I have read countless letters here that have called Hillary and Bill Clinton racist, entitled, bad people, unscrupulous, cheaters, cynical, duplicitous, and overall all purpose scumbags. The Clintons have been told to "step aside" and "go away."

Question 1.

If you guys who support Obama believe these things, then why do you want Clinton to help your candidate. I know I would not want to be in league with someone who possesses all these horrible traits. Why do you guys want Clinton to support the Obama candidacy and participate in the general election. The characterization of the Clintons is that they represent the worst of society (I think bigotry is the worst of society, so I am proceeding on the assumption that you guys do). Would you want people like that supporting you and your candidate?

Question 2.

The Clintons have been told to go away. The general sentiment among Obama supporters is that Clintonism is over, useless, divisive, and all around bad. If Senator Clinton said "I am disappointed by how things turned out, I will turn my focus on being the best senator as I can be for the people of New York for the rest of my term, after which I will leave the Senate." Or what if she said that she is going to leave the Senate now to "step aside" for another younger Democrat who does not have the name Clinton and just "go away" entirely. If she were to say those things, without expressing any bitterness, would you Obama supporters denounce her as divisive? After all, she is just doing what many of people have called upon her to do: go away and relieve the Democratic party and the world of Clintonism? Would she still be the bad guy?

Question 3

If the Clintons should go away, why should Sen. Clinton accept a VP spot on the ticket? Why should she stay in the party just for the hopes that Obama will bend down to pat her on the head and offer her a seat on the Supreme Court? I would have a hard time accepting something from a former opponent who would then have the nerve to offer me something less than what I had wanted. Of course Obama cannot offer her the presidency and I am not suggesting that he should, but does anyone other than me think that is more than a little insulting?

Many people, even Obama's dick rider in-chief, Chris Matthews, does not believe the myth that Clinton would preserve her legacy if she did what Ted Kennedy did after the 1980 primary. There are those who have the political memory of an ant. They believe that Kennedy graciously bowed out and went on to produce his most groundbreaking legislation. That is wholly untrue. Senator Kennedy spoke only to his supporters at the convention and said to them that their fight, meaning their fight for the nomination, would go on and to let the people who supported Carter go on supporting him. It is not uncommon to hear people say that Kennedy went on to solidify his legacy as the greatest US senator ever. I do not know if I agree with that, but he seemed broken after 1980. Why can't Senator Clinton take the same approach at the convention by thanking her supporters, volunteers, donors, and all the people who believed in her and then walk away. It is the thing that everyone has been clamoring for: Bill and Hillary should go away.

I am interested to see how Obama supporters would feel about the scenarios I have presented. Can I have honest answers without the snark and ad hominem attacks?