If only everyone had just voted for Hillary like they were supposed to (didn't we all get the memo on that?) then Hillary would be winning the way it was all meant to be. I mean, what's the matter with the democrats? It was clearly understood that after Bush Co. had its way with America, it was Hillary's turn, and no one else's? Didn't we all hear her call "dibs back" in 2000, or perhaps even before that?

Yet here we are all messing with her historical inevitability.

Members of Obama's fanbase are so entrenched in their cult they don't understand that the article is an argument that the current system neither makes sense nor is "democratic."

Therefore pro-Obama arguments based on being ahead by tiny "pledged delegates" margins (margins achieved through winning undemocratic caucuses in red states) or without counting Florida or Michigan are worthless. They are presented as "democratic" arguments but there's nothing democratic about them.

All of the arguments favoring Obama depend on ignoring the truth about his chances in November (zero) and ignoring the fact that neither candidate can be legitimately called the most popular.

Like the entire BO campaign, it's a faith-based opinion with nothing resembling evidence backing it up.

I think that a look at how our Constitution says we choose our leaders might be in order.

It is certainly true that the Democrats need to revise their primary system. The Republican primary system may be less democratic (small d) but it is reasonable and does produce results.

The DNC is responsible for this mess. The Clintons have had their fingers in the pie so they may have to live with their own ideas.

We throw around the terms Republic and Democracy. "I pledge allegiance to the flag and the Republic for which it stands, etc". We are the greatest Democracy, etc.

As long as we don't have a dictator we will be OK.

I can't help wondering if Salon paid for this piece. If so, I will have to give consideration to whether I renew my premium membership. I would be paying for such claptrap.

Who cares about Hillary Clinton? She now has zero credibility. She has zero credibility because she is dishonest, and it is out there for all to see.

As far as projections into the future about McCain beating Obama, this is speculation, conjecture, and flight of imagination. Hint: the future hasn't happened yet. At some point it will have happened, and it will be different than any of us think we know it will be.

If anyone can't beat McCain, then it is because he or she has nothing to offer. Actually, less than less than nothing to offer, because McCain has less than nothing to offer. It is pure ego masturbation to pronounce that this or that person will win or lose to that or this person.

Obama is not a perfect candidate, but he offers a better chance for saving our corrupt civilizaiton than anyone else on the scene. If I had my druthers, Ralph Nader would be president on issues alone, but he is not a viable candidate, and would be a dark presence on the national scene, which would make for a long four years.

Like it or not, Hillary fans, she is through. That is not a prediction, but an observation of the present. She is through right now, today. All the garbledy garbledy about the Electoral College an winners taking all will not put this little Humpy Dumpty together again. Good riddance.

We need to make the system make sense. It is set up now to allow delagets, not the people make our choice thats why the democraps never win.

You might be biased if you believed this crap.

You might be biased if you believed Hillary was DUE the job.

You might be closed minded if you did not understand that, yes, every once in a long while, there IS an inspirational person who comes along. Yes, that person is a natural born leader. Yes, that person is usually 'young.' Yes the many try to dismiss him or her.

And yes, this year that person is Obama.

I haven't seen it since Bobby Kennedy and MLK. But, in reality we all, under the surface, KNEW they were flawed.

And, many of us knew Reagan was a really, really bad move for the country. And he was really, really a bag of air. Pure BS.

Sometimes though, what we need is inspiration and that time is now. But, please stop with the 'woman must be president' thing. It will happen. Hillary is not the only woman in America. We will get a woman there. But this is Obama's year.

And, in the worse case, if he tries any progressive ideas and fails, so what? If he shows up for work and does NOTHING, he is better than the Shrub.

There are a lot mischaracterizations here of the Obama camp positions: First of all, Obama did run a couple ads in Florida for which he got explicit DNC permission because they were on cable channels that broadcast nationally.

Obama's lies about DNC permission were rapidly debunked. Obama lied in his pledge to not run ads in Florida. Clinton and Edwards had no problem complying.

ABC News on Obama's "DNC" lie

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/obama-wrong-abo.html

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., inaccurately claimed Tuesday that the Democratic National Committee has defended his decision to launch a national cable buy reaching a substantial number of homes in Florida, a state which violated D.N.C. rules by scheduling its contest before Feb. 5.

"The DNC has consistently said that we have not broken that pledge," said Obama.

Obama's claim is not true.

"The DNC has not weighed in on the pledge because it was a pledge with the state party chairs from the four early states, not the DNC," DNC spokeswoman Stacie Paxton told ABC News.

The problem with Clinton is that she has taken on some of the worst political traits of Bill and the problem with Obama is that his advisors and he play politics with Florida and Michigan while deriding politics and seemingly want to say they are above politics.

This interesting primary has many flaws, some of which are from the candidates own making.

The nomination conundrum has come about as a way to be fair to all parts of each state (rural, suburban, and urban)that have differing needs and attitudes.

Especially here in Pa (and also Ohio, Missouri, and others), there seems to be a different electorate depending where one lives in the state. Philadelphia is for Obama; Montgomery County is split, probably more for Clinton; and the rest of the state (aside from cities like Allentown, Pittsburg) won't vote in the general election for any Democrat.

As a result the party had to do proportional voting, which was favored by many African American intellectuals, by the way.