What do you want to do? Change the rules in the middle of the game. I, and about two-hundred other citizens stayed at the polls in Texas for three hours after then closed to caucus in my small precinct tonight. We fought a bit, mostly over what the rules meant, but we read through them together and ultimately agreed that Obama got 10 delegates from our precinct to the County convention and Hillary got 9.

Hillary won the primary in my county, but Obama won the caucuses. How is following the rules that have been in place for twenty or more years a "technical victory?" What would you have us do -- ignore the time and effort people spent at the caucuses tonight.

One good thing that came from the caucus is we all got to meet some new Democrats from out neighborhood we didn't know. And at the end, we all pledged to support either candidate, whichever one won the nomination. Sounds like we got a lot more done tonight than the posters on this thread!

To the poster on page one who suggested that Sen. Kennedy, et al should cast their superdelegate votes for HRC as apparently some members of the Georgia Congressional delegation are doing, there are appreciable differences. Obama carried the Congressional districts in questions -- majority minority district -- by margins of 5:1 to 3:1. It wasn't just a win, it was a tidal wave. In the case of Massachusetts, while Senator Clinton won the State, it was not by such a huge margin that one could say that the State unequivocally rejected one candidate over the other.

Well, it's not Academia Waltz, but what is?

I'm a high school drop out and a lawyer, too. Not quite the same as your story, but some parallels, so perhaps I'm uniquely suited to give some advice. I quit H.S. at the end of my junior year because I was accepted early to college. However, my H.S. grades were not that good, but my SAT's were very good. I hated H.S. because I hated, as you did, arbitrary authority figures. My grades were only going to get worse, so I figured that then was as good a time as any to bolt.

College was great. I went to a good, but not great, private liberal arts school. Smart teachers, reasonably smart students. I loved it. Beat the hell out of H.S.

Then I went to law school. Here our paths diverge. I went to a top ten in the nation law school. I thought it was the easiest academic thing I had ever done. The only home work was to read, no papers, and one final exam was your entire grade. And the exam was time pressured. The perfect structure for a procrastinating bullshitter who was a great crammer and performed best under pressure. I was in hog heaven.

But studying for the bar was not picnic. But if you take it seriously, you will pass. And you will find your niche in the legal field. And like me, once you are successful, you'll get a big kick out of telling your clients you are a H.S. drop out. Just relax, take your bar review class seriously, and you'll do fine. Look around at some of the idiots who practice law. They passed, and so can you. Even if you have to take it more than once -- one of my valued partners passed on her third try -- you'll get there.

I'm an Edwards supporter. I hosted a fund raiser for him and along with one other bundler, we raise a bit over $100,000 for his campaign. I'd do anything within my power to see him elected. But the odds of either Hillary or Obama dropping out of the race at this point are about the same as the odds of my cat becoming a viable candidate in time to get delegates in the California primary. They're not going anywhere. And frankly, if John has a realistic path to the nomination at this point, I don't see it. (And I'm on phone calls with the campaign about once a week.)

As to why he has not received more support from the electorate, I frankly am not sure. He has been horribly short changed by the media, but that has to be expected given that he is truly outside of the establishment and the corporate media is nothing more than the very embodiment of the establishment. But even at that, and despite the two history making figures he's running against, I thought he would be in the thick of the race.

All that being said, however, I still believe that his presence in the race is good for the country and good for the Democratic Party. He is raising issues that no other candidate is raising. He is pushing the other two candidates to address issues, rather than just bitch and carp about each other. And frankly, I think he will campaign with enthusiasm for the party's nominee in the fall and do so effectively. This fight truly is personal to him, and he will, like I will, do anything to elect the eventual Democratic nominee. And we will need healing as a party to succeed in the fall. And perhaps that can be his roll.

Tell him you're into girls and propose a threesome. After that, he'll be so tickled, he won't care about the rest. :)

The situation in Gaza reminds me of a sign that I keep in the copy room in my law firm which states (with irony): "The beatings will continue until morale improves." My employees laugh at the sign because 1) there are really no beatings; and 2) we recognize the irony of the remark that beating would never improve morale. It's a shame that the geniuses who run U.S. and Israeli policy need such a sign in their office to be reminded of such an obvious facet of human nature.