The above poster is a troll. Any "advice" from him to "help" supporters of Hillary comes from one whose intent is to drive Democrats apart. Think of this poster as a very small yapping thing at the ankles - best ignored.

BTW to those who do not review Congressional Quarterly the below quote from Hillary Clinton in the May 30 edition may be of interest - I refer in particular to the statement "I’ll support whatever the elected officials and the voters in those two states want to do.”

As the Clinton team spoke in opposition to the MI leaders' allocation plan and appears to be considering a challenge that is NOT supported by Michigan officials, the difference of four delegates [at one-half weight, or two votes] seems both petty AND inconsistent.

URL:

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002885938

EXCERPT:

Last week, Clinton indicated that she might take the fight to the convention in August if Michigan and Florida want to challenge an unfavorable ruling on their delegates. The two states were stripped of their delegates for holding early primaries; a special Democratic National Committee panel meets Saturday to decide their fate.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Clinton was asked whether she would support the states if they appeal an unfavorable rules committee decision to the convention floor, the former first lady replied:

“Yes I will. I will, because I feel very strongly about this.”

“I will consult with Floridians and the voters in Michigan because it’s really their voices that are being ignored and their votes that are being discounted, and I’ll support whatever the elected officials and the voters in those two states want to do.”

END EXCERPT

According to an interview quoted yesterday in the Congressional Quarterly [that I've crossed posted elsewhere in Salon]-

Last week, Hillary vowed to support the elected Michigan officials - when she thought they would fight. Today they presented a unified allocation plan - and pleaded with the DNC to accept it. They did [albeit at one-half weight, as with Florida] Only Hillary opposed that plan, and refused to honor Michigan's request.

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002885938

Last week, Clinton indicated that she might take the fight to the convention in August if Michigan and Florida want to challenge an unfavorable ruling on their delegates. The two states were stripped of their delegates for holding early primaries; a special Democratic National Committee panel meets Saturday to decide their fate.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Clinton was asked whether she would support the states if they appeal an unfavorable rules committee decision to the convention floor, the former first lady replied:

“Yes I will. I will, because I feel very strongly about this.”

“I will consult with Floridians and the voters in Michigan because it’s really their voices that are being ignored and their votes that are being discounted, and I’ll support whatever the elected officials and the voters in those two states want to do.”

As with the website on Fox news - 'we watch so you don't have to' I now look at a few letters here and there to discover whether Ms. Walsh has yet begun to evolve into a writer more able to analyze and critique others' statements with any depth, such that her articles are ever again worth reading.

Apparently the answer, based upon

(a) the quoted material, whose use of 'either/or' demonstrates that the writer is unable to propound more than two possible interpretations - a shallow premise [lowering somewhat the grade I would be forced to have given to Ms Walsh, were she one of my former freshman writing students back in the day] and

(b) the two-word, spot-on analysis - is:

"no, she has not evolved yet."

And, after I was about halfway down a page of browsing, I looked up and saw the excellent moniker attached to that most excellent descriptor.

Lo, it was unschooler.

You go girl - many thanks!

"WALSH: UNSCHOOLER READS HER SO I DON't HAVE TO"

Many thanks for the time each of you has taken to set forth these cogent analyses.

I will admit that my unkinder self enjoyed Bryan S' final kicker

- i.e., the reaction to wrenching news as rorsasch [sp?] test:

...and if you're a partisan hack masquerading as an editor with integrity, you fake confusion and concern and present a selective set of facts engineered to lead the reader to only one conclusion

He's lately avoided use of phrase such as "obama's [whores] [slang 'hos' of course] and words such as n****r - but the racist pig remains at core and is best ignored.

His only goal is to inflame tensions among Dems.

There is no value in doing anything other than notifying others that he is a troll -whenever you see the name, to help the community & save everyone the bother.

this thread lacks the racist slurs seen in other threads but

the core goal is the same: inflame hatred between Dems.

Always best to ignore this yapper.