"Hillary Clinton Has Chosen To Approve Comments Before They Appear".....

Definitely shady!

Berf, honey, this has been that way for months. Every since she's been on Gather.

Oh, and yes, shady as a big old oak tree on a sunny afternoon.

This is the comment I left on the article - which probably won't be approved.

" Why do comments need to be approved before appearing?

Myth: Hillary can handle criticism and opposite viewpoints.

Fact: Hillary hates anyone who doesn't agree with her and will somehow figure out how to 'eliminate' them at the next available opportunity, while pointing the finger at someone else."

Oh .... heck NO! lol That ain't going to be approved!

Nice metaphor, Lera..........

Maybe it isn't her I don't know

hmm, i guess there is really no way of knowing its truly her

Oh, it's never the actual candidate. It's their campaign team - which is just as bad.

Well we are talking about a candidate who has campaign staffers who con gullible audience members to ask only the questions she wants to answer.

Student describes how she became a Clinton plant
The college student who was told what question to ask at one of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign events said "voters have the right to know what happened" and she wasn't the only one who was planted.

Not surprising.

No, it is definitely not her, Vivian. I never assumed that for one minute.
It was posted by one of her "employees" named Peter Daou......

(By the way, this article isn't really directly about Hillary herself.
It's about why comments need to be approved on her articles)

politics like football rouses up some pretty awful comments , I for one would be more apt to talk about politics if the gossip mongrels were kept out of them.

Incidentally, I am not seeing this comment approval statement on Obama's latest article at:

www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474977290462&nav=Namespace

Will the irony never cease???

Those are her options and she has every right to do so. Just like every other gather member. I see no problem with it.

Obama came on Gather only to ask for money and was flagged as inappropriate. I have no problem approving comments, many Gather members do it everyday.

I guess whether we like it or not...she (or an employee) is exercising the use of the same option all Gather members have to pre-approve or censor comments before posting...lol!

Sandy, I agree with you 100 percent. If she were actually the one writing the articles, she would have every right to do so. I am not questioning anybody's "rights."
I am talking about someone who is NOT "just like every other Gather member."
I am talking about someone who has pseudonymously become a member for the specific purpose of attracting voters to elect her to the highest office in this country.

In your comment above Berf:

No, it is definitely not her, Vivian. I never assumed that for one minute....

Does it really help to stir things up making it sound like it is her?

Debate her politics, debate her positions, debate whether we think she is running as a stand-in for Bill, but why are we debating imposter (excuse me, ghost-writing) acts done in her name?

Debra----

I couldn't care less who she has writing her articles for her.
My question isn't "Who writes Hillary's articles?"
I am asking why her campaign is denying US the opportunity
to debate her, by leaving whatever comments we choose.
Furthermore, if it's not her, then with whom are we debating??
By censoring and sanitizing any comments left on "her" articles,
she is denying us all that privilege.

Hey BERF...did you know you can ping her?

Everything about politics is shady. Politics should be outlawed.

Either she doesn't believe in the first ammendment, or she's just insecure.

If politicians are that sensitive, or that corrupt, they really shouln't run for office.

Even if "she" think she can censor her own content, it won't stop people like us from voicing our opinions ELSEWHERE.

I can understand regular people doing this (like if I were to post a picture of my niece, and someone wrote an abusive comment, I'd delete the comment) but this is an election, and we are all (supposed to be) adults here.

Grow up, censors!!

Leah-----

That, in essence, is all I'm talking about here as well......

I do not trust her either way.

Every politician wants to control how they are seen as much as possible, from stacking the deck by having ringers in a supposed press confress, to feeding the questions as did our President to the soldiers who were hand picked to ask him questions via a supposed open forum with the troops in Iraq. This is nothing new.

As much as we all hate being censored on Gather, this is a common practice. I think its a little cowardly, but I understand why they do it. They aren't the common Gather writer, and they don't want their thread hijacked by someone who wants to smear them.

Definately shady and a form of censorship. Besides, Hillary and her Bill have never been my favorite people!!!

HILL AR RY IS GREAT . . . RE SIS TANCE IS FUT TILE . . . TURN TO THE LEFT OR EX PECT BLACK SUVs IN YOUR DRIVE WAY . . . SHE MUST CRUSH YOU NOW . . . !!!

<<It's their campaign team >>

Don't forget that Karl Rove was GWB's campaign team.

Intersting. Do they comment on the articles of others?

I truly don't think that it is actually her or part of her team. Its just another wise akers way of putting more doubt and negativity in her path.

How does the old saying go about only believing half of what you read...

Doesn't anyone here know how many people on here are alter-egos?? Berf you are even suspect, and if I told you who I have thought you are all along you wouldn't believe me...of course you still might be who I think you are. ;p

Shady is putting it mildly.

I am nobody except Berf...............

.....and just being Berf is more than I can handle as it is........:>)=

Hilary's team probably wants to control comments because they don't want to let negative comments slip through the cracks. I don't agree with it, but hey I'm not voting for her anyway.

What Danielle P said! :)

Obama doesn't filter his comments. I left a comment on a Hillary Clinton article about a party in New York, asking if the ticket price includes air fare to NY and it still hasn't been approved. I made a comment on an Obama fund-raising article that seems to have disappeared and it went right through. Since the article is gone, it was soliciting donations in exchange for an exclusive dinner with Obama. I posted a comment asking if we could choose the menu.

Shady

Interesting to say the least.

Seems shady to me as well. Of course my whole opinion on the election still stands, it is one big joke. I am not voting this time around and some may disagree with that but why should I? For one, my vote would not make a difference seeing as if I were to vote it would not be for the popular runners (more like Mikey Mouse or Sponge Bob), for two, I am not happy with my choices, that's obvious, so why should I waste time on something that is going to end with me being unsatisfied either way.

And yes I will complain about the upcoming president and I have a right to, my husband is in the army and since he is employed by said government I will not sit and keep my mouth shut when whichever one ends up screwing up and making a big mess of things ...which by the way I predict will be worse than what we have going on now. Sucks when the media makes this more like a reality show than a serious government election and ruins any oppurtunity for the majority to take this election, even in the smallest form, seriously.

That's my opinion on it all...for whatever it's worth. OHHHHHHHHH and the whole Gather issue...again great way to make this election a big pile of stinking POOPY!!

BERF, gather allows anyone to edit comments on their articles, in Senator Clinton's case, her campaign ghost writer probably wishes to be able to make sure no one leaves comments promoting another candidate.