Here's dignity for you: She keeps winning.

I don't get this, I really don't. She wins the bigger states, she polls better in the states we have to win, she carries Latinos, which we have to carry, and yet the pundits--like it was their decision--keep hammering at her to get out of the race.

Has this ever even happened before? RFK had less of a shot than Hillary does. Did anybody tell him to get out of the race?

Your guy leads by a handful of delegate votes, racked up mainly in red states where few people live, and which we will never carry.

My guess: The pundits finally have a candidate that they think is as cool as they are, so they identify with him.

At heart, Camille is a sentimentalist and a romanticist. Who knew? We can transform ourselves into wonderfulness! Hope! Unity!

Hillary is at least smart enough to know that that's a bunch of crap. It's the same old world out there. The rich beat down the poor, the strong screw the weak, and that's just the way it is.

You make change through hard work, through getting up every day and battling for change. That's how you get Social Security and Medicare, and now, health care. You fight for it.

Which is why I'm for Hillary.

I know I'm supposed to think all kinds of bad things about the Clintons. The really cool people tend not to support them, and lots of people--OK, nearly always Republicans and media pundits--say bad things about the Clintons all the time. Yet, every time I've seen them, they seem to be well-spoken and well-mannered, so, as far as I know, they are perfectly normal human beings, and not the hydra-headed monster of their enemies' imagination.

How could you possibly know whether or not Hillary and Bill have a "sham marriage"?

Which I'm fine with, actually. They can have it.

Maybe this declaration of "mission accomplished" wil work out better than the last one.

What the hell does "majority of the pledged delegates" mean anyway? Do you get some kind of prize for that?

that any hint of reason or reality in this campaign is going to be flamed by the glassy-eyed Obama fanatics.

I actually like Sen. Obama. I wouldn't have trouble voting for him--except I'm given pause with the realization that a lot of really loopy (mostly young liberal males) people would be in actual positions of authority.

It's strictly political. Hillary can give him a boost in the Ohio valley where he badly needs it. Either that, or somebody from Ohio--Brown or Strickland. No less a politician than Richard Nixon once said, "Ohio is the ballgame."

Go to one of those sites where you can jigger the vote around. See if you can find a way to win without Ohio. You can do it, but you have to thread a bunch of other needles to do it.

if the Obama people would get their head out of their butt. Good night, she didn't do this, she didn't do that, she did this awful thing, she did that awful thing.

You guys want some cheese with that whine? Good night, you won, for cryin' out loud. Whatever happened to grace in victory?

We'll fall into line, don't worry--not that you've given any sign of being concerned about 18 million Democratic voters anyway, not with "all the new people" you're bringing in, and Axelrod and Brazile saying they don't really need traditional Democrats.

We suspect you'll change your tune eventually--at least the smart ones among you will. In the meantime, we'll try not to let your obnoxious behavior affect our opinion of Sen. Obama. Most of us like him, after all.

Which is why I never read her articles. The letters are always fun though.

but every convention since I've started watching in 1960, of both parties, has had a roll call vote.

Idealists yearn for idealists, but not everybody. In fact, I don't trust idealists. They're unreliable.

Incidentally, it was the Democratic establishment that weighed in for Obama, not Hillary.

but I think at least one of the candidates on the Democratic ticket ought to be a Democrat.

The Obama campaign encouraged this kind of stuff in the beginning, and now they're having to pay on the other end.

Free advice for Obama: Put the big rallies on hold for awhile, ditch the suit, stay away from big shots and potentates, and get out among the people and talk about the real bread-and-butter issues they're facing.

In any normal year, Clinton wouldn't have conceded. You're a hundred votes behind and you concede? In any normal year, we'd still be scrapping for votes some how some way.

But this year, we've all got to cave in to "everything-Obama" all the time or the Obama supporters get all huffy and start calling us names and what not.

How can Hillary's name not be placed in nomination? We have roll call votes at every convention. But this year, we've got to nominate Obama by full-throated pretend-unanimous acclamation? Please. That's too much for a party divided 50-50.

If we're not going to have a roll call, what's the point of even having the convention?

but this is perhaps premature. Any good campaign would have done what it could to unite the party, but no, the Obama people continue to trash the candidate of half the party. Remember folks: Pride goeth before the fall.