The Occasional Observer

Check out this passage from cnn's website today:

She [Hillary] again invoked the popular vote, saying she snared "more votes than any primary candidate in history," but primaries come down to delegates, and according to CNN calculations, Obama has her whipped, 2,156 to 1,923.

Hmmm, do you think CNN is in the bag for someone??? First, I'm not exactly sure that a difference of 233 delegate votes out of 4079 constitutes a "whipping". Second, last time I checked the word "whipped" doesn't exactly conjure up images of impartial, unbiased non-opinionated journalism. Finally, can you imagine the racial uproar if the situation were reversed and CNN wrote that Clinton had "whipped" Obama???