Try not talking to Hillary Clinton supporters as if they are children. You might get better results if you actually tried to explain what's good about Obama rather than tried to frighten us about McCain. How stupid does this guy/these guys think we are? Do they actually believe the "low information voter" bullcrap?

Work to change the rules; work to lessen the influence of misogyny on our politics; work to keep shattering the glass ceiling.

as I take this:

No one denies that you are entitled to deep and personal feelings of disappointment at the outcome of the primary campaign.

as sour grapes which I do not suffer from. I am not mourning a loss. But I'm not who he is trying to reach, I'm not voting for John McCain.

How many times have I heard this: "Think of the big picture!"  as the Dems scr*wed me over yet  one. more. time. because somebody else's goals and aspirations and needs were "more important" than mine.

FISA.

Fool me once, shame on me... well, you know the rest.

I understand the point he's been making, and I agree, but the tone is off.

This year, 2008, is the first year since I turned 30 that I won't be voting in the general election.  

And if there might have been a hope that I would change my mind about Obama, he squashed it completely when he violated a promise and voted yes on the despicable FISA bill.

But, where is the admission that sexist attacks were made on Clinton by the Obama campaign and not just the media?

Where is the admission that the rules committee didn't follow it's own rules?

Where is the admission that caucuses weren't just strategized better buy one candidate, but that there exists real documented evidence that actual violations of the rules were committed at caucuses?

Your friend is willing to admit that the media treated Clinton unfairly.  But, not admit that Obama did it as well.  But, not admit that the dem party did it as well.

Where is the admonishment of Jesse Jackson Jr for his race-based threats made against super delegates?

Where is the admonishment of Donna Brazile and Michelle Obama for their intentional misinterpretation of Bill Clinton's fairytale comment?

When your friend talks of working to make changes in the processes and the rules, why will there be any incentive at all to make any changes in the future if I reward this year's behavior by voting for Obama and this year's behavior results in a dem win of the white house?

But this is the first time since pre-1964 I can recall that prominent democrats feel safe to threaten voters with good government. The right not to vote is as fundamental a right as the right to vote. And should we not get the things you list over the next four years, I am not going to blame McCain who does not really promise them. I am not even going to blame Baarack who at best is asking us to vote for him instead of the other guy but is not promising to do anything for those who need the government to help them.

I am going to blame Obama supporters like you.

Enjoy your moral cocoon.

Sincerely,

I try to be careful and prudent about what I do say, and make it clear that I am an issues voter and that I so support the Democratic TICKET, as does Hillary Clinton. But I keep getting crap thrown at me, like I'm some kind of idiot, and like I have to be a cheerleader, and "if there is nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all".

I lived through the lefties trashing Hubert Humphrey when he ran against Richard Nixon. I made similar arguments to my friends and acquaintances at the time. Don't let the perfect by the enemy of the good. Nixon far worse, etc., etc.

But I knew Hubert Humphrey held most Democratic Party values in his heart and mind. His actions for many years had shown me he would govern as a liberal and a protector of people's rights. Yes, he was LBJ's VP; yes, he did not resign or speak out against the Vietnam War while in that office. But I felt I knew with some certainty how he would govern, which principles governed his public life.

I still don't know about Obama--that is what's holding me back from backing him. I may vote for him, holding my nose, but I can't find enthusiasm for him.

Amazingly, early on for a short while, I supported him over Hillary--bcz I believed the hype based on his '04 convention speech. While Edwards had me with universal healthcare and the NOLA announcement, I felt I better buckle down and learn more about the most viable contenders. I liked Dodd a lot, also. I never was big on Biden, not for Jerlyn's reasons, but based on what he did with the banking/bankruptcy "reform" bill.

I actually worked to learn about Obama's legislative and personal history. Learned more about Clinton, as well, including things I would have thought the MCM woudl have covered--but they hadn't. I came out of my search for info thinking Clinton was so much better when I really scrutinized things. And I hadn't even wanted her to run! It didn't help that my exposure to Obama's speaking style was at the debates where his word fogs and inability to make a point drove me crazy.

Sorry to bore with another recitation of how I came to be a Clinton advocate, but I did look at Obama. I just did not "see the light," and his dependence on that kind of "persuasion" actually scared me off. I'm not a good True Believer--too skeptical.

Oh wait, everywhere. On TV. On the radio. In newspapers and magazines. Even from 'friends.'

Get over it already. She lost. Move on. Your whining and bitterness is not a lost vote for Obama. It's a vote for McCain and four more years of Bush policies. Blah blah blah.

With all due respect to Mr. 'Letter-Writing Friend,' he just doesn't understand the basis of why I, and so many of us, just won't fall automatically behind Barack Obama.

At least he was truthful and prefaced his lecture to us with "As a long-time supporter of Barack Obama..." That itself prepared me for what to expect.

The same old talk-points and narratives.

Now, it's not because Obama's black. It's not because he beat my preferred candidate. It's because he's just not qualified and ready for the job. He did not earn this nomination. He was pushed mightily along the way.

I've said it before, and I'd love to say it again.

I respectfully reject your call for unity. I can not understand why we ignore this one simple point: if Sen Obama and most democrats are so deeply concerned about these issues why did he not simply select Sen Clinton for VP. No matter what his personal views were about the primary and any supposed slights he could have single handedly ended this race and unified the party.

"Work to change the rules; work to lessen the influence of misogyny on our politics; work to keep shattering the glass ceiling."  

Wouldn't it be nice if this lawyer, Barack Obama and Obama supporters in general just once expressed they too should stand up to misogyny?  And wouldn't it have been nice if they had done it during the primaries rather than benefit from it?  But I guess protecting women's rights is "women's work."

Second, I remember being told a million times that we HAD to select Obama because if we didn't all those young people would stay home. So we were bullied during the primaries to cow-tow to people who WEREN'T committed to the party.  Now we're being bullied by those SAME people to follow their line?

So it's ok if young people and Obama supporters ditch the Dems - so ok we had to give into their demands?  But committed Hillary voters (and long-time Dems) just have to sit down and STFU?

Don't complain about detention, torture, and surveillance.

Because, I guess, the Obama administration will not complain about it either? He certainly has not been vocal on any of these things as a US Senator.

Don't give up your day job.

Sincerely,

You cover up for your child, or pat the dog and tell him he's good while he's chewing on your shoe, there is no lesson learned.  I want the DNC to remember what that 'D' stands for--not just for a candidate on a ballot, but a for system that administers justice to all and tries to offer all citizens that right to pursue happiness.

Second, while I'm personally on board with Obama, I'm confident this letter is 100% "more of the same" to anyone who isn't.  You know, as a lawyer, if I know the judge has rejected my best argument a dozen times already from other litigants, I'm going to find a different way of making the argument even if in my heart I think it's totally persuasive.  Everyone who can be won over by SGBTRvW has already been won over.  So while it's an eloquent letter, I really don't know what purpose the author expected it to serve.

that is there right as voters.  

Same goes for someone pounding me for voting for OBAMA .. It isnt going to make me pull the lever for McCain..that will never happen and will just anger me.  So i know how the anti-Obama's feel in that regard. I respect thier views 100%

Respect is the only way

  Here's a big problem with the "don't complain" list. If its true that by not voting for Obama, I forfeit any right to complain about any future  McCain actions, then the corollary must be that if I don't vote for McCain, then I forfeit any right to complain about any possible Obama actions. It can't just be applied one way.  

I strongly reject both versions of this anti-democratic idea. Regardless of how anyone votes, I want people to complain when they see something they think is wrong. I want them to do it in a McCain Presidency, and I want them to do it in an Obama Presidency. If I end up voting for Obama, I fully intend to hold him responsible for his actions, and not let him off the hook just because I voted for him. I'm not voting for McCain, but if I don't vote for Obama, I don't see how that gives McCain the right to do whatever he wants without criticism from me.  

  I can't truly believe that someone would honesty advocate that voting for a candidate, or failing to vote for their major opponent, relieves you of the right to criticize, or even that its good policy to advocate such a thing. I suspect that its simply a ploy to guilt me into a vote that I don't feel comfortable making. Its a bogus argument.

As a long-time supporter of Barack Obama - and a former official in the Clinton Administration - I ask you to step back and look at what you are doing.

Of course it is my fault for running into the fist of the DNC. I've thought about what I'm doing and what I did. I enabled a party that has proven they don't really care about me and what is happening to me. They've proven the only thing they care about is achieving power and maintaining it.

Every time a Clinton supporter goes on network television and attacks Obama it feeds the story line that the right wing smear machine is pushing and that the lapdog media is swallowing.

Since I've never been on television and the vast majority of Clinton supporters have never going on network television I'm not sure what this has to do with me or the price of beans.

But every election has a winner and a loser. As deep as her own pain must be Hillary Clinton demonstrated that she can put it behind her. You should do the same - you MUST do the same - for the sake of the Democratic Party and the nation. Work to change the rules; work to lessen the influence of misogyny on our politics; work to keep shattering the glass ceiling. But don't let John McCain become president.

How funny that I must do something for the good of the party and nation. Yet the party didn't decided to step in while my candidate was assaulted over and over. They didn't deem it necessary to call foul for the good of the party and nation but I must now put party and nation first when they hung me and my candidate out to dry.

Even if we worked to change the rules they would be ignored just like we all saw with the RBC.

...Please - remember the past. Don't make us repeat it.

I intend to vote for Obama.

But every time I read something like that it makes rethink my support.

Here's a suggestion to Obama supporters.  Don't try to bully a Clinton supporter into voting for Obama by telling us that the all manner of horrors will happen if we don't.  It doesn't work.

Hillary gave the best model for convincing her supporters.  Variations on that are the only thing that's going to work.

And now they want us to help them fight what they refused to do for her.

A constant theme of entreaties like this is their constant demand for US to do something for HIM eg. get over it, vote for him, ignore our principles and doubts, etc and so on.  

But we never hear what HE will do for US in exchange.

Publicly apologizing for those associated with his campaign staff for the blatant, unnecessary smearing of the Clintons as racist would be a start.

And then firing those people from his staff and promising, as he did at one point during his campaign, that if he saw or heard anyone doing anything like that again, they wouldn't be with his staff.

He could also admit to and reject the blatant favoritism of those at the DNC (namely Brazile and Dean) who sat on the scales for him and STILL found themselves having to drag him across the finish line despite the clear message from those stalwart Democratic Primary voters who voted for his Opponent in historic numbers.

Furthermore, admitting that he allowed a disgusting level of sexism to emerge from those who support him in the Media without taking one step to correct it or speak out against it (because it benefited him) would not only be necessary, but healthy for us, as a Nation, to begin seeing clearly how far our Media has fallen.

And, just to finish off this Wish List, he could incorporate staff from the most recent Democratic winning ticket for President who actually know how to run a successful race and eschew the "advice" of those Chicago based pols he's so enamored of.  Advice which seems to be losing him support on not only a State-by-State level, but on a National one as well.

If Barack Obama can do all that, perhaps we can then talk about where he stands on the Issues and how he can move closer to becoming a True Democrat before November 4th.

But as this appears to be, in the truest sense of the word, a Wish List, I don't expect your Candidate to come through for me.  So why should I come through for him?

Dear friend and fellow Democrat;

I need to comment on some of your statements.

To whit:

But if you do, or if you sit on your hands in this election, don't complain about tax breaks for the rich and tax burdens on the poor.

Because the Democratic Congress is powerless to pass tax laws?

Don't complain about American servicemen and women dying in Iraq and maybe Iran, Georgia or wherever.

Because the Democratic Congress is powerless to cut off funding for war, or prevent money from being spent on future wars?

Don't complain about detention, torture, and surveillance.

Because the Democratic Congress is powerless to shut down Gitmo, pass laws ending torture or let any of these laws with sunset provisions to expire?

Don't complain about judges who take away a woman's right to choose and a worker's right to unionize.

Because the Democratic Congress is powerless to pass labor laws, or to deny confirmation to judges?

Don't complain about environmental degradation and giveaways to mining and oil companies.

Because the Democratic Congress is too powerless to prevent passing these giveaways or prevent erosion of current environmental laws?

Don't complain about an energy policy that takes money out of the pockets of hard-working Americans and gives it to Russian oligarchs and states that finance terrorism.

Because the Democratic Congress is powerless to enact any energy policy, these things are all done by presidential fiat?

Don't complain about a stagnant economy with growing inequality.

Because the Democratic Congress is powerless to (see above regarding fiscal and spending policies)?

Don't complain about our broken health care system.

Because the Democratic Congress is powerless to pass even the most meager reforms on a bi-partisan basis (isn't that what Obama is saying we must do)?

Because you will have had your chance to do something about these issues - and walked away from it.

Just like the Democratic Congress has for the last two years. Except they had an excuse, they are in power and we are not?

Santayana famously said that those "who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Don't we know it!

In 1968 Democrats angry over the war deserted Hubert Humphrey - and we got Richard Nixon.

In 2000, disaffected Democrats voted for Ralph Nader - and we got George W. Bush.

And in 2008, the Democrats still disaffected by Bill Clinton's blow jobs in 1997 - got us Barack Obama, who seems determined at this point to run as an unapologetic Republican-lite.

Please - remember the past. Don't make us repeat it.

Yeah, I'm remembering it right now. It's not pleasant that supposed Democrats have decided to ignore the past and are running afraid of our legacy as a progressive party. Do you not read polls? It's not working!

Look Hillary Clinton last night gave Barack Obama the best excuse he could ever have to find his uh, his, huh, "inner courage" and run as a Democrat. The ball is in his court now. Will he or won't he take the mantle as head of the Democratic Party and its history of fighting for progressive causes? If he does, you will find me in his corner (I believe like Hillary does in "deathbed conversions"). If he is going to continue to run against the Democratic party and its historic principles and ideals and instead on some kind of messianic, "post-partisan" dog and pony show, then count me out.

All the best,

Herb the verb

It's the cavalier treatment of voters by the Rules and Bylaws Committee who shifted votes around like so many chess pieces.  Just try to imagine for one second if the roles were reversed and Obama found himself robbed of earned votes....

The media played a cameo role, but the DNC and the party honchos were the stars, lining up for Obama when the voters in their own districts clearly preferred Hillary.   It was the party leaders who told Clinton to step aside, who tried to prevent her name from being put into nomination.

Instead of lecturing Clinton supporters about their duty, it would behoove Obama and his faithful to speak out against the anti-democratic primary process that disenfranchises voters and turns the nomination over to superdelegates.  

Don't BLAME the voters if they can't vote for the candidate.

"In 1968 we lost to Nixon because disgruntled liberals refused to back Humphrey.

"In 1980 we lost because many disaffected Kennedy supporters refused to help Carter and we got Reagan.

"In 2000 we lost Al Gore and got Bush because disaffected liberals sat it out or voted for Nader."

How can I reward Barak Obama and the DNC with my vote when they have gamed the system to select him? it would only encourage them to do it again.

He blocked the revote in MI and Fl. His petty gestures brushing Hillary of his shoulder. (watch music videos much?) his vote for FISA granting telecos immunity...what are you talking about?

Don't complain about detention, torture, and surveillance.

Barak is already supporting surveillance and has demonstrated an olympic ability to capitulate and triangulate to get elected. He voted for Cheney's energy bill, he's cozying up to the evangelical right wing, praised Reagan while stepping all over Bill Clinton, the president who brought prosperity in the 90's.

Barak Obama does not represent the Democratic ideals I grew up with. He has made the Democratic party Republican like.

I'm tired of the conspiracy theories that the Clintons wake up in the mornings, twirl their evil mustaches and plot how they're going to take over the White House for good. I'm tired of the conspiracy theories that the Obamas and his supporters (who, by some stretch of the imagination, are all male misogynists) wake up in the mornings, twirl their evil mustaches, and plot how they're going to be sexist towards Hillary and her supporters (who, by some stretch of the imagination, are all female feminists).

I'm tired of the labeling that the Clintons are racists/selfish/kitchen-sink-throwing/immoral. I'm tired of the labeling that the Obamas are reverse-racists/sexists/black panthers/anti-Christ.

What I'm mostly tired of is the, "Out of [insert number of years] of voting Democratic, I don't know who I'm going to vote for/ I'm going to vote Republican/ I'm not going to vote/ etc." What the h-e-double hockey sticks are you telling me for?! If something in the party has changed (no pun intended) and you don't like it, guess what! Vote for a different party! If you don't like any of the options presented, guess what! Stay home! If you want to punish your party by voting for its absolute anti-thesis, guess what! Go ahead and punish them! It's a free country, no one's stopping you, no one has a gun to your head demanding that you vote this or that way, or even vote at all! State your intentions, do it, and then go about living!

I'm sure that all of the energy put into telling as many people as you possibly can how your upset about whatever problem and how your going to solve the problem by voting for someone else can be used for more important purposes, such as conducting demonstrations, peaceful or otherwise, that the media must absolutely stop all forms of discrimination; or demand that any person who runs for president must have a minimum of 35 years in political/public service which must be approved by such and such committee, and that if that person is allowed to run, that person should be subject to immediate disqualification from running or continuing a campaign if he/she displays any forms of verbal, physical, intellectual, or systematic discrimination, any ties with convicted felons, or if they make any promise or statement that they break, change their mind on, or that proves to be false; or demand that our entire nominating system is complete and utter garbage and should be overhauled, nominating leaders as they should be nominated, being that the one with the most votes from the people wins.

If it is that much of a heart-wrenching action to vote for someone you don't like, then don't vote for him/her. Vote for someone else and go about your business. If experience counts, and candidate A has experience and candidate B doesn't, vote for candidate A. Period. If candidate B makes you sick every time you turn on the TV, guess what! Don't vote for candidate B! It's a free country and you can vote for whoever you want to.

However, if one absolutely knows, without a doubt in their mind, that candidate A is going to bring about negative results in the future, but one doesn't know for sure if candidate B will bring about all/any of the positive results that one wants in the future, and one still votes for candidate A, then there's no real basis for complaint when candidate A wins and delivers on what one expects. One should actually be satisfied because candidate A delivered exactly on what one expected, regardless of whether or not one approves of said result. That would be like someone having the option to vote for an illegal war, knowing exactly what will happen if the war were approved and executed, and then voting for it, and then complaining about the war, even though it went/is going exactly as they predicted it would go. What sense does that make?

I've had it up to (pointing to neck) here with all of the complaining and the whining and the crying and the moaning and the groaning and the noses being held and the senseless arguing and the conspiracies and the blanket accusations and the blanket assumptions and the blanket stereotyping and the pouting and the condescension and the disrespect and the threatening and the apathy. Make up your mind about whether or not your going to vote. If you decide to vote, decide who you think will do the best job and vote for that person. If you're not satisfied with anyone who's being presented, then don't vote. It's as simple as that. Once you've made that decision, you can focus on more pressing matters, whatever those may be.

Everything I won't have a 'right' to complain about if Obama loses (again, nothing is ever Obama's responsibility, is it?) is something that either Obama himself, or his more ardent Congressional supporters, could have been fighting for in the last 2, 4 or 8 years.  They have not.  The premise of your friend's argument is faulty.

You are making a case based on a Democratic candidate that does not exist (in Obama) and a Democratic Party that does not exist.  It used to exist, but Obama has disclaimed all connection with it.  Dean, Pelosi, Brazile et al, have quite clearly stated their intentions that it shall never exist again, if they get their way.

I'm not voting for McCain.  I simply can't.  But the same part of me -- my principles -- that won't let me vote for McCain is the part of me that can't vote for Obama.  And those are what they are.  They aren't swayed by cajoling, whining, or bullying, or threats.

I can't, alone, stop the Democratic Party from abandoning the bread-and-butter Democrats from its ranks, from trying to purge the working class who they should be championing, from standing silently if not laughingly by while some of their members and the media spewed misogynist vitriol and race-baited to win a nomination, but I d*mn well don't have to help it.

Implying that all Clinton supporters who don't jump on the Obama/Biden train are irrational, stupid, uneducated, ill-informed about current events, and/or too short-sighted to consider the future when they vote is insulting and counterproductive to your long-term goal. And I consider using the "Emotional Hillary-ites" meme as feeding a negative lapdog media, right-wing storyline as well.

Don't tell me that I should be doing the work outlined above -- I've been doing it all my life. Not just in terms of politics, but in my personal and professional life. And not just self-interestedly and exclusively in terms of misogyny. I've marched and voted and campaigned to advance civil and labor rights (in many instances long before I ever heard the word "feminist.") I've broken barriers of gender and class for myself -- and used the power and authority I was able to obtain while working for others, as well as in my own business, to encourage and create new opportunites for younger women, minorities, and both young men and women from disadvantaged backgrounds. I've been committed to protecting the rights of and expanding the opportunities available to others -- all the while thinking that I was part of a "progressive" community of people who, although they might not share my gender, or race, generation or economic class, were as equally committed to me; to respectful treatment and political and economic equality and justice for women, and working class Americans, like me.

But in this primary the Obama campaign, Obama supporters and representatives of the Democratic party too often spoke and acted in ways that told me that women like me, and people from working class backgrounds like mine, were not respected members of that community. Were not people whose rights and interests they were ready to treat with respect much less fight for.

So what I want to hear, need to be convinced of, is that YOU, as an Obama supporter, and the Obama movement, are committed to that work. Because it is Obama and his supporters whose commitment to those values were found wanting in the primary.

Instead of telling me what I must do to fight misogyny, demonstrate how you will fight misogyny.

5. He has a "let them eat cake" U. Chicago approach to real families' economic issues.

6. He has consistently preferred the company and votes of Republicans and evangelicals over the party's base, which may explain why Obama has done so remarkably poorly among, you know, actual Democrats (can anyone think of another candidate in history who has done so poorly among his own party's registered voters?  take away the folks who just became Democrat for this one election, and Obama's support among Dems is downright pitiable).

7. We are on the verge of an historic opportunity for true progressive change.  And we have a clueless right-center free market anti-FDR as our candidate.  Electing Obama most likely will squander this opportunity for a new New Deal.  It may be preferable to endure 4 years of McCain for a chance at a real liberal (you know, someone who actually stands up for working families and provides them with meaningful policy changes instead of just Hope and a handful of incremental differences from the Republicans, which he feels free to later backtrack on).

So, we should reward Obama the presidency because scary McCain will ruin us?

How in the world could anyone, anywhere, and of any persuation draw the conclusion that this crook Obama will do any the things he promises--given that he has caved on every issue that Democrats have always held sacrosanct.  Issues that lie deep and are embedded in our Constitution. Issues that he has trashed even as the presumptive nominee,such as his vote for FISA, his intention of enhancing faith based initiatives, his pro vote on the Cheny energy bill, etc.

Every time a Clinton supporter goes on network television and attacks Obama it feeds the story line that the right wing smear machine is pushing and that the lapdog media is swallowing.

good.  That means that although the DNC didn't want to hear us, our voices are being heard.

The problem with the letter is that I know all this stuff. What I don't know is whether OBAMA knows all this stuff.  Because Pelosi and Reid's Congress sure didn't.

I've got 'til November to figure it out. Let him show me something, and then I'll decide.

Fixing his broken health care plan -- using clear, explicit, and above all FREE FROM PARSING language would be a really good start.

Ditto gay rights.

Obama on the other hand hasn't not only never given up pretenses and airs, but since June has increased them. This is the problem Obama supporters have - NOT HRC supporters.  

Obama supporters need to focus on Obama. They need to make him be a leader that people can believe in. If Obama were to do that, HRC supporters would be right there with them. Instead all Obama supporters do is rag on HRC supporters - that will never bring them around the way they should be brought around.

Obama voted for the patriot act.
Obama voted for FISA.
On Iraq, he campaigned for Lieberman - and now he had named Biden as his running mate - an active advocate of the war.
He has rattled the saber with respect to Iran and now Russia.
On health care - Obama's plan is a mess. He is against single-payer - the plan most Americans favor.
What has he had to say about torture?
He changed his position on allowing off-shore oil drilling.
He has repeatedly proclaimed his Christianity... his version thereof which he says makes him oppose the right of gay people to marry.
(I am completely repelled by someone wearing their religion on their sleave. Jesus said that people who do this are hypocrites. I agree with Jesus.)

All this, you might notice has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton.

I will admit that I preferred her. I think she is more intelligent, more mature, and has more heart. I think the Obama campaign smeared her as a racist - while Obama stood by.

But that is not the point.
If Obama wants my vote, he has to act like a democrat.
More than that, he has to act and talk like a progressive democrat. I don't want to hear about his admiration for Ronald Reagan.

As a long-time supporter of Barack Obama - and a former official in the Clinton Administration - I ask you to step back and look at what you are doing.

... to JJJr, Representative  Clyburn, Obama Campaign HQ, and about 90% of the Obama Fan Base back in January.

Open Letter to Obama Supporters Trying To Get Clinton Supporters To Vote For Obama -

Just STFU and let Hillary do it.  

I don't like Obama - I got troll-rated on  DKos over a year ago for mentioning that the DLC loves him and diarying about the aggressive tactics of his fundraisers. Even then, he didn't seem progressive to me.

Now it's confirmed (not progressive) and my complaints include the Democratic Party machine. I hoped in vain for a Congress with a spine. I hoped Pelosi would keep her promise to end the war and hold Bushies accountable.

I can complain that if we had Democratic leadership who led with democratic values we wouldn't be where we are now.

Is this even an issue for discussion?

They have.

Whew.  Thanks to Jeralyn for giving me the opportunity to respond.

I'll try to choose my words carefully in the hopes of not ticking people off on a personal level any more than I already have; it really is my intent to engage in a serious way, not to patronize, demean or hector anyone.  (And please don't take my flaws out on Jeralyn).

It seems to me that the comments pretty much fall into two categories - forward-looking and backward-looking.

I understand the forward-looking comments - the people who are concerned with Barack Obama's qualifications and his policies.  I think the criticism that Obama needs to be more clear and specific about what he will do is a fair one - I worry that he is succumbing to the traditional Democratic candidate's disease of listening too    much to consultants (a disease that probably hurt Hillary as well) and I hope that tomorrow night he starts to fix that problem.

I can only say to this first group that I hope that over the next couple of months you come to agree with me that whatever doubts you have about Obama, John McCain will be worse in almost every    conceivable respect.  Given the issues that you say concern you, I hope you conclude that he and the people he is likely to surround  himself with (thanks, "tree," for making that point) are going to be better than McCain and his plutocratic mob - even if you think that Hillary might have been better yet.  There's no doubt of that in my mind.  Obama's not perfect - but he's got to be better than McCain.

But if on Election Day you genuinely believe that John McCain will be a better president than Barack Obama, that he will do more to further the goals that you think are important - well, I may    disagree vehemently but I respect that choice.

And I hope no one succumbs to the revolutionary's fantasy that if we just get four years of McCain, things will be so bad that the Democrats will be sure to win in 2012.  That's never worked in the    past.  Let's win now.

At the risk of exposing myself to more flame, however, I do have a problem with the  backward-looking comments - the people who say, "I
am so angry about the way Hillary was treated during the campaign that I'm not going to support Obama now."  This is the position I find troubling.

Believe me, I'm not disputing that you have genuine grievances.  I may disagree on the merits of some (not all) of them but I understand that my view on these issues is not yours.  But I do ask
you to consider what is the best thing to do about those grievances.  Is it to go out and try to make sure that it doesn't happen again?  Or is it to take your ball and going home?

I particularly want to respond to the suggestion by "Molly Pitcher" that the DNC needs to suffer the consequences of its bad behavior. That's a great philosophy for child-rearing - the one I followed with my kids.  But the difference here is the externalities involved. It's not only the DNC that will suffer - it's the entire country.  It's as if you punish your child for staying out late at the movies by blowing up the movie theatre.  I am not suggesting that you "get over it" - I am suggesting that you fight it on its own terms, in its own arena.

I can't speak for the DNC; I can't speak for Obama.  I can only speak for myself.  I'd like to see both misogyny AND racism eliminated from our political discourse and indeed from the nation at large.  I'd like to see a fairer and more transparent nomination  process, though I'm damned if I can figure out the best way to do it.

But I also don't want to live in this country for four or eight more years of a Republican Administration.  I don't want my three    daughters to have to live with the consequences of that any more than I want them to live in a world where people choose who to vote for on the basis of gender or skin color - or where politicians    think that they can gain an advantage by appealing to those prejudices.  The choice we have now is between Barack Obama and John McCain, not anyone else.  I know which one I think will be  better for me and for my children - for all the reasons I
enumerated originally.  And I hope that those of you who are feeling this disappointment and rage come to the same conclusion.