Senator Clinton:

Just read where Senator Patrick Leahy is calling on you to drop out of the Presidential race.

Believe me.

I know something about this.

Here’s my advice:

Don’t listen to people when they tell you not to run anymore.

That’s just political bigotry.

Listen to your own inner citizen First Amendment voice.

This is America.

Just like every other citizen, you have a right to run.

Whenever you like.

For as long as you like.

It’s up to you, Hillary.

Just tell them –

It’s democracy.

Get used to it.

Yours truly,

Ralph Nader

http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/nader_to_clinton_just_tell_the.html

but she chooses to say things that could easily be misconstrued.

not too crazy about boiled eggs, but the deviled stuff would be good on a cracker. Maybe a ritz cracker. With a Coors Light or two.

as a reason why the primary should continue until June.

She doesn't really need to get RFK involved.

Her candidacy is history, after all.

are not mutually exclusive.

A lot of people do this here in the letters section. They DECRY THE OTHER. I certainly do...the other freaks me out.

But instead of demonizing the enemy by way of clever propaganda, Rosa Parks simply claimed what was rightfully hers. An anti-blogger, in a way.

With Obama it is not so simple. The votes in Kentucky were not really his...but they could have been...in some future America we might imagine.

However, to say "you're a racist, vote for me" is ridiculous.

On the other hand, he's made sure that the cameras have recorded him on his mountain bike.

Bush has led our country in the wrong direction for sure, but he's (slightly) better at controlling his image than people give him credit for.

they know Obama has a good chance in November.

Michael Jackson as Michael Landon...Lindsay Lohan as Mary.

I'm waiting.

you know you love us

Nothing humiliating about standing up against Bush/McCain...whatever the outcome.

You're confused about what democracy represents.

The name of this page is "Letters to the Editor", not "moderated Usenet news group". One could argue that those who carry on running conversations are abusing the medium just as much as the haters and flamers.

Personally, I think this forum should be open to anyone. I've been censored here for making what I consider to be valid (and non-obscene) points. Considering the difficulties in monitoring such a large number of blog pages, I really don't think moderation here is fair or practical.

On the other hand, the ability to manage pen names like one would manage spam in an email program is an interesting idea. Since this would cost $ to implement, it probably won't happen.

Of course the problem is when other people start referencing the people that you've blocked...for instance, if A and C both talk to B, but not to each other. If everyone started doing this, it might get confusing.

I was arguing that someone was off-topic and should stop posting (someone I don't especially like). This person became upset at my comments, and subsequently appeared to become a little bit unglued.

A short section of both our posts was deleted, but her original comment that I objected to remained. It was sort of an ugly exchange, but no worse than the stuff I see here almost every day.

I didn't get any sort of note from Salon...do they do that?

Every time a letter writer (sometimes a woman) becomes upset emotionally it does not mean that that person is trying to manipulate the conversation.

Unfortunately I have become one of those online personas who rarely gives in...for the case we're talking about it would have been better if I had just apologized.

No I didn't think you reported me...the admin at Salon exercises some sort of editing logic that I've seen in action a couple of other times, with other people.

you're gonna need Excel 2007!

She would get a lot more votes than Nader. Then she could pay someone to write a book about the experience and make millions of dollars.

weird

it's bedtime

HRC: People have been trying to push me out of this ever since Iowa.

Q: Why?

HRC: I don't know. I don't know. I find it curious. Because it is unprecedented in history. I don’t understand it. Between my opponent and his camp and some in the media there has been this urgency to end this. And historically, that makes no sense. So I find it a bit of a mystery.

Q: So you don't buy the party unity argument?

HRC: I don’t because again I've been around long enough.

My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right?

We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don’t understand it. There's lots of speculation about why it is.

Q: What is your speculation?

HRC: I don't know. I find it curious. And I don't want to attribute motives or strategies to people because I don't really know, but it's a historical curiosity to me.

Is this some proven grass roots technique? Funny, I don't feel my opinion changing...

Well, write to us again sometime.

This blog is fine-tuned for conflict.