If all agree to the rules beforehand, and the rules are clearly stated to all and agreed to by all ahead of the game, then I don’t see why adhering to the rules suddenly becomes a problem later.

The rules suddenly become an issue when the states in question become decisive. I'll assume you know that so for now, not in the "braindead" column.

Naturally there is nothing untoward about not fighting that fight when it isn't expected that it would be decisive, but you can pretend there is.

The rules also allow the DNC to seat the delegates as they are or hold re votes if both campaigns agree. Obama sent lawyers to make sure there would be no re vote in those states.

The rules also allow superdelegates to consider the popular vote including those states, the delegate count including those states, or whatever they want. Obama continues to lie by suggesting they must adhere to the pledge delegate count minus Florida and Michigan.

I have no proof you were aware of any of that so will just let it go as "shockingly uninformed."

Okay, not a rule, but an acknowledgement that the votes wouldn't count. Clinton too signed a statement to the effect that the votes were null and void.

What pledge is that? I only know of this pledge not to campaign, which Clinton adhered to and Obama broke by running ads in Florida and then lying about the DNC approving it. The DNC had to release a statement saying he was lying about getting permission from them.

Edwards and Clinton managed not to run ads there. I don't believe Obama is too stupid to have similarly avoided it.

WHEREAS, over a year ago, the Democratic National Committee established a 2008 nominating calendar;

WHEREAS, this calendar honors the racial, ethnic, economic and geographic diversity of our party and our country;

WHEREAS, the DNC also honored the traditional role of retail politics early in the nominating process, to ensure that money alone will not determine our presidential nominee;

WHEREAS, it is the desire of Presidential campaigns, the DNC, the states and the American people to bring finality, predictability and common sense to the nominating calendar.

THEREFORE, I _______________, Democratic Candidate for President, pledge I shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by the rules and regulations of the DNC. It does not include activities specifically related to raising campaign resources such as fundraising events or the hiring of fundraising staff.

Not true at all. Polls show that a percentage of Clinton supporters have said they "will not vote" for Obama, but that is a relatively low percentage and most of those people are speaking out of their bitterness.

The percentage of Clinton supporters who will not vote for Obama is not "relatively low" it's relatively higher.

Again, these voters are elderly people who think Obama is a Trojan Horse for Rev. Wright theology, working class whites who know he tried to bamboozle them after saying they were stupid and confused, Hispanics, middle class whites who think he is too weak to be commander in chief, working white women.

He won't win back more than a fraction, and they are a significant larger proportion of the electorate. Further, most of them think McCain is acceptable or Obama is dangerous, and will cross over. Not true of AA voters.

It's the FACT that he sends this sleaze around. You can bob and weave and duck and throw some punches to try and flummox people, Joe, but at the end of the day, Sidney Blumenthal still circulates these vile pieces. That is the issue you never address because you can't in any honest way. Blumenthal disseminates this utter crap. And if you think that's okay, it makes it even worse.

Actually the article addresses the issue clearly: Blumenthal sends out items from all sources that fall into all categories of credibility and significance. He sends them to a diverse list that includes Obama supporters.

He leaves it to the politically and media savvy recipients to evaluate the items and decide what importance they are as legitimate subjects for investigation or their potential impact on the race.

Apparently Blumenthal believes the adults on the list are capable of making those evaluations.

Children (Obama supporters) pretend adults must be protected from certain media sources or "types" of content.

Grow up.

Your three point post is the most candid post ever published here.

I know it's truthful because I went through precisely the same conversion process as the one you describe witnessing, and you wouldn't recognize or be able to describe how she wins over voters if you hadn't both seen it with your friends and noticed you were being forced to acknowledge her strengths.

Most Obama supporters likely notice it too, but they just decide to adjust their blinders or just gouge their eyes out to avoid those acknowledgments.

I used to sound like Keith Olbermann when I would gleefully trash what I expected to be her quick and easy Democratic primary destruction, sometimes even resorting to some sexist cheap shots.

Not only did she earn my resistant vote, I've donated more than I can afford.

I have to admit Obama showed brass ones when he gave that speech a couple of weeks ago and said "I can no more disown Reverend Wright than I can disown the black community or than I can disown my white grandmother."

Wasn't that courageous and The Ones We Are Waiting For-ish?