After Obama won the nomination, and just after that ensuing twilight zone before Hillary finally acknowledged he had won, and then endorsed him, Aunt Sam and I, among others, voiced our apprehensions about Clinton Denver intentions because she did not release her delegates to him.
The immediate response to our tentative concerns was, of course: a) scornful derision; and, b) accusations that we were filled with "Hillary hate" ...opinions that were expressed vehemently by self-declared former Hillary supporters.
Well, actually no, that's not it. Certainly there is a great deal to admire in Hillary, as we who are her generational peers have better reason than most to recognize and appreciate.
The point we were trying to make actually derives from our recognition of her intelligence, focus and energy -- so that what worried us then, and what concerns me now, is the singular factor about Hillary that represents, simultaneously, both her greatest strength and her greatest flaw: Hillary, by her own admission, "just doesn't quit."
And so, if you are one who has already noted that she did not release her delegates; and then you've factored in that "unto death" characteristic; and then, a bit later, you read on Huffington Post that Hillary wants Obama to agree to a roll call at the convention -- ostensibly as a sentimental gesture "for Chelsea".....well, then I think it is legitimate to wonder what's on her mind and possibly up her sleeve.
Especially after she vowed to support Obama 100%, but then voted against him re: FISA, when even Hillary's strongest supporters would admit that her voting record has been motivated, more often, by what was politically expedient than it has reflected her real conscience.
This could, of course, turn out to be just the pathetic fretting of "past-it" women I've been told you picture us as being, women who, as one poster described it, "do a lot of hand-wringing, reading Psychology Today while dressed (in July?) in turtleneck sweaters."
But what if you're wrong, on all counts? What then?

Gawd, not this melodramatic bullshit again!!!

NanMichiganwomyn See Profile I'm a Fan of NanMichiganwomyn

We womyn can still win this thing. This gives me so much hope for womynkind.

There are only two kinds of penised persons: rapists and prerapists. No more penised presidents! We need Hillary! We won't take anything less.

We don't have much time. We womyn can plan safely where no penised person or previously penised person is allowed: the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival August 5-10.

Does anyone know of a womynsafe space in Denverthat is still available where we can join forces for the Democratic National Conventionduring August 25-28?
Reply Favorite Flag as abusive Posted 05:19 PM on 07/12/2008

For Chelsea? Not likely. It might be a procedural vote, but all the delegates who supported Hillary know about the Clinton "lists." Hopefully they will get past the fear of retribution. The Clinton's are still a powerful lot.

I don't know whether or not there's any truth to this but one comment on the Huff article asserted that Sean Hannity's behind all this

I'd just like to point out to anyone who dismisses this as hysteria and/or irrelevant, one person could come out and put a stop to it all (or at least try) and she hasn't.

I'd also like to point out in as non-inflammatory a way as possible that, whatever any of those of us who support Obama think of Hillary Clinton, there is one thing about her that won't have changed.

Leave aside her personal ambitions, put the most positive bent as you can on her attacks on Obama during the primary, she genuinely never believed that Obama could win the general. The incredibly close national polls now will only have reinforced her in that view.

I conclude from all this that of course she needs to protect herself in the event that Obama is the nominee and so she will continue to go through the superficially right motions over the next few weeks.

But she and her camp will try to force the roll call vote and change the nomination because they don't believe that Obama can win the general. The big question is whether delegates will retain confidence in him and stay where they were at the beginning of June? If his campaign starts to get nervous about that, then I'd bet the strong money wil be on his offering her the VP before the convention. The million dollar question is, would she still take it?

Yea, I mean anyone of you who takes this seriously.

BTW I put that last post badly. I don't mean that I think Hillary has integrity - but I do think once she gets into campaign mode and fights for working class issues that she does do that particular part of it with integrity.

I think these fringe groups are something to be concerned about until after the term "presumptive" is retired and Barack is officially the nominee.

Like many of you, I do harbor concern at what the real motives are of both these groups and the Clintons are planning. As we know both Bill and Hillary are very politically ambitious and savvy people. Now it could very well be, that Hillary will find contentment in having run a tough, hard fought campaign that anyone could be proud of. She might be fully prepared to take on the Senate and carve out a masterful career there.

Gail Sheehy's reflections on what Hillary wants -- both in interviews and in VF -- have stated that she wants to "do this for Chelsea" (having her name placed in nomination), but at least in my view, you do that kind of thing if your child is young enough to not fully grasp what this campaign has been about (say, if you daughter was, oh, 7 or 10 years old and more concerned with the Jonas Brothers and ice cream, and not rounding up super delegates for Mom.)

With regard to her supporters needing "time" to make the "transition" to supporting the Democratic nominee (presumptive or otherwise), it seems odd that these very same people -- who put more stock, energy and fervor in cheering for their favorite NASCAR driver or sports team -- need so much time to accept the fact that their candidate lost. To that end, these groups, which keep the dream alive, plotting and planning all kinds of twists and turns for a different outcome should be viewed with a certain amount of wariness. If there comes an even slightly plausible scenario, you may see some of her inner circle embrace it (think Tina Flournoy, Harold Ickes, Stephanie Tubbs Jackson, et al) who might see that as a way of extending the campaign just a little further, and if not winning, then doing a some damage to Obama at a critical point in time -- just when everyone will be focusing on the "convention bounce."

If we are to take Hillary at her word, that she recognizes Barack is the presumptive nominee, will be the nominee, and is in fact committed to seeing him be elected President, then she must use all of her power to end these groups and any attempt to divert focus from the purpose of defeating John McCain. And that means subduing her political ego, refusing any roll call vote, playing only a supportive role towards Obama (which elevates her status as Democratic "stateswoman") and demanding that these groups cease and desist. Hillary should also become a forceful media surrogate for Barack -- as has Sen. Claire McCaskill, for example -- sticking to the campaign's message and not seen as diluting it. That will be a difficult task, but Hillary certainly has the chops for it.

But I would not discount the damage these fringe groups can do. Hillary can assuage our concerns by actively working to diffuse them.

From the HuffPo article:

That is the thinking behind a small but determined band of Hillary backers, some of whom have formed a 527 fundraising committee that has already run one $9,700 ad in the Chicago Tribune, and plans more in the weeks to come.

Their largest contribution so far has been $5000. So far they have spent $9700 on an ad in the Chi. Trib. While they say they plan on "more to come" there's no guarantee. Of that $9700 if the other contributions came all from $100 givers that means they have 47 other financial supporters. If it came in $50 contributions they have 94 people willing to pony up.

So I as an Obama supporter why should I be worried this? You can go to Larry Johnson's site or PUMA and get yourself worked up by such nonsense but why give them credence? These people are not Democrats. There are so few of them they will not have an effect on the election.

Instead of wringing your hands get out and organize. I'll be spending the afternoon knocking on doors for Barack and all our local candidates today along with about a hundred other volunteers from the Scott Harper campaign (IL-13). I spent last night at a "stuffing party" with about 10 other volunteers putting the literature we're delivering today in bags. What will you be doing today to help elect our candidates?

First of all, as of last night anyway, there didn't seem to be any mention of the Denver Group on any mainstream media front. There are a lot of us who love the blogs, but most Americans still get their "news" on TV. But, if this does become a deal that causes more trouble, then I think that Hillary, for the good of the party and to help insure a democratic win this year, is the one to quash this whole thing. There is no movement, no convention fight and no fire behind this mess if Hillary states unequivocally that she has withdrawn her name from nomination and released her delegates. When she conceded, she said that she would do anything and everything she could to insure that Obama gets elected and to support the democratic party. Well, this is it. This is what we need her to do. Thanks in advance Hillary. I know that you won't take a chance of giving the republicans a helping hand by allowing the Denver Group, PUMA, etc. to go forward with their plans to disrupt the convention.

One final thought. The more this gets talked about the more free advertising these groups get because we inadvertently spread their word. If we ignore them, they may die from lack of energy.