I could not disagree with you more regarding your assessment of Mr. Obama. You stated, "When a presidential candidate's core values are unity, equality, opportunity and creating an atmosphere of respect and harmony, both nationally and internationally, then that candidate's vision aligns with the best hopes and dreams of the women's movement. And that is precisely Barack Obama's vision." Let me see, he is rude and condescending and snubs Senator Clinton every chance he gets. He is arrogant and I for one have had enough of a man like this for the past seven years. Perhaps, the real issue is that woman prefer to be treated like this. I for one am not so inclined.

If Senator Clinton does not make it to the White House, at least, she has chipped away at the wall that stands in the path of women seeking higher office. That is more than Mr. Obama has done for women.

I am so tired of everyone saying things about Hillary Clinton staying with Bill Clinton when he was publicly humiliating her. Eleanor Roosevelt stayed with FDR and did great works even though he was playing around. Jackie Kennedy stayed with JFK when he was sneaking his women through the back door. She sat and watched Marilyn Monroe sing "Happy Birthday, Mr. President" in hardly any clothes and in front of all kinds-of people knowing full well Ms. Monroe and JFK were doing it in the sheets. What about Michelle Obama? She gave up a lucrative law career and being on numerous Boards (one of which is very closely related to Wal-Mart) to campaign on behalf of her husband. We can all say we made choices and we will never make everyone happy. We will always be second guessed, but it is our decision and our decision alone. I don't want everyone questioning everything I have done in the past nor in the future. As Mr. Obama says, "Trust me and have hope." Hopefully, we can all change and grow and be accepted. Who am I to say what is in Hillary's heart? I can and will only go by her commitment to the United States of America.

The problem with Superdelegates voting the will of the people is that if a primary was held, more people were allowed to vote; whereas, if you live in a state with a caucus, only a select few were able to attend as they have to be there at 7:00 PM and that is it. There is no 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Not a fair vote as far as I am concerned. If you want the Superdelegates to vote according to their state, then all states have to hold primaries and only the people left at the this point in time can be on the ballot. It would make everyone's life easier including the candidates because more people would be allowed to vote and have their voice be counted. If you follow Obama's logic, then the regular delegates from Michigan and Florida have to be counted; so the Superdelegates from those state can follow the will of the people of their state.

Thoughts to ponder!

Since people want to change the rules in regards to how the superdelegates vote, the FL and MI delegates, etc., why don't we just simple say winner takes all. It works for the Republicans. Oh, we can't do that, because Hillary would be way ahead in the delegate count and wouldn't need FL or MI or the superdelegates to reach 2025. You see, someone can always find a way to make someone else unhappy.

If you want to change things then go to your local, county and state caucuses and institute the changes. All states should either have to have a caucus or a primary, but not one or the either (caucuses are the least voter friendly and limit how many people can participate in the process.) You can't change things for this year, but you can for the next election. It is all part of the growing process. Just as our forefathers never imagined a pair like Bush/Cheney, the people in the Democratic Party during the 80's never envisioned what is happening now.

Old cliche, but change is hard.

If the Democrats used the winner takes all, Hillary would be far ahead of Obama and we wouldn't be in this pickle. Why, because she won CA, NY, NJ, etc. We wouldn't be talking about FL or MI or superdelegates. Why don't we just change the rules now and get it over with and then we could be concentrating on McCain and the Republicans. Dare I say, a lot of people wouldn't be happy with that now would they.

I agree with i_17bingo, I too am sick and tired of being told how to vote! I will not vote for Obama, because he is disrespectful, arrogant (we have had that for seven plus years as well as "I am an uniter."), and told me that "Her people will vote for me, but mine won't vote for her." Sorry, my vote has to be earned, which he has not done so. The hate and vitriol from the Obama camp is over the top, but they don't see it. It is always from Clinton. Politics are dirty and mean and there are two sides. If you can't stand it, get out! Obama is a Svengali and leaves a lot to be desired as far as I am concerned.

Hillary wants to seat MI and FL. She knew the rules and she can't change them. She is a hypocrite. Obama makes a pledge, but left in loopholes or he needs to win the presidency and it is okay to go back on the pledge. Is there a double standard here? Does he want to win at all costs, pledges be damned?! Oh, please continue to tell me that he is in it for the best of the country and not for himself. I need a good laugh this morning!