Recycling back to 1789. The founders really did change the mindset then. They went in with broken articles of confederation and came out with a new Constitution. The glaze of history and some outright hagiography has obscured how the sausage was made, but by all accounts it was loud, noisy and nasty with lot's of arguing. Salon today might be a faint reflection of those times.

But I think we are here today with our own version of the issues around the 3/5ths compromise. Some of us are fine with the status quo of our nation. Others are all or nothing for their particular cause. Most of us are probably in the middle, looking to improve what we can, and will leave the rest to another, more perfect day. To elect either Hillary or Obama will necessitate a change in mindset, a partial victory of sorts. History will judge how large or small. Even McCain could turn out differently than we think; he definitely has that crazy streak that is disliked by his party, though he appears to have chained himself to his party's platform.

MaddieP believes in the karma or fate of Nations. I believe our fate is not set and that it can be altered by force of will and by our actions. We have quite a ways to go before November and the conversation/ convention is just starting. Who knows how far we can push the ball forward.

Frankly, though, from the vitriol I've seen pour forth of late, it seems pretty clear to me that, if by some miracle we manage to elect this guy, he won't be long for this earth.

Well, I've had the same concern for quite awhile. Keep you fingers crossed that it doesn't happen. But often, that's the reward for a job well done. Earth.

The fact check numbers seem close to the globe numbers (diff by ~20,000), and also appear to match up somewhat with these exit poll numbers as well from MSNBC where republicans were 9% of the vote with the split 46/53 Hillary/Obama. I have no idea what the margins of error are, so I guess it's good enough for gov't work. If I had more free time, I'd do a bit more analysis: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21226009/

It would be interesting to how the percentage of republicans/independents voting for Hillary/Obama changes between contests. I was suprised to find Obama won IA among democrats only 32 to 33.

But my point was not that Rush was skewing TX results for Hillary, but that purists like billcap want to exclude all non-dems from voting results. So you have to through out the numbers from both sides.

I can see his point, but I'm also pretty sure that the size of the democratic party is shrinking, not growing. So one could end up a candidate that passes the purity test among the faithful, but is unelectable. In some ways, we are already having that argument.

The USA will be worse under an Obama rule than under Bush. Obama will rule like another Mugabe and the his win would be revolutionary and be the beginning of the end of the United States. How do you like that for Wrightian hyperbole?

Excellent! You and WES advance to the semi-finals

I don't recall that kind of language from Martin Luther King or Obama for that matter. It was a political blunder to have Wright in the campaign and it was a political necessity to run him off.

I agree that it was a blunder to have Rev Wright around, although others may disagree. I haven't heard Obama say anything close to that. But MLK said some firey stuff in his day. If I was cynical, I'd say that we have turned him into a saint so that we don't have to listen to the harsh stuff and make any changes in our lifes.

Here's a quote and a link to a recent article on MLK:

Feb. 4, 1968: "God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. . . . And we are criminals in that war. We've committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place." King then predicted this response from the Almighty: "And if you don't stop your reckless course, I'll rise up and break the backbone of your power."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/20/AR2008032003021.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

I'm going to start saying 'la-la-la-la' right about now.

Well, maybe that's a very good, but crude way of putting it. Who's in and who's out and do you have a shot at an equal share? We've been slowly expanding those boundaries over a few hundred years, maybe too fast for those already on the inside and not fast enough for those on the outside.

It's hard to see the future when this kind of change takes place across generations. Sometimes a thin line, between words and reality.

Yes, I did read the article, which is why I want to say la-la-la-la.

But I see no reason to speak ill of Hillary at this time. It only seems to rally her supporters (as noted in the article) and perpetuate this shit flinging contest. My views should be widely noted at this point. Like Joan, I'm supporting whoever is the nominee (heh).