God, Salon/Joan, why do we need more of this crap? People didn't get upset enough before? Can this election be about anything besides Hillary?

I don't know who Obama will pick. For me, a Wes Clark is the ideal VP candidate. A white male with military credentials reinforces all the areas that one might describe as question marks for Obama in a general election. In short, Clark is an "outsider insider."

Why not Clinton? Because such a selection is acceding to blackmail. "I create the rift in the party. Only I can heal the rift. And here's what I want in exchange."

Before the primaries, it was obvious that HRC is one of the most polarizing figures in American politics. After the primaries, it is abundantly clear that this is still the case. The division and disharmony in the party can be laid directly at her doorstep. Why this should be rewarded, I don't know.

But it's clear that the calls for this rest more on placating a restive voting block that she stirred into outrage for her own purposes than any other consideration. The fact that Obama should have to worry about consolidating Democratic voters after these disastrous eight years of BushCo is a sad moment for America, and a de facto condemnation of HRC. She is not a uniter, but a divider. Which is why we're having this inane conversation in the first place.

First off, lots of people are berserk on the internets. You never who they are, what they really believe, who they're trying to wind up. The whole forum is tailor-made for people to vent all their petty frustrations and so on.

I think the reason anger toward Clinton remains is because of articles like this, this never-ending insertion of HRC into the conversation. She lost. Obama's pick is his business, no one else's. As I wrote earlier, the basic dynamic of this whole conversation relies on an implied blackmail from Clinton: "I have this voters, I nurtured their 'righteous' indignation, and only I can heal this rift."

This is a narcissistic refusal to place women, party, and country before her own ambitions, and the willingness to engage in these sorts of machinations is, consequently, polarizing.

If Obama wants to pick Clinton on her own merits, and by his own choice, that's fine. But she's left precious little room for him to do this and have it appear to be anything but caving in to her pressure and brinksmanship.

(I wasn't an Obama supporter to begin with, but when my candidate dropped out, I turned my support to Obama. I didn't have some huge vested interest in him, certainly not an "Obamabot" or whatever other derisory term is currently being tossed at his supporters.)

How exactly are your posts relevant to the topic of HRC for VP?

I think we get what you don't like about Obama. And that's fine. Don't vote for him.

Otherwise, stop clogging up the thread and try to address the topic at hand.

Editors-

If you can't find a way unclog the threads of these off-topic and repetitious posts, maybe you could help the planner find a job? Or get him/her enrolled in summer school?

After a all, a 'mind' is a terrible thing to waste, or to watch being wasted or you can't get fooled again. Or something.

They're far less repetitious than your silly and endless reformulations of five or six detractions.

Basically, we get what you're saying, where you're coming from. Fair play.

But most adults content themselves with making their point instead of insisting on making themselves a nuisance. Sometimes adults get tired of trying to have a conversation and continually being interrupted by children looking for attention.

Post the same things over and over again, then cry "oppression!" and "fascism!" when people tire of your childish antics.

You don't like Obama. Rock on. There will likely be anywhere from 40-49% of the voters in November who will agree with you.

But what you conveniently ignore is that no one cares about the content of your posts. It's the volume of repetition that is annoying.

Yes, none of us who're tired of the schtick should say anything, because then we wouldn't be manly men. When you can't make a single persuasive post, or manage to engage in substantive conversation that might change minds, then of course everyone should just yield the floor to the attention-starved campaigns of water torture.

However, I will take my own advice and try to leave the so-called "conversation" on topic. Which, unfortunately, is apparently more than we can expect from you.