I just have one question. When is the media going to stop slanting its coverage in favor of Obama? Why does everyone feel they must be 'careful' when speaking about Obama? I think the man has had enough education and upbringing to not be offended by the same ridicule as Clinton.

Maybe the media should try being a little more equal in its reporting. Why would Slate print a statement in an article about denying an African-American a chance to be president, but not think to write the same for a woman? What is the difference? Both Clinton and Obama are in minorities.

Personally, I am tired of the media giving Obama special treatment because he is black. If he were any other race, he wouldn't be treated so carefully.

The media needs to get over this "black" thing. I am just curious what would have happened if Clinton had been black and Obama had been white? I bet Clinton would be winning and Obama would be losing.

Geraldine? Is that you? You know the Clinton campaign told you not to say those things anymore, right?

Stating a fact, like say, "Obama is winning", is not slanted- its just stating a fact.

Ooooooooooooooh.....I forgot....the truth isn't always accepted. My bad.....

It's just that I would have thought the fact that no candidate, including Senator Clinton, agrees with you would have given you pause. But I stand corrected. Do you have similar opinions on female political candidates as well? Just curious.

Stating he is winning is fine. THAT isn't slanting. You obviously watch and read the news. Clinton is not getting the same treatment as Obama. That is also not slanting.

You have obviously missed the point. I intend to vote for the best person. I do not vote for candidate to race, color, gender or party. :-x You may think otherwise, but I have never voted in that manner. I never will. That was my opinion. You have yours. Whether or not you agree with me is your right.

Well....it would be political suicide, now wouldn't it.

If Hillary was Black and loosing you would have been told in no uncertain terms by the media that the race was over Febuarary 5, 2008.?????????????????

Both Hillary and her supporters seem to be in denial. The media went all out to prop up Hillary after her win in Pennsylvania. I really have not seen the media being ‘careful’ with Obama, in fact they are very ‘careful’ with the Clintons because if it was any other person aside from the Clintons struggling in a race they are not likely to win, they would have been severe media pressure to quit than what we have seen, so perhaps you are looking at this race on a different type of TV, in a different country and on another planet. BTW I am not too sure Hillary can be classified as a woman because women do not have balls.

First off, I wouldn't say that the mobius strip-like loops of the Rev. Wright snips or the obsurd conflation of Obama's "bitter" remark into some pandemic of social elitism are exactly what would pass for treating him with kid-skin gloves. Hill didn't get nearly that level of ridicule or coverage for blatant and outrageous lies about her "courage under fire" in Bosnia, not to mention her support of NAFTA, or her association with the religious wingnut "Family," WHICH HAVE NOT EVEN RECEIVED MENTION.

Secondly, by what perverse reversal of logic has being black suddenly become an ADVANTAGE in America? Unlike one of our favorite media memes--eg "the missing white girl"--I've never seen a nation gripped with the disappearance of a black woman. If you go down to Wall Street, you will find only about 3% African Americans, far below a nation-wide representational quotient. These folks can't win for losing. If they do well, it's attributed to some sort of PC favortism and Affirmative Action. If they do poorly, it's attributed by some latent concept of social Darwinism (or even biological Darwinism for some atavistic theorists) to pure lack of personal merit, and social upbringing supposedly has nothing to do with it. It's almost the diametric opposite of the yard stick used for corporate America, which, like Bear Sterns, is rewarded for failing, but reaps the private profits of "winning" when they supposedly make astute business decisions. In both cases, the goal posts keep shifting. For blacks, it seems, only failure is earned, while success is always a giveaway. And what country is supposed to champion liberty and justice for all, again? Think about it.

Last night wasn't that big of a win for Obama. Hillary was able to more than halve the lead he had in polls, and her support actually was in higher percentages than other states. The black vote carried him, which is what happened in the south, which is why Hillary supporters aren't backing down - not because of racism, but because these are red states, where Democrats consist of, for the most part, blacks and young people. She's won all the states that indicate we're going to win back the White House, and he won't!

The middle class isn't straight-ticket Democrat like blacks and young/college people - they don't see voting Republican as a mortal sin. Superdelegates exist for a reason - because sometimes the numbers lie - and his do. He's never been tried by the Republican party, and already the swing voters are alienating him. Just wait until November. I really hope he doesn't get the nomination, because I don't want another Republican in office.

I'd lay off the white/black and the man/woman. If Obama's name was Jerry Smith, and he was a white, first-term senator from Illinois, 93% of black people wouldn't be voting for him. That's reality. It's also what the founder of BET said, who endorses Hillary. Are you going to call him racist too?

Great point! I totally see what you mean. I had never thought about that before, but you are right. Who cares about the color or your skin or your gender? MEDIA WAKE UP! We are not electing the 'hottest' or the 'coolest' or the 'best dancer'. This is not 'American Idol/President'. This is important stuff. Get to the heart of the issue and use your degrees to actually RESEARCH a candidiate and find out where they stand, where they came from, and where they are going. We need to get past looks and charisma - that's how we ended up with Bill Clinton. We don't need a snake charmer - we need a leader. Someone who has the guts to do what is right. Personally, I don't believe that to be Hilary or Barrack. They are both jokes. It's sad, too. Because I would love to see an American minority leading our country. However, neither the female nor the african american has it.

If his name was Jerry Smith and he... wasn't who he is, I wouldn't have voted for him. You can make up alternate biographies for Obama all day, but he has a coalition that can take him to the white house. To reduce him to one facet of that coalition is to do him, and yourself, a disservice. I don't object to saying that a lot of Obama's support comes from black voters. I do object to using that metric to disparage him as a candidate.

I'm not saying he wouldn't be a great presidential candidate in 8 years, but the truth is that the skewed delegate count in red states is due to the fact that over 90% of black people are voting for a black candidate. You can't possibly tell me that Obama would, as a white man (even named Barack Obama), be carrying the south.

Hillary's tried to talk him up, and get Democrats to support whoever wins. I'm really nervous that his bubble is going to burst big time once we hit the general election and it's not just Democrats (mostly) voting, if he's the nominee.