She has to do research to establish what her own vote was and her own opinion is?

There used to be this quaint custom in the news business where 'news' (fact-based reporting) was clearly distinguished from 'editorial' (opinion pieces). This was the origin of the editorial pages, where columnists, editorial staff, and readers voiced their opinions. These lines of demarcation were the very first thing journalism students were taught. as they were sacrosanct. I know because I'm a J-school graduate, class of '71 (think pre-historic!)

The reader I chastised was putting forth an opinion (think editorial pages!) based on clearly erroneous information (think bad 'facts'!). This is actually kind of understandable, as American media themselves have all but abandoned the task of offering fact-based reporting. The standard seems to have devolved into cut-and-paste 'reporting' (think mimeograph!), driven by private agenda. So how are the young expected to know - and treasure - the importance of forming opinions after sifting through the facts/realities?

Sometimes I think we're well and truly screwed. Other times I'm certain we are. Doomed to the ash heap of history through the slow but steady creep of ignorance piled on ignorance.

Take a look at these numbers compiled by a poster over at TalkLeft who has a functioning calculator (and a brain):

Of the states that voted in March, April, May, and June:

Hillary won 8 states with 1,125,125 total votes(659,512 more than Obama):

1. Ohio (by 228,781 votes) ;

2. Rhode Island (by 33,635 votes);

3. Texas (by 95,731 votes, reduced by 5,298 caucus votes won by Obama);

4. Pennsylvania (by 214,224 votes);

5. West Virginia (by 147,551 votes);

6. Indiana (by 14,195 votes);

7. Kentucky (by 249,346 votes); and

8. Puerto Rico (by 141,662 votes).

Obama won 6 states with 465,613 total votes:

1. North Carolina (by 222,859 votes);

2. Oregon (by 108,458 votes);

3. Mississippi (by 100,123 votes);

4. Wyoming; (by 2,066 caucus votes);

5. Guam (by 7 caucus votes) and

6. Vermont (by 32,100 votes).

Any questions, class? Especially about the will of the voters (as opposed to who can best game the system early in the game). These numbers are a graphic illustration of just where Obama's chances are headed - down, down, and yet further down.

Let's UNITE behind a candidate before it is too late!

Sorry, but the HMS Too Much Freight has already sailed. And sunk. Rats.

The Obama camp didn't have to let Clinton get as many delegates from Michigan as she ended up with.

If nothing else, this statement rests on the assumption that Obama now runs the DNC/RBC. Perhaps the universe? So utterly gracious of the OFB to allow Hillary to continue breathing.

This is bullcrap, and you know it. Obama took his name off the MI ballot in a a cynical gambit to curry favor with IA voters, while portraying Hillary as an evildoer who scorns the roolz. That gamble (and theme) paid off bigtime, in large part because the frigging media turned a blind eye to Obama's dirty tricks, which it continues to do to this day. Obama was not on the ballot in MI because of his own doing. Therefore, he deserves zero votes. End of story. And end of Democratic party, as of the RBC charade last Saturday. Whether Obamacrats choose to believe the latter or not is their problem. But it will be the whole party's problem come November, when John McCain wins in a landslide.

(Note: a third party is apparently forming as I type - the PUMA party, made up of the millions whose mantra is now "Party Unity My Ass". See Riverdaughter for details.)

"OBAMA'S NAME WASN'T EVEN ON THE BALLOT"

Because Obama removed his own damned name from the ballot. Whatever happened to taking responsibility for the consequences of your actions? Oh, sorry, forgot. Must be another of the Thousand And One Obama Exceptionz.

Sorry, the sniff test condemns Obama when it comes to MI. Obama's campaign wasn't exactly getting stellar feedback from the voters when he decided on the MI gambit. This was desperation time, and so he made a desperate, down and dirty move in order to pander to IA voters. Thus your argument that this very calculated move didn't fit into the Obama m.o. is a very weak one.

Your thesis that Hillary has a duty to solve problems of Obama's making is nothing less than stunning in its arrogance and presumption, not to mention stupidity. Hillary owes Obama absolutely nothing. In fact, Obama owes Hillary a big fat apology, one made on every prime time talk show and newscast in this country. It should preferably be made on bended knee in sackcloth and ashes. And even then, millions of us wouldn't take exception if Hillary scorned the apology. In fact, millions of us believe that Hillary would be a fool to lift a single finger in aid of Obama. Unless, of course, it was the middle one. She could always sort of scratch her cheek while she's doing it.

When the hell do we get around to a serious discussion of the role which sexism/misogyny played in the primaries? This undoubtedly has had a larger effect than 'white racism', but oh no, we can't go there. We must protect Obama at all costs. But Hillary? Naaah. That would take all the fun out of WWTSBJQ.

Oh, and get ready for the Farrakhan Bombchelle to explode any day now. The Tape is almost certainly Out There - more and more references are being made to it in the MSM. However, I begin to think that a video of Obama torturing kittens could surface, but all the in-the-tankers would somehow rationalize it away. "Oh, but they bit him!" "Kittens are evil. He was doing the world a favor." "They were Hillary's kittens, after all." "Hillary tortured Socks. What's the big deal?" "The kittens were actually black. This video has been altered to make them look white, just to make Obama look like a racist." And on and on and on...