To quote from the New York Times article, Senator Clinton,
…decried what she called Mr. Obama’s lack of faith in American values, labeling a description he gave of “bitter” voters in small-town Pennsylvania as “elitist, out of touch and, frankly, patronizing.”
…even placed Mr. Obama in the same upper-crust echelon as Al Gore and John Kerry, noting that even though both former Democratic presidential candidates were men of faith, “large segments of the electorate concluded that they did not really understand or relate to or frankly respect their ways of life.”
Apparently the news media is driving this, because the Times article says that her statements were in response to a question. So if she is accused of divisive politics she can use that wide-eyed innocent teenager look of hers and claim in that patented surprised tone that she was merely answering the question she was asked. She is, of course, required to answer all questions fully and in depth; except ones about blue dresses or anything she doesn’t want to talk about. She’s really good at not answering those.
Democrats had better hope that Senator Obama does not win the nomination, because Senator Clinton is certainly doing her best to assure that he cannot be elected President.
Me? I have become rather indifferent. If Obama is nominated I will vote for him, but I think he will get to Washington where he will be out-numbered by a ratio of 535:1 and accomplish little or nothing. A Democratic Party that will allow Clinton to do what she is doing is a party that will not allow Obama to create change. If Clinton is nominated I will sit the election out.