Of course groups do not have to reconcile. They can lose elections, launch revolutions, or anything else.

My exception to you is based on your apparent single minded goal to undermine the Obama campaign. As I told you before, you enter discussions which are in no way related to the candidates and, after a few innocuous comments, find a way to disparrage Obama. Additionally, I have previously explained that you argue both sides of a case, so long as it’s derrogatory to Obama. Initially, you begin with the argument that he is naive, idealistic, and his followers have their head in the cloud, and that he will be dead meat for the Republicans. Only Hillary is though enough and willing to stoop to the Rovian tactics necessary to win. Then you reverse, and argue that he is mean, underhanded, and unfair to Hillary. A number of people have asked you what your purpose is. You aren’t cnvincing or converting people to the Clinton cause. Honestly, I’ve wondered if you aren’t a McCain supporter and don’t spend the other part of your day trying to sow discord on some blog which includes a number of HRC supporters.

Indeed, I’ve not been responding to any of your posts precisely because I’ve not wanted to provoke this personal thing you have for me.

As an Obama supporter, you do speak for the campaign, and I think calling Clinton insane is contrary to what Obama’s own message is. I also think calling her insane is not evidence of a desire for party unity. I do think Obama supporters have one standard for themselves and another for Clinton and her supporters, and I object to it. I also feel perfectly free to voice my opinion on in when I see it.

I also do not agree with you that there must be reconciliation. People do not have to be in agreement on everything, but it might help to hear different perspectives instead of only wanting to sing to the choir or have the choir sing back at you.

I merely addressed your very clear inference that one alternative to Clinton continuing the campaign is that she is not sane. I’ve never commented on Obama’s sanity since I believe it is an ad hominem attack to do so, is unhelpful, is uncivilized, and contributes nothing to make such inane and irrational attacks on people who are obviously quite sane.

It is supposed to be Obama supporters who’ve been inspired to a higher and more positive politic and unity. I do not see how referring to Clinton as not sane supports that. You’ve been very angry at me rather than listening to my point of view in a detached manner. I merely think people should practice what they preach, and if you (generic you) preach inspiration and hope and unity, you ought to practice it. I’ve not seen a lot of it from Obama’s own supporters, which leads me to question his ability to in fact succeed.

“I don’t know if it’s true, or even a valid concept, but it beats the other alternative explanation that she’s no longer sane.”

I think reasonable people would read that as your saying that an explanation for her continuing her campaign is that she, Clinton, is not sane, not of sound mind, insane. (You do use the subject (she, ie: Clinton) in conjunction with the adjective (sane) rather than a motive in conjunction with it. It is a direct comment on her state of mind, which you indicate you have heard an argument somewhere that she is not sane. It is that to which I responded. I am making an assumption that this argument you apparently heard, that she is no longer sane, came from an Obama supporter since it likely did not come from a Clinton supporter or a McCain supporter.

I have never referred to Obama supporters as delusional. That is your word, not mind.

Also, you have to know that your extreme sensitivity to any reverence to sanity runs counter to your initial advent on FDL with multiple refences to delusional Obama followers. Again, I took offense, when I tried to express my views and reasona for differing and you called me dishonest and guilty of resorting to Republican spin. I actually stopped trying to reason with you after that, and actually don’t see how you believe you are supporting any Democratic candidate or any reconcilliation.

I was merely responding to what you’d written. That makes me fringe?

Interesting.

‘See’ you, selise …

But I wish to thank you for all the many things you have stood for these last few weeks and days.

I can always count on you to really understand.

You are one of the few who can admit being wrong with true sincerity, and thereby serve as a most honorable example.

However, from my perspective you are rarely wrong.

And I would urge you, in these perilous days, to speak from your heart.

Your moral compass is the best.

Let the chips fall where they may.