends to the Presidency? I realize this is a very touchy subject since it should be illegal to ask women such a question. But this is a different situation:

1. If in fact she may not support all birth control for others, isn't it fair to ask if she herself uses it?
2. Considering the fact that the Presidency is not a job but an all consuming life choice, should not the American people know whether she plans more children, esp. since she had a child just a few months ago? If she assumed the Presidency from McCain, can we be sure her duties would not be curtailed because of a pregnancy?

Of course, the second question may be a bit muddle by the fact that Sarah may actually not be the new baby's mother. As a photo on Andrew Sullivan's website makes clear, Palin has always shown quite prominently during her pregnancies. She did not look that way during this last one.

Up until now, I have been reluctant to have the subject of Palin not being the actual mother of Trig. But between the possibility of her being at least partly anti-birth control and the fact that she's abstinence only sex education but she feels the need to possibly hide her unmarried daughter's pregnancy, I'm reconsidering whether this may be a subject to question her about.

I am prepared for criticism. But if Palin actually is anti-birth control or supports only limited birth control, is it not fair to ask her how she herself what her own private practices are since she seems intent on making these private decisions for women?

and like you I find the judgmental Fundamentalist religiosity of the conservative era quite off-putting. When Obama has ventured into relgious talk, on the other hand, I have found what he has had to be mostly devoid of that shaming, divisive, judgmental nature that Fundamentalists thrive upon. He is far more inclusive and tends to emphasis the social justice aspect of Christianity.

I think you go too far when you characterize Obama's talking about his religious beliefs as proselytizing.

Drudge may now lean toward Obama (I don;t know for sure) but Hillary's campaign actively colluded with Drudge even after what he did to her husband:

As Senator Barack Obama prepared to give a major speech on Iraq one morning a few weeks ago, a flashing red-siren alert went up on the Drudge Report Web site. It read, "Queen of the Quarter: Hillary Crushes Obama in Surprise Fund-Raising Surge," and, "$27 Million, Sources Tell Drudge Report."

Within minutes, the Drudge site had injected Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton's fund-raising success into the day's political news on the Internet and cable television. It did not halt coverage of Mr. Obama's speech or his criticism of her vote to authorize the war in 2002, but along the front lines of the campaign -- the hourly, intensely fought effort to capture the news cycle or deny ownership of it to the other side -- it was a telling assault.

Mrs. Clinton's aides declined to discuss how the Drudge Report got access to her latest fund-raising figures nearly 20 minutes before the official announcement went to supporters. But it was a prime example of a development that has surprised much of the political world: Mrs. Clinton is learning to play nice with the Drudge Report and the powerful, elusive and conservative-leaning man behind it.

That man, Matt Drudge, came to national prominence a decade ago as a nemesis of the Clintons who used the Web to peddle, gleefully, the latest news and rumor generated by the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

That people in Mrs. Clinton's campaign orbit would tip off the Drudge Report to its fund-raising numbers is in part a reflection of her pragmatic approach to dealing with potential enemies, like Newt Gingrich or Rupert Murdoch. But it also speaks to the enduring power of the Drudge Report, which mixes original reporting with links to newspaper, Internet or television reports far and wide.

You may want to cast Drudge's sudden shift to Obama as something nefarious, but Hillaryt herself coveted Drudge's favor. I guess she would give Obama credit for getting the coverage she wish she had.

have hundreds of thousands more voters who can vote in the general election.

Of course, that's just a technicality.

Don't misquote RFK Jr. He did not say Obama supporters crossed the line. He simply said Hillary is being misconstrued.

If you wanna have credibility, don't make shit up.

He knew this was a gaffe and he gave Hillary the benefit of the doubt.

I just wish Hillary had had the same class and had given Barack the same benefit of the doubt when he made his "bitter" comment. Instead, Hillary, her campaign, and all her supporters here at MyDD harped on this continually.

If Hillary's going to live by the cheap, demagogic sword, she has to possibly die by the cheap, demagogic sword, since she's the one who made the standard by which we should judge politicians.

How fucking passive aggressive.

You quote the following response from the Obama campaign as if it reflects poorly on them:

"Senator Clinton's statement before the Argus Leader editorial board was unfortunate and has no place in this campaign," said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

I think it showed considerable restraint, especially compared to the way Hillary's campaign jumped on his "bitter" remarks.

You can try to turn this on Obama. And you can vote for McCain out of spite. But it does not change the fact that Hillary just imploded her own campaign.

But it also doesn't mean what this person told you is true.

Anyway, if you are trying to make this site the "Democratic" Drudge Report, you're doing a great job. Then again that's a step up from what its been considered lately -  the "Democratic" Free Republic.

before you were against SNL.

But I guess that should be expected when the themes and metrics for measuring this race change from day to day among the Clintons and their people.

that I enjoyed Recommending a "pro"-Hillary diary.

Let's spread this "wonderful" news. (Ugh, I think I just vomited a little in my mouth.)

Why compromise your reputation with diary after diary of cut and pastes? Why not concentrate on diaries in which you add something new and original rather than merely parroting campaign hacks?

Obviously you have a devoted following around here that will cheerlead whatever you put out, whether it's truly Recommend worthy or not. Mazel tov on having cultivated that. But as all the comments indicate, your writing is becoming more and more...not your writing. Someone else obviously did the heavy lifting here.

It's admirable that you juggle a hectic life and still find time for blogging for Hillary. But is it so important for you to get affirmation around here, even if it means becoming nothing more than a campaign stenographer.

when we both supported Hillary before I switched to Obama and you migrated here, we usually would defend Hillary with substantial arguments. And when we resorted to snark, they did not resemble the venom coming from partisans for other candidates.

I stopped supporting Hillary because, when the going got tough, she started to resort to the sort of tactics the GOP have always resorted to and which we Democrats have always decried. Unfortunately, it appears that, since segregating yourselves here at MyDD, Hillary supporters are following her lead. You are better then these kind of comments.

Yes, Gen. Walter Stewart made some bone-headed remarks. But what did Obama have his campaign do? Repudiate the remarks

Spokesman Hari Sevugan: "We obviously do not agree with that sentiment."

And when Samantha Power inappropriately called Hillary a "Monster," Obama had her leave the campaign.

Just as Hillary cannot control all her surrogates, neither can Barack. What matters is how they deal with these missteps. Once again, Barack showed character.

And now that men can have babies, that's not an empty sentiment.

(I hope I intensified your creeping out.)