Well, Obama was chosen in the primaries by more than just TX- he won 36 of the contests, often by really large margins.

It was Hillary's folks who helped write the rules regrading the MI and FL votes, which she wanted to change after the vote so she could obtain more delegates. It was Obama who allowed Clinton more delegates with regards to this issue. He could have just stuck by the rules.

Obama also ran a superior and better organized campaign than HIllary. Even after Hillary's bud and superdelegate supporter the guv of PA, Rendell extended the deadline for delegates to be filed for the PA primary Hillary still came up short.

Besides, what does Obama's religion have anything to do with it? It doesn't matter whether he is a Christian or a Muslim. The last time I checked in this country we could still worship the religion we believed in.

If anyone has hijacked the political process for the Dem primaries it is clearly Hillary- no one can dispute the fact that after certain outcomes she called for the rules to be changed to her favor and she did obtain more delegates.

Obama may have taken advantage of the arcane TX caucus rules, but he did it within the rules and he did it without whining about how much effort he and his team spent in understanding those rules. Hillary could have cared less about the caucus rules (and not just the TX caucus) and her team did not want to understand those rules. I like a president who does his homework and plays by the rules, even if they are bizarre. After all Obama did not make those rules. He knew he had to run as clean a campaign as possible or else he would be charged with hijacking the primaries, which I see he is being charged as having done anyway.

Don't tell me to do my homework.

It's not only that Obama lacks substance and experience, it is also that he is a liar and a crook. We already have that in the WH, you want another four years of that crap? Check the list, FISA, NAFTA, campaign financing, separation of church and state, Rezko, Wright, Pfleger, Ayers, abortion rights, etc.

Are you aware that he expediently changed religions from “secular” Muslim to Christianity when he decided to run in politics? Are you aware of his tactics and back stapping. Are you aware that he built his war chest with the help of Rezko after throwing money and contacts to Rezko and his Syrian gangsters?

Country before party!

No fool like a silly one. Want more ice in your kool-aid?

But what is certain is that the pro-Hillary rallies, the Bill Clinton speech (which is likely to praise his wife and detail his own legacy rather than passionately urge Demmies to vote for Obama)

This is certain? You keep on using that word Joe. I do not think it means what you think it means.

No wonder–just like you reported yesterday–a lot of elected Republicans are going to avoid their own convention.

I think you're right on this. Even in defeat the Clintons continue to divide the Democratic Party, just as they did in the primaries. THe Republicans uneasily came together around McCain and he still has problems with certain elements of the Republican base, but when one thinks of the Republican presidential candidate, one thinks of McCain with problems. When one thinks of Obama, one thinks of Obama and the Clintons….

The Clintons are like an annoying little dog with its mouth clamped down on Obama's pant's leg. He's mostly standing tall, but the annoying dog is holding him back and one can't help but notice it. Even though one knows that the dog doesn't really matter. The roll call vote for Hillary at the convention may be meant to honor her accomplishments… but you're right that Obama's message is diluted. Instead of one message unified around Obama, there are two messages not unified at all.

Unlike McCain, where he will get attention due him. Even if some of the speakers at the Republican convention are distractions, they're not trying to steal the spotlight from him in order to run for president in 2012.