I rarely reply to you because it has been obvious for so long that you are probably a pro working for Obama. However, I do get rather tired of the sly (dare I say cold and calculating way) that you always do a number on Clinton. I intend to enjoy deconstructing one of your letters.

You said: I don't think the Clinton team is particularly interested in democracy or fairness -- they just want to win,

If they are not interested in democracy then why are they participating in one of the most democratic of processes, an election? Why don't they just stage a coup? Then there is that other horrifying charge. They want to win. Duh. Does Obama not want to win? If not why is he participating in an election? Is it part of a book tour?

however they can get there, and if that means supporting flawed elections, they'll do it (and that's certainly been their stance to date, talking about "justice" for the MI and FL voters,

Right. Because allowing Florida and Michigan to have a say is just so undemocratic, so unjust. Clinton did not make the rules. The Democratic powers that be made them. They decided that Florida and Michigan should be punished, so here we are.

when really they're talking about advantage for Clinton -- the "justice" talk only came up once they realized she needed every vote).

Like you are not talking about an advantage for Obama? What was Obama doing running ads that aired in Florida during their primary if not to gain an advantage? It could be argued that he broke the rules.

I don't expect them to agree to a do-over unless they're dragged to it by the exigencies of the moment, if they can determine they can garner an advantage from it.

Are we supposed to naively assume that the Obama campaign is not looking to protect their advantage? Even if it means that Florida and Michigan voters do not have their votes considered at all?

And while you talked about the diversity of the states Clinton won, was her electoral base diverse, or was it her usual base: poorer, older, less-educated voters?

What an elitist statement! I can see why you would so easily consider disenfranchising a large number of voters. They just don't matter if they are poorer, older, or less-educated. Statements like this are the ones that get Obama supporters characterized as latte-sipping. 'Cause we all know that poorer, older, and less-educated people sometimes have to settle for plain old coffee. Old people: Potential Soylent Green, right Slackie?

Did Clinton make new inroads into the electorate, or was it falling back on those voting blocs that have stuck with her. Maybe Clinton's people will calculate that there are enough poor, old, and less-educated voters in MI and FL to give then a win if they risked another vote in those states, but I don't expect them to go there unless they absolutely have to.

Geez Slackie. You seem to assume that not only are those voters in MI and FL not worth spit, but I am surprised that don't remember that some of those Florida voters actually voted for Obama. Are they not worth spit too?

And, of course, that would set a precedent for bucking party rules whenever it seems advantageous to do so, which can't bode well for the Democratic Party. Clinton abided by the rules when they suited her, but when things went south for her campaign, she changed her tune. Bad precedent.

Need I remind you that those same party rules that you think should be so strictly adhered to also allow the superdelegates to votes as they wish, not beholding to the voters in their states. Them's the rules.

I have noticed a pattern in your letters in the way you characterize Hillary Clinton (or her team):

unjust

manipulative

looking for her own advantage

calculating ---

we know the drill. Why not just say omigod she's a woman and she is not willing to lose, be self-sacrificing, give up, let the guy win.

Damn that bitch! Who does she think she is daring to be the first woman president, to fire back when fired upon, to keep on keeping on, to try to win, to not give up?

Hillary Clinton, still standing -- despite all your attacks.

Now that is just ... utterly offensive.

I usually read through all of the letters first, then attempt to post and find out my password is a dud. Today, I have seen enough.

I am unashamed to be male, white, middle-aged, well educated and a Hillary supporter, no matter what my peers say. But please don't let that subtract from what I have to say.

First, I routinely see a lot of misconceptions being spread in letters I read hear. To my eye they are mostly about HRC, but that may just be because I know more about her. One thing I am pretty sure of is that she did NOT campaign in FL and MI before their primaries--she did not, like her competitors, take her name off the ballot, but I do not recall there being any agreement or requirement for her to do so. I do recall reports of Obama TV ads being run just before the FL primary, but, like so much of what seems to happen with his campaign--and in his life--he seems to have no knowledge and/or control over that.

Second, I don't have any grandiose praise for the DNC and how they have handled the FL/MI situation so far, but it was brought up on this morning's today show that the primaries were moved by the GOP in each State, which controls the Governors' offices and the election boards. So quit laying so much blame at the feet of the DNC and take this for what it is worth--another GOP screwup which many of you are allowing to turn into an attempt to disenfranchise FL/MI voters.

Third, if you think FL/MI should revote, then I guess you think all the other States should have do-overs as well, especially those that favored HRC. Hell, I bet you would LOVE to have caucuses in all those States as well--another way to disenfranchise voters.

Fourthly, (and this is a bit off topic) instead of reviling HRC's claims of experience and the medical insurance plan she set forth in the 1990s, think about your own actions, and those of all the others who dug their feet in to oppose her proposal. If you had listened to her back then, we would probably have universal health care now. Furthermore, we would have reaped 15 years of the benefits of better health care for all Americans, whether they want it or not.

Finally, any Obama supporter who swears he/she will sit out the election or vote for McCain if HRC gets the nomination needs to have their head analyzed. This country will not be a better place if it ends up with 4-8 years of McBush.

I trust I have offended no one that does not deserve it, and that you will all see things my way and immediately throw your full support to the Clinton/Obama ticket, now and in 2012.