I had wondered for quite a while whether you deserved to be blacklisted. I am now satisfied that the answer is “yes”. You made yourself part of the story (now it seems, you made yourself THE story) - never a good idea.

This is likely an artifact of Ms. Lutkin failure to use the primary source for her quotation. She is likely quoting from an intermediary source and her spell-checker underlined the word so she inserted [SIC]. Unfortunate and unprofessional - sure. Unexpected - not in the least.

I think you may need a citation for Oliver being a US citizen. My understanding is that he has a green card, but I have not seen any documentation suggesting he has actually become a citizen.

I’m an American, and I will gladly listen to the advice our neighbors in the north care to share. They’ve just come off electing an AMAZING leader - given the awful choices we seem to be quickly moving toward there is clearly much we could learn!

Oh nice! Bigoted troll adds xenophobe to the old resume.

Whoa! You were clearly looking to take offense, and were not disappointed. I think you missed the question this column really evokes. It is hard not to agree with Brooks’ assessment that Clinton has chosen to portray herself in a very professional, almost bureaucratic manner rather than as any sort of everyman/woman.…

Better to be boring than to be hateful and wrong.

benjaminallover offered a thoughtful response with some really great points. Confronted by his reasonableness you decided to resort to name calling and insults? Shame on you.

I can only imagine how fun ‘hell’ might be, but the comparison seems apt.

Thank you for that articulate and piercing legal argument. I stand ready to substitute your understanding with that of Supreme Court justices whose intellects are clearly inferior to yours. </sarcasm>

Almost 10 Million views and more than 600 K likes/dislikes. Hard to believe that this is in ANY way a problem.

Fair enough.

Sorry to hear that. Truly.

Yeah, but Grant came in next to last.

Your position is silly. If I do not vote for a Republican, then I am not voting for a Republican. Pretty simple. Suggestions to the contrary are nonsense. In fact, if I abstain then I am not even casting a vote against anyone.

I am certainly not voting Republican. I also find the suggestion extremely offensive that not voting based on gender is somehow misogynistic or is somehow evidence that I do not “give a s#!t”. I care deeply, and it will be a great sadness to me if my Party selects a nominee whom I cannot support. However, I feel…

No need, as important as so called ‘social’ issues are, I think matters of corporatism, income inequality, and war & peace are of greater consequence this cycle. I understand where you are coming from, but being on the right side of a woman’s right to choose does not make up for being a corporatist hawk.

Sadly, I am among the 25% mentioned in the Politico article. While Biden or O’Malley were my first choices, I now support Sanders. I will never cast a ballot for Clinton.

THIS! 1000% THIS.

I can only speak for myself. For me it is not hate. First, I do not trust her. The money that she has taken into her superPAC, into the Clinton Foundation, and for public speaking engagements screams conflict of interest. I do not begrudge her family’s financial success, but I do believe it has changed them. Thirty…