I'm sorry but I represent an annoying segment of the population and I have a duty to help them annoy people up through the convention. Onward to Denver!

GO NADER!!!!!!!!!!

This has been the best post that I have read anywhere.

Too funny.

As a whinny Obama supporter, I can only laugh in half-hearted (you know which half) agreement.

Thanks.

"My dad is better than your dad. He's got eight cars and a house in Ireland. SING IT!"
-McClusky

I feel your pain.

Where is Al Gore?

So you want all those people who are lately involved in the political system - many for the first time, to simply go away?

I have it! Let's go back to w, cheney, chickenhawk & co.s way of by-passing the majority of Americans...

I think not!

If you are going to trash Hillary, at least use verifiable facts. Her supporters said "Yes she WILL" which is in line with her message and her argument. It is not enough to hope, which is what "Yes we CAN" represents. You must be able to deliver. There is a difference between can and will. It isn't subtle. It is a core difference in philosophy.

I am not an Obama supporter and have no great enthusiasm for him. He's far too cozy with the centers of corporate power in this country, he's voted to fund the wars consistently, his medical insurance plan is just that--a plan to put money into the private insurance companies when it's obvious that we need a single-payer plan akin to those in Western European countries. That said, he did oppose the war in Iraq, and could vote for him, albeit without great enthusiasm. Hillary, however, is consistently on the side of the monied interests, has a steady and consistent history of war enthusiasm, has a career of showing interest in little except her career. I could not vote for her. If she is nominated, I will vote for Nader instead, or for some similar alternative. This is not a case of a pouting Obama supporter saying that I will take my ball and go home. It simply is thus: I could vote for Obama, although without enthusiams, but I could not vote for Hillary. She's far too similar to McCain. Even she said so.

cscs, you have outdone yourself! This thread could actually go on and on with arguments back and forth, just like the good ole days of the ole Cafe!

Yes, cscs, you have revived the soul of the Cafe.

I salute you!!!! Go ahead and disagree if you like, but I love this post!

Go-Bama!!! ♪♪♪

And blessed be the Peacemakers!!! ♪♪♪

I think both sides can unite over this insult. Our dual-cultism must be acknowledged and respected!

I do agree, as an Obamalamaramabamamaniac, that the talk of switching to Nader or not voting or sulking so hard you vote for McCain isn't acceptable. We don't want four to eight more years of right-wing Supreme Court appointees, 100 to 1,000 more years in Iraq, a few more wars, a president supported by corporate lobbyists, etc.

Are you sure knitting is popular? I don't want an unpopular hobby.

I live with a won't-vote-for-the-bitch person and it's frustrating. I think a lot of Hillary supporters--the women--will vote for whomever gets the nomination because they will remember what's really at stake: the Supreme Court. One more conservative justice will lurch the court rightwards for another fifty years and will sink abortion rights. I hope the Obama supporters will remember this, too, but maybe a lot of them are too young or pissed to remember that to liberals (including me), Bill Clinton seemed like a disaster, too. He was a triangulating capitulator just like his wife. It took Bush for me to realize that a disastrous Democrat wasn't so bad after all.
The perfect is the enemy of the good. I'm pulling for Obama, but I'm not ruling out voting for a pet rock, if that's what wins the Democratic nomination.

That, sir, is a sexist insult. May I challenge you to a duel?

I agree. Both candidates' supporters should just shut up and let Rahm Emmanuel pick the Democratic candidate.

Seriously though, we are on the verge of seeing the first woman or the first non-white President in our history. Why shouldn't the process be a difficult one? Let it play out, and let the candidate with the most committed delegates at the end of the process be the nominee.

A drawn-out political fight between two excellent candidates, each with their own rabid group of supporters, is not going to destroy America. The majority of Americans is going to take a good look at John McCain (and his stated goal to prolong the Bush/Cheney presidency and all that it stands for) in November, and overwhlemingly vote for the Democratic candidate, no matter who it is.

WHY WON'T THE CLINTON'S RELEASE THEIR TAX RETURNS AND QUIT THE STONEWALLING ON THE RELEASE OF THEIR PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY RECORDS?

Hillary indicated to Tim Russert of MSNBC, in the last debate, she was "working on it". She then went on to blame Bush for holding up the progress of her ability to release the records of her time as first lady. Bush's press secretary responded the very next day, that Clinton has not yet turned them over to the administration?!

So, once again, the question.... WHY?
Hillary's cat and mouse game has run it's course. This speaks directly to her arrogance and credibility. It makes anyone with an ounce of sense, revisit the old Clinton baggage of Vince Foster, Whitewater and Lewinsky.

THE MEDIA NEEDS TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! No more softball pandering to Hillary on this count.