O.k...everyone, please repeat after me:

"More people have voted against Hillary Clinton for the nomination than any other Candidate in History."

"Why should we put forth a candidate that a majority of voters voted against"

"There is no reason to take the candidate who has received more votes against her, and give her the nomination because of some supposed strength in a single unreliable demographic."

"It is clear that the majority of persons voting in this contest wish someone other than Senator Clinton to be the nominee."

Please, everytime some person trots out the canard about Hillary Clinton's popular vote lead, respond in kind.

She isn't winning, she hasn't won, she has no base, no strength and is generall despised by the persons who make up the Democratic Party.

I know, I know, I'm violating my own advice, let's all be friends, but I am just getting sick of the lies upon lies upon lies.

I know Senator Clinton's lies are meaningless, and that after her crushing defeat in Perurto Rico (not too many Hard Working Whites there now are there?) we will all go forward Happily.

But please for those interested in making a talking point. Make it.

Is that Senator Clinton does not provide fine print to her statments.

She makes a blanket statement about her being ahead, and let's the idea float out there.

Yes, when possible reporters call her on it, and no one who watches the news falls for her poor math skills. (who need economists of mathmagicians, all just a bunch of egg headed ellites who don't understand the pain of the working class).

The problem is when a meme gets out there, gets repeated, it can cause damage to a candidate.

Such as Senator Clinton's Secret Muslim accusations, but fotunately the jokes are still about Senator Clinton's two facedness and lies.

It's a danger because in another month Jay Leno won't have Hillary Clinton to kick around any more, and we really don't want this meme coming up to hurt the candidate.

It's a long shot, but the feeling is, if Senator Obama can me magnanimous in victory, Senator Clinton should be equally so in defeat.

So far that is not the tac she has employed.

They all get to vote again in November, and that is the concern.

And yes, there are lots of people who get their news in sound bite snipets in the car.

While Air America and NPR give context WABC often doesn't.

So yeah, there are levels of reporting on this and not all of them are good.

"All of that has prompted numerous upward revisions to long-term oil-price forecasts on Wall Street."

Anyone notice that the people incharge of revising these long term oil-prices forcasts upward are also heavily invested in oil as a commodity?

Goldman-Sach et all say that Oil is going up up up, meanwhile they'veput a great deal of money into this high priced oil, and if the price did say, suddenly collapse, they would be out of a lot of money.

Same thing for gold.

I raise the issue just because it strikes me the time to buy any comodity isn't when it's on the rise, but when it's stable.

If some one says oil's going up, would you like to buy some, I am a little suspicious, even with Peak Oil as a real world concern.

I think of late Senator Obama has been going out of his way to show as much respect and honor to Senator Clinton as possible.

Maybe you need more, but I felt his statements about how Senator Clinton had changed the world that his daughters will grow up in was incredibly magnanimous.

What are you looking for from Senator Obama? I am sure he wants to know all he can do to sway Senator Clinton's supporters to the eventual nominee, even if it is himself.

Isn't there an flaw in Clinton's supposed logic here?

Yes previous primaries went on this long...but previous primaries weren't front loaded like this.

Her husband won California which put him over the top in June...but California has long since voted, and the few remaining contests don't have enough votes to put the delegate numbers in Senator Clinton's Camp.

I don't think Clinton should get out of the race, primarily because it doesn't really matter.

Can't she just say that. Can't she just say, "Hey I've been here this long, just let me finish." Which is what the Obama camp has been saying...so, why are people still asking her this question?

Why should this still come up?

It just seems like manufactured controversy at this point.

We know she won't leave till after Peurto Rico, and we know that regardless of the outcome of the events, the final aribtrator will be the super delegates, and Finnally we all know that baring something completely unforseen (that lone gunman issue) the super delegates are likely going to go with Obama.

So why are we even discussing this news?

Well obviously we're discussing it because Senator Clinton raised the lone gunman issue, but outside of conspiracy circles (around which the Clintons are already common villians) why is this a subject worth discussion?

Let's just agree to nolonger ask Hillary how long she'll be in the race. Let her finish, and the Super Delegates make their choice, and call it a day.

The more we ask the question, the more likely it is that she'll make another mistatement, or make some comment that's divisive or just plain stupid.

So, from now on, reporters, when you Senator Clinton, smile politely, thank her for her years of service, and ask her about her health care plan.

When you see Senator Obama ask him about his strategy against McCain.

You know...focus on issues that actually matter, instead of manufacturing pointless opportunities for rhetoric.