Oh, horsefeathers! But as long as you vote correctly, you can put your support where the sun dont shine...

I have supported him from the start (and by support I mean sent more money than I can afford and volunteered for the campaign). He has been remarkably consistent. He has not budged an inch on the things that led me to support him. None of them can be sumed up in a sound bite. Having positions that cannot be summed up in a sound bite and articulating positions that are nuanced enough that a conservative and a liberal can pull a sentence apice out of one paragraph from a speach he gave, and ignoring the context as idealogs do, find something to be offended by makes him the right kind of thinker to handle the complex problems that face the nation today.

I'll support the Dodds, Feingolds and Leahys of this world.

Great. But all this really tells us is you don't have the stomach for the complexity of presidential politics and the diverse constituencies involved. Understandable; sometimes I wonder if I do, too. But it's apples and oranges and hardly a useful comparison.

He kept his powder dry and treated her with respect through out the campaign. I clearly did not but I am not the candidate and it is himwe are discussing. He was constantly being ridiculed for not being tough enough and for failing to 'close the deal'. He did not because he wanted to win over her supporters after securing the nokmination and he clearly has. he has a higher level of support among democrats than either Gore or Kerry did at the same time in the nomination process. It is a myth that there are large numbers of Hillary supporters out ther who are not supporting him. Elections are not contests between campaign managers they are contests between candidates. it is the candidate who is responsible in the end for the tone and management of their campaign. His was drama free and that is what won him the nomination and will win him the election in the fall. Hillary is a good politicain. The reason he beat her is he is a great one.

1. I do not agree that the Cacus system is flawed. It was put in place for excelent reasons. It allows for the insurgent candidate with a motivated constiuency to overcome the machine candidate with name recognition. It tests a candidates ability to lead a large group of folowers through a byzatine process. It is cheaper than a primary and so must be used in states where the state does not pay for a primary. Like it or not cacuses are here to stay, and I like it.

2. He has been consistent in the the things I care about. His position changes have been few and minor and reflected one of the things that I do like about him, that being a refusal to be a dogmatic, reactionary idealog.

Right on. You can pretty much tell what Obama is lacking by the things people around here like Mr. Geater make up about him. Thanks to them, we may be in for another President who knows how to play the system to get elected but nothing about governing.

Town meetings were not part of his statement. He said he would debate McCain any tiem any place. You will note that this pledge does not include as often as you like. That is not the same as commiting to ten debates in the format of your oponents choosing. The ten townhalls thing was a BS offer.