WiJO is almost right — the crawl actually reads "PURPLE AND GREEN CANDIDATE ACCUMULATES MORE SECRETIONS • CANDIDATE WITHOUT INSEMINATION TUBE APPEALS TO SUPER-SECRETORS".

The "secretor" business is obviously about the way the media covers the money race as an actual determiner of electability. And as we all know, Hillary is trying to counter Obama's broad-based fundraising success by tapping more big donors. (Because it's only undemocratic when it favors the other guy.)

Quoth Anonymous at 8:50:

stop fighting god on abortion, gay rights, theocracy, etc. and we can all live happily together. "Be reasonable" on these things and they will even allow us the privilige of paying for their health care and retirement. Such a deal.

Anonymous clearly isn't listening to what Amy Sullivan and other Christian liberals like Jim Wallis are saying. The simple fact is that when the religious right made issues like abortion and gay rights the center of their preaching, they displaced the actual issues that Jesus emphasized. Most American Christians realize this. Fortunately, the Democratic Party is starting to realize it as well, and use it as a talking point.

As for theocracy: Jesus said, "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and give unto God that which is God's." Sounds like an endorsement of the separation of church and state to me.

The members of the religious right who've been trying to break down the barriers between church and state forget that the separation of church and state exists for the sake of the church as much as for the sake of the state. When the church is used for political purposes, it becomes part of the political machinery and is corrupted. America's religious right has forgotten the lessons of Europe's wars of religion. However, the religious left still remembers.

Bobr900 makes a good point when he says that Sullivan is an evangelical, but not a fundamentalist. And Xychro is wrong when he says that all evangelicals take the Bible literally. Now, it's true that a lot of self-identified evangelicals are also fundamentalists, but some are not. "Evangelical" comes from evangelism, the act of spreading the Gospel. Different Christians disagree on what parts of the Gospel are the most important, and how to interpret them.

(Incidentally, fundamentalists are mistaken when they say that their interpretations are "literal" and ancient: for example, the widespread dispensationalist view of the Rapture and End Times was invented in the 19th century. The liberal Christian view of the Kingdom of God as an ongoing, present event is arguably more literal than the fundie/dispensationalist future-oriented view. After all, Jesus said "The Kingdom of God is within you.")

Different people sometimes mean different things when they say "evangelical"; there's a good page at ReligiousTolerance.org which gathers defintions of the word (see http://www.religioustolerance.org/evan_defn.htm ).

I agree that it's hard to see how there's room for fundamentalists in the Democratic party. But there's plenty of room for non-fundamentalist evangelicals.

Quoth Anonymous at 8:30:

Obama is uncomfortable because he's accustomed to adoration...

and if anyone dares to question anything he has said, done, or worn (the Somali garb), he cries RACISM!

I think you're projecting something you expect to hear onto the candidate himself. Did you actually watch the debate? Obama shrugged off the moderators' attempts to make a big deal out of the Somali costume photo, and said that he accepted Hillary's word on the matter. He's not the one whining about who gets the first question, or trying to quote Saturday Night Live as the exemplar of journalism. Obama's never "cried RACISM!", except when he called Bill Clinton on his attempt to dismiss Obama's South Carolina win. By contrast, Hillary and her supporters regularly claim that anyone who opposes her candidacy "just doesn't want to see a woman in the White House". They're crying "SEXISM" far more loudly than anyone is crying "RACISM" in defense of Obama.

Bill Clinton has admitted that Texas and Ohio are "must-win" states for Hillary. If she doesn't win both of them with sizable margins, she doesn't have a prayer of winning the pledged delegates. So I'd say that if she loses either state on March 4, she really should drop out of the race.

If she wins both states with big margins, she's got a chance and it would be silly of her to resign. The most difficult situation would be if she scrapes by with 51% of the vote, splitting the delegates with Obama. In that case, an argument could still be made for Hillary withdrawing for the sake of the party, but I don't expect either Clinton to listen.

This decision was obviously motivated by Salon's widespread bias against Hillary Clinton.

Because we all know that Anonymous was a woman.

(Joke!)

Clinton's team would argue that Obama's lead in total votes cast comes from independents and Republicans, not Democrats.

Yep, that's the argument. Which is really strange — they're acting as if the ability to attract independent and Republican voters is a bad thing. Heaven forbid we expand the Democratic base. No, we're happy with just the people who voted for John Kerry in 2004, because that worked so well.