Joan,

I was at the Oakland rally with Ted Kennedy. I am Asian. There were quite a few of us there. There were also quite a few Latinos there (did you happen to miss the "Latinos for Obama" signs waved around or the deafening "Si Se Puede" chants started on the stage behind Kennedy by some Latinas and Latinos?). The event was very Oakland - diverse, multi-generational, and - yes - a little bit granola. And like a true Oakland rally - we couldn't do without our beloved Rep. Barbara Lee. She is after all the only one who cast a "No" vote for the Iraq war way back when. And she did that in the face of total opposition. That took the kind of courage that could only come out of a community that fiercely prides itself on encouraging the hippie values of the past: multiculturalism and world peace.

Please don't belittle the East Bay/Oakland area or the Obama campaign by misrepresenting the rally as "ebony and ivory."

I know you're an editor with an opinion. But an "Op-ed" piece doesn't entitle you to miscast factual reality does it?

Do better. You're not representing the character of your Hillary campaign well with such editorial practices.

...for the candidate who will most likely be able to win in November?

Hillary unites the Republicans, even in their most fractured state, against her.

Hillary has no draw on moderate Republicans and Independents - all of whom John McCain and Obama do.

Hell, she doesn't even unite the Democrats as a result of her recent campaign strategies.

There is ample proof for both of those above statements. I'm just too tired at 12:45am to give you all the links to the plethora of articles and poll results that substantiate the statements.

It doesn't matter how hard she can fight. She can't win over people who fundamentally refuse to vote for her. It's simple math.

Republicans + Independents > (voting) Democrats.

More to the point, would it really be so bad to vote for a - gasp - black *man* who inspires young people and moderate Republicans and Independents *and* Democrats to *hope*? Isn't that the job of a national figurehead? And to boot - he's a pretty excellent "manager" if this campaign is any proof.

But if that isn't enough to sway your heart, then I say: vote with your brain.

Let's not have a repeat of the '04 and '00 elections. Please.

for a thoughtful response... I think the idea of a popular, grassroots movement - plain political advocacy from the ground up -- is the most important contribution from Obama's campaign. This campaign has already been a "change" - with unprecedented involvement across all categories in a political process (the primaries) that generally goes unnoticed except by hardcore political fanatics. I can only imagine what might happen in the future, with a president who actually believes and supports widespread civilian involvement in the political process; to depend on regular citizens to apply great pressure on Washington politics.

Change for Obama is about the common citizen caring and acting on behalf of the nation - by volunteering, by canvassing, by forcing representatives and senators to take their voices seriously without depending on PACs and special interests. It means that the common voter has to be informed, creative, active and self-sacrificing.

He's the only candidate to blatantly state that we will need to make sacrifices: the wealthy need to give up tax breaks in service to the poor and average citizens need to engage in politics through political activism. Our insular lives will need to be exchanged for a greater bond with our neighbors and localities. His groundswell of support indicates that he's tapped into the American population's need to be put to service for a larger good -- to feel useful and empowered.

None of this would have happened if the race were just between Clinton and Edwards (even though I still think Edwards had the clearest defined commitment to remedying poverty).

Even if he doesn't become president, I hope all the people who don't vote for him understand that even their fervor for Hillary was one that grew under Obama's phenomenal influence from the grassroots level on the campaign process.

Why is this important? My god, I wouldn't even want a picture with Newsom - didn't he have an affair with his best friend's wife?

Obama has tons of ties in the Bay Area to people who aren't part of the typical SF political establishment, like DA Kamala Harris and Rep. Barbara Lee. Why not cover all of those photo-ops? Or - even better - why not cover no photo ops and stick to issues that matter?

Why not, indeed, start turning your eye to covering John McCain and the lies his campaign has started to issue rather than wasting your time - and ours - on photo-ops Obama doesn't take for whatever reason?

People are dying - in Iraq and in America - because of failed foreign and domestic policies. Your enemy isn't Obama. It's with Bush's administration and McCain's potential extension of Bush's policies. Your fight is with the Republican party.

Hillary lost Wisconsin, Hawaii and the last 8 contests before because she decided to dismiss "flyover" states. She lost because her campaign was arrogant about its "inevitability"; she lost, because as much as she champions rights of the working class, she has lost touch with the working class and how to mobilize them to get behind her.

We can still like Hillary and admit that she hasn't run as good a campaign as Obama. We can let her go and feel ok about it.

Focus, Joan, focus. November will be around the corner and we need a Democrat to win.

...makes me proud to be an American. Finally, a Democrat who will fight with good, common sense.