She knew herself well enough to know that sex would destroy the friendship.

I think you are exactly right...the problem is that I have trouble detaching my thinking from my penis, and I would bet that a lot of other men have the same problem.

Yes, my union supports Obama. We are health care workers, public service employees, and building services personnel/security officers.

Obama needs to emphasize his strengths with ALL demographics.

A woman I know told me about a year ago that she didn't want to sleep with me because "she liked me". Now, this is not what I usually expect as a result of being liked. But I accepted her reality, and we're still friends.

Sometimes you just have to accept what someone says without thinking about it too much.

Most people that I read here who say these things about Clinton do so without prefacing their comments with "I'm fine with a woman but..." They usually just spout their garbage directly.

On the other hand, people who object to Clinton for particular policy reasons often use the preface you have described. I think this is a reaction to the constant accusations of sexism from Clinton supporters.

So I think your example is somewhat bogus.

it's a close race...but not a stalemate. no I didn't read the article.

"There may be times when the will of the people, for example Iraq, the will of the people, unfortunately is that we withdraw from Iraq immediately or very very soon. I don't share that view of the will of the people. And I think the will of the people was that we get out of Korea when Harry Truman was president of the United States, but then he decided to do what he thought was best for the will of the country. Now, I don't compare this issue with Iraq or Korea, but, look, I'll be glad to continue this discussion, and read the stuff about it, but I am not changing my position on quote 'medical marijuana,' okay?" (Nov. 14, 2007, McCain blogger conference call, said upon being reminded that the will of the people in California was to make medical marijuana legal)

http://politics.healthdiaries.com/john-mccain-quotes-on-medical-marijuana.html

Q: President Bush has talked about our staying in Iraq for 50 years — (cut off by McCain)

McCAIN: Make it a hundred.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/04/mccain-100-years/

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, says her group has always considered McCain pro-life as well. And it's not just abortion, she says.

"He voted against family planning, he voted against the freedom of access to clinic entrances — that was about violence against women in clinics," Keenan says, adding, "He voted against funding for teen pregnancy-prevention programs, and making sure that abstinence only was medically accurate. This is very, very extreme."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18632802

"I have stated time after time after time that Roe v Wade was a bad decision, that I support a woman — the rights of the unborn — that I have fought for human rights and human dignity throughout my entire political career," McCain said. "To me, it's an issue of human rights and human dignity."

Again, you seem to be arguing for only those rules you agree with, and against the ones you don't like, while saying the rules must be followed.

You argue that the caucuses are undemocratic, but argue that we must follow the rules regarding the superdelegates, who are hardly democratic at all.

Why not just accept ALL the rules? If we follow ALL the rules of the nomination process, Obama is the leading candidate.

Obama will win the blue states in the GE. The strategy to win overall is getting the swing voters, and some red states.

Supporters of Hillary go on and on about her ability to bring in the swing voter...but her real strength is with the base, a base that would be expected to go with Obama in the GE rather than switch to McCain.

But the rules say they are NOT to be counted.

Didn't you say: "(Those are the rules.)"?

Just the rules you like.

The Democratic primary uses a delegate system for determining the winner.

This is interesting, because after her Super Tuesday flop we heard a lot about how the delegates were necessary so that any "distortions in the system" could be corrected.

Now that Obama is ahead in delegates (even closing the gap in superdelegates), it's the popular vote that matters with Clinton supporters.

The "large state" argument - that Clinton's large state wins in the primary translate into large state losses for Obama in the GE - has no basis in reality.

You are very confused, because the government is not a business. I would know, because I work for the government. That is not to say that we don't receive valuable goods and services from the government, but the President does not "run" our country.

Not bored...just wondering what you are specifically referring to.

He's not running.

Bush's key flaw is his right-wing ideology.

The stark contrast between George W Bush and Bill Clinton's presidencies should disabuse anyone from the dangerous notion that we should vote for someone who gives us great speaches about unity and tone in Washington rather than the boring policy wonk who has actual plans to make things better.

Clinton was a better speaker than either Bush by far (Bill, not Hillary)...certainly not a "boring policy wonk".

You must be new here.

...but will it fly in November? I will HATE to vote for Hillary, but I will. How many will just pass, or vote for a third party, or vote for McCain?

If Obama wins the nomination by the rules, but loses by delegate decision...well, disappointment can be a big spoiler.

For me, in the end, the question isn't whether we can keep America's promise; it's whether we will keep America's promise.

Could you repeat the question?

brevity is the soul of wit