for its Hillary Clinton shilling.

In any case, Clinton's non sequitur was stunningly air-headed. Why couldn't she stick to platitudes? Or at least not diminish her point that some nominations drag on by introducing assassinations from out of left field. What's the point? Not presidential at all.

If Clinton does somehow manage, by calling in numerous cards, to get the nomination, she won't be as hopeless as McCain becomes whenever his teleprompter fails. Even if she insists on sounding like a scatterbrained guest on The View.

There are too many "innocent" or "awkward" statements from the Clintons to dismiss the reading that assassination was on Hillary Clinton's mind.

She mentions hard-working "white Americans"--meaning, not black and on welfare. Only that reading is ruled out as "inadmissible" even though the statement easily and naturally admits the cynical reading that it has.

The second mention of an assassination has to be dismissed to, according to Clintonophiles, even though the reading is there, and Hillary apologized.

Bill Clinton mentioned Jesse Jackson's campaign in South Dakota. But we must dismiss the subtext that Obama is "the president of black america." Another natural and completely obvious reading, evident to anyone who lacks professional training in journalism, that must be ruled out.

There are no conceivable circumstances under which Clinton would concede the election. No fact of the matter would matter. Likewise for her supporters. They're taking it to the convention.

is that he loses the profoundly entitled and angry middle-aged misandrist vote. But that's a wash: if it didn't help his opponent, it wouldn't help him either.

die-hard Democrats defecting to McCain and the Republicans. My opinion before today's decision was that prolonging the nomination was hardening Clinton and Obama supporters against each other. That seems to have happened, and it's still happening.

Clinton and her steadfast supporters will not concede the nomination. No fact of the matter would make the slightest difference. They're going all the way to Denver. That the RBC took the long view is of no consequence.

will not be satisfied until their candidate wins the nomination. They expected nothing less from the Rules and Bylaws Committee. Consider this representative Clinton supporter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KACQuZVAE3s

Hillary now has extremely encouraging news and the popular vote must be accorded the same weight as the superdelegate count in deciding the nomination.

They must be on very close terms with the Clinton campaign.

HRC and her intransigent supporters aren't the only ones living in alternate reality. The lawyers (and self-styled pundits) at TalkLeft.com have invented a quasi-legal theory, according to which the DNC Rules and ByLaws Committee broke its own rules, and according to which HRC is winning in the popular vote. The mathematics requires counting Michigan for HRC only.

I imagine that Salon's editors will be removing his comments. He is suggesting that others join him at TalkLeft.com. Now the innumerate know where to go.

is to focus on the four delegates, to the exclusion of everything else. Nothing else matters or is worthy of the slightest consideration. There is nothing else in life or in politics, beyond those four delegates.

If there were a unity ticket, with HRC as VP, the focus should be squarely where it belongs: on those four delegates.

under which Hillary Rodham Clinton will concede the election. She left her name on the ballot in Michigan. Likewise with the nomination: no concessions, all the way to the convention. Clinton is digging in.

It's a nightmare.

"We saw the face of the angry white female backlash against Obama over the weekend, and it was hard not to turn away."

What exactly, do these angry females propose to do? Not vote for Obama? Where is their anger directed, precisely, or is it generalized anger? Anger can provoke retaliation.

"Now that Obama has won his history-making bid, it's time for him to start winning over all of Hillary Clinton's constituencies, especially women."

Is this some sort of threat?

Threatening some kind of backlash against Obama if he doesn't meet the unspecified demands of Clinton constituencies is another matter altogether.

Walsh quotes Clinton's preposterous assertion that her voters were "invisible"--as if Clinton's failure to win the nomination suddenly reduced them, in Harriet Christian's phrase, from "second class citizens" to "nothing." 18 million voters suddenly invisible. That's a loaded phrase, intended to elicit feelings of sexist oppression among her constituents.

Walsh would have us believe, along with Harriet Christian, whose pain she feels, that Obama now has to shine the glass slippers of legions of angry "invisible" Clinton supporters.

One reason so many of Clinton's constituents are aggrieved is that they realize there weren't enough of them to make a difference for Clinton. If they were as politically powerful a force as they had hoped, Clinton and not Obama would be the Democratic nominee.

And if Clinton were the nominee, that could have been interpreted as one kind of victory over sexism. So this defeat is an understandably bitter pill for many of her supporters, and others.

But if Obama is going to live up to his bridge building rhetoric, he should certainly not turn his back on Clinton's constituents.

to beat McCain, who will make missteps. McCain is incapable of expressing himself without a teleprompter, and technological failure is inevitable. Democrats can continue to squabble over their favorite personality, smugly accuse each other of recidivist racism and sexism with no hope of rehabilitation, and exhibit the near-complete breakdown of executive functioning, and still beat McCain. He simply cannot keep his cool.

Joe Conason is mistaken: Democrats can have it all. There is plenty of room for identity politics and a Democratic president.

you're onto something. Bill Moyer's offered to find Porter Barry a real job. Moyers could extend the same offer to Kopperman.

Not that it matters: his career is over if he listens to the American public.

Koppelman could use an education in journalism. Hateful monster.