So a disenfranchisement of the Michigan voters is okay with you? Right, as long as your guy wins...who cares how you get there. How very Karl Rove of you. Quit posturing as the moderator of sound reasoning and progress... (but thank your for covering the Ignorance and Arrogance part of the DNC slogan...now if you can only work on unity!

The importance is not one that Hillary needs rather it is one that her supporters should have. My wife and I supported her and contributed to her because we believed a woman should be able to stand as an equal to any man if she had the skills to do the job. Hillary proved that she has that ability and those skills. No woman has ever come so close to this goal and her achievement should be memorialized by a roll call vote.

"Dissin" in the vernacular of current culture is to show 'disrespect', to treat someone as though they were less than a worthwhile human being. Hillary made her bargain with Obama, but there are millions of other 'worthwhile' people who want to have their effort at bringing equality to the highest office in the land marked for history. It is a unique moment in our Nation, not to do that will be 'dissin' those folks big time.

You're being hyperbolic. See if you can follow the logic:

1. There is no law or constitutional requirement on choosing a NOMINEE for president. You can flip a coin if you want. The Green Party has no state by state voting process to choose its candidate. If it did they probably would have gotten Nader again.

2. Disenfranchisement can only occur if you have THE RIGHT as DEFINED in our laws and constitution to vote and then have it taken away from you. You don't have a right to have your vote counted in a primary. No one does.

3. Hence, the citizens of Michigan can not be disenfranchised when it comes to the Democratic primary. In fact, the DNC is not obliged by anything other than its own rules and decisions on who they think should be their nominee. Its really that simple.

4. Comparing people to Karl Rove is soooo 2006!

Um, well, except that, last I checked, Clinton isn't running for president.

Perhaps people want an alternative to the politician that has betrayed the American people by voting for telecom immunity.

Perhaps people are finding out more about Obama's record in funding slumlords.

Perhaps people are finding out that hes not much of a Democrat.

Oh, you're oh-so-very-concerned about all the disenfranchised Clinton voters. What about the people who stayed home because they wanted to vote for Obama, Edwards, or Richardson? Screw them, right? Rules are rules, they took their name off the ballot, right?

Oh, wait, but rules aren't rules when they favor Clinton. Oh, now I get it! Thanks for clearing that up, smart guy!

You want to blame someone? Blame Michigan. They flaunted the rules on purpose to prove a point. Then they ran crying to momma when the race was close, and it turned out that their stunt actually hurt them.

Or you can just nurse your grievance, and pretend, in your ill-educated manner, that the primary has something to do with enfranchisement. You've been proven wrong about a million times already, but you just ignore everyone and throw out your pouty nonsense whenever someone gives you half a chance.

We're moving on without you. Pout all you want, lie all you want, ignore everyone's argument all you want. It won't change the fact that the man you irrationally hate will be the next president. Get used to it.

"Dissin" in the vernacular of current culture is to show 'disrespect', to treat someone as though they were less than a worthwhile human being.

Yeah, we know what it means.

Hillary made her bargain with Obama, but there are millions of other 'worthwhile' people who want to have their effort at bringing equality to the highest office in the land marked for history. It is a unique moment in our Nation, not to do that will be 'dissin' those folks big time.

This isn't the first close primary. It's the first close primary with a woman in contention. So basically what you're saying is that you want to have some special ceremony for the girl. That's exactly the opposite of equality, and it's just plain dumb.

A black man winning the Dem primary and running for the Presidency is also just a tiny, eensie, widdle bit historic, don'tcha think? So maybe we should move the Democratic National Convention to Harlem, to record it for history, and to recognize the millions of people who fought to bring equality to the nation by campaigning for Obama.

There's no "recent tradition" of there being a nomination that was this tightly contested. At prior recent conventions, the runner-up arrived at the convention a great distance from the front-runner, knowing that there was no hope at all of prevailing. So don't cite "recent tradition" as if it were a useful precedent. That's dishonest and an insult to your readers. The more interesting question is whether a candidate who got anywhere near as great a share of the vote as Clinton did EVER didn't have his name put up at the convention. Can any of the resident historians reply to that?

because, she is not running for president.

Can I get a roll call vote?

Dear Editor:

The JustSayNoDeal coalition is the umbrella website under which The Denver Group is but one - however; an extremely effective one. It has many fans and small donors who made the Chicago Tribune "Boston Tea Party" ad possible. Coalition folks are also the ones who contributed, in a matter of two weeks, $10 million to help retire Hillary Clinton's campaign debt.

As a P.U.M.A. (Party Unity My A**) and PUMA Pac (People United Means Action) member, let me just say that there are at least 2.5 million of us - hardly small "change."

Mr. Koppelman tries to create the impression that Hillary Clinton's supporters are a bunch of screaming morons who are in terminal denial about about our gal. He is so wrong. There are many brilliant website owners and bloggers contributing their intellects and ideas to the PUMA Movement - only they aren't of the latte, knee-jerk liberal variety. We PUMAs saw through the presumptive as if he were thin plate glass.

We are demanding that the Democratic Party/DNC behave ethically and with integrity at the Convention - and that means having Hillary Clinton's name placed into nomination with all the trimmings, speeches, etc., a history-making woman candidate who fairly won the popular vote victory during the primaries. She deserves no less.

The DNC must conduct the Convention according to precedent and tradition. How many times do we have to repeat that Bill Clinton didn't clinch in 1992 until the third ballot, and good ole' Teddy created a floor fight in 1982.

On to Denver!