So I was in Provincetown, MA, this weekend.  I had a real fun time, as did most there, I suspect.  One thing happened, though, that got me a bit bummed.

Now, the 7-8 o'clock hour tends to be rather festive.  And, since the crowd at that point is largely gay and gay-friendly, I do mean "festive" for real.  People are happy and laughing and generally having a very good time.  

During this time, a few friends and I are walking near the center of town, passing by a couple of handsome guys handing out "Vote Obama" stickers.

Now, you can see from my past entries, I've had problems with the excesses taking by some Obama supporters, and by some of the recent swings to the rightward moves, but I'm all in now and happily took a couple of stickers.

As he took a couple of stickers, one of my friends said, and I can quote, "well, he wasn't my choice, but he's the nominee, so sure!" and was hoping to get a sticker or two.

Now, you only have me to tell you this so believe it or don't: This was said in as friendly a way as I could imagine.  It was a real reconciliation gesture for him.

Which is why the response from the Obama volunteer was so surprising:

"Well, you can vote for McCain then."

I still support him whole-heartedly.

But I did say, many times, that I saw little practical difference between Obama and Clinton.  In other ways, there are worlds of difference.  But not in practical terms.

They both might well bring change or maybe they would just play it safe.

But nothing in either one's actions suggested anything resembling a jolting shift in policy.

I mean, maybe in reality Obama really wants to do it - and his words until last week suggested that he does - while I was less certain about Clinton.

But when push came to shove so far - in voting records and current rhetoric - it seems to be just more of the same either way.

And, mind you, I don't say this as a criticism.

Interestingly, when I said or implied such things in the past, most just assumed I was, in reality, a rabid Clinton partisan.

Odd, that. Especially given that everything I wrote about this subject made it clear that I was quite bleh about the two of them.

Of course, the basic premise I made was correct.

It was proven in the entirety of both of their past voting records.

And it continues now.

But I was curious about the reactions of others...

Look, it's real simple.

Some people, including some that run some blogs, have a little apologizing to do.

Until then, as the realities of politics miraculously reveal themselves to the rest of us, there will be an lingering unrest.

There's a fucking REASON they did the Unity tour.

But jokers like Aravosis and (though I don't want to believe it) Olbermann would rather let the party sit in tatters.

Is there any A-list blogger, and a-list Olbermann, that can answer the following question:

Are there mistakes you made regarding the Democratic primary in 2008?

The fact is, unless there is a great surprise waiting, their answer will be... "heh heh.  No."

Which is why so many people are so distrustful of them now.

I mean, because by their actions, they are pure and true descendants of Rove and Bush.

Dontcha think?

They could change that.

But... sadly... I'm confident they won't.

Since I've never been considered a real part of this community (haven't contributed much since 04, and not even much then, I guess), there's little point in me saying "goodbye".  

Heck, I’m not doing that, actually.  

Just riffing.  Scraped together from two recent comments.

There's only so much hysteria a human should have to take.  

For me, enough time passes where I see enough gaskets blowing while fighting over true Democrats before I start thinking something is actually wrong with the people continually blowing their gaskets.

I am losing trust in the contributors here.  

If someone writes a cogent essay of great political import, I'll keep remembering their screed calling for the personal destruction of a fellow Democrat.  Making me ashamed to admit my choice of candidate because I don't want to be associated with the insanity.

I'll remember screaming.  Lots of that.

And I'll wonder, "maybe this or that person really shouldn't be looked to for fact-based opinion, reality-based commentary".

This may be right or wrong.  

I claim no knowledge of another soul here.

But it reeks of destructiveness here.

What an interesting ride.

Quick summary.

From the beginning of 2005, the only Congressional members I could count on to vote - almost exclusively - in the way I really wanted were the members of my state's delegation, House and Senate, from Massachusetts.

Yes, that includes the "boring" Ted Kennedy and the absolutely dailyKos-despised John Kerry.  Yeah, remember how you all wanted him on a spit?  I do.

Anyways, they all made me proud to be from MA since then.  

No one else did.

Without question, I absolutely disliked pretty much every vote and positions taken by Clinton.  And equally so Obama.  Sorry.  Come on people, the only person who showed any leadership in 2007 was Dodd.  Period.   And before you open your mouth to say otherwise, shut it.  Stop lying.

OK, I guess I was going to wait until thing were certain – like officially decided.

But, you know what?  We don’t have time for that.

As is well documented in this diary by Kossack Shane Hensinger, the fanatical right-wing is already on the attack.

I’ll leave it for others at the moment to comment, organize, and co-ordinate.

My point here is this.

After all the blood spilt here on dKos in the past few months, it’s time for one thing.

It’s time to start patching up each others wounds and set our sights where they rightly belong.  

We can not wait a moment longer.

Well, I've been here since pre-2004.  I think I started even poking around (unregistered) during the primary season before then.  But I don't think I remember anything like this.

PS: I'm 50/50, at this point, on whom to vote for.

Many of us, even those that have regressed to lurking status, have completely had it.

This is a site that, by definition, a site for Democrats, right?

Well, the problem - in my eyes - is not people arguing, even in pretty nasty fashion, about who should be the Democratic nominee.   While a lot are (personal opinion) off your goddam rockers in the bile your spewing, I think it's totally good arguing about policy and substance.

We totally DO want the best possible candidate (or Pres/VP combo) we can possible muster.

*** MAIN POINT OF POST ***
But I have issue with those people - and it seems like thousands here - that insist the will NOT VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRAT if that nominee is [Fill in your personal voodoo doll here].

Really?  

I mean, none of them is Adolf Hitler, right?

So... REALLY?

Fine.

The rest of us wish you wouldn't come here any more.

*** End of main point ***

And if I understand correcly, all of those stem cells would have been derived from the left-over results of in-vitro fertilization, right?

And the President vetoed the use of such for life-saving research because that would destroy life.

OK.

But wait a second.  Unless those embryos are implanted in a mother's womb they can not lead to a life.

And without every one of those thousands of embryos being implanted in a mother's womb soon, they are - today - headed for one place: incineration.  

What the heck?  Something doesn't jibe here.  

Is this veto condemning these embryos to utter destruction with no purpose?

I stumbled onto a recent diary at Redstate.org (where I almost never go) which is a summation of the Conservative response to the horrors in NOLA and the lack of competent Federal action.

See the full text below, but the central relevant point is:

If I'm told by authorities to evacuate the area,
I am responsible to see my family safely away from the area.
I am responsible.
I was not raised to expect help from anyone but myself.

And you know what?  I think I agree completely!  
See what I mean below the fold...

I feel the same dread and anger as I did on 9/11.
My anger is mainly at the terrorists who have ripped innocent lives from the face of the Earth.
We should have chased the terrorists down after 9/11 and prevented this travesty in London from happening.

But now we must face facts:
The GOP has DROPPED THE BALL.
They stopped caring about terrorism YEARS AGO:

• Bin Laden is now back in his old comfy home base, Afghanistan.
  
• The Taliban and Al-Qaeda are regaining power in Afghanistan.
  
• Terrorists are now training openly where NONE existed 3 years ago: IRAQ.
  
• Terror attacks are at an all-time high.

• Security funding has been slashed.
  
• Rail and Subway Security has been IGNORED.
  
• Nuclear and Chemical plants in America STILL un-protected.
  
• US-Canada Border STILL wide-open and unprotected.
  
• Our coastlines are STILL underguarded.
  
• Bioterrorism has been IGNORED.

From Media Matters:

(addition of spacing and emphasis mine)
Read more about him at Media Matters.

Might be too long for reporters to understand, though ;)

I thought I'd provide a concise bullet-point version.

I'll just leave out the Miranda part.  Kos and everyone else have covered that nicely.

If you like it, please pass to any news agency as a cheat sheet.

(below the fold)

I can be kinda slow, so my question is below, in boldface so you can skip to it.

"Ultra-liberal MA!" you say?  What help do they need?  It's Dem through and through!"  

No, Massachusetts has an ultra-conservative streak running though it, with no one higher local offices to show us that that is WRONG.  This conservative bent is evidenced by having Republican governors for the past 14 years.  Trust me, it's not because they've done great things.  They haven't.  The Dem contenders just, well, sucked.

Patrick appears to be a real progressive.  He also was part of the Clinton admin. (assistant AG), which has earned him useful friends.  And he seems to be wowing people with speeches lately.  (I'll have my first chance to hear him at the MA Dem convention this Saturday.)  These together bode very well for him to be a viable or even unquestionable alternative to that numbnut, Romney.

more - including the question(!!!) - after the fold...

This has now stopped being a matter of freedom of expression.  
It isn't political, it's personal.  For all of us.

In the matter of Senator John Forbes Kerry, neither the side that likes him nor the side that dislikes him can let go of arguing so vehemently about him.  

This is mostly because he is our last link to an election which almost overturned the evil now remaining in power.

We've lost perspective.

Ruy Teixeira pretty much blasts a wide swath among Dems searching for ways to bring about our success.

First, he says (as I horribly oversimplify):

• Framing is Useless
  
• Unity is Mindless
  
• Mobilization is Futile

The final take-down of all those nutty ideas others might actually find useful is:

He points out some quite useful ideas for Dems, but tosses out ANY possible usefulness of those concepts above.

Chris Bowers seems a bit astonished.  For what it's worth, I'd agree, I think this whole thing is a bit bizzaro.  But that's me.

From "The Passion of the Frist":

And I was thinking, that's about it, really - we just haven't gotten around to REPEATING IT that simply, PROVING IT with action, and SHOVING IT in the arch-conservative's faces.

It really is what we believe, the GOP isn't using that motto much at all, and more and more, people can see that the Republican ACTIONS are against that Democratic motto.

But... we are once again told that there's no way to have a simple Democratic message.  Kos' statement has been analyzed and run through multiple computer simulations and a multiple PhD panel has concluded that the statement is not worth trying.  

You see, we want too many good things that the GOP will say THEY want, too. There is NO simple statement that we, as Democrats, can put out there that will not be laughed at by conservatives.

So why bother?

Except for the last bit, so say some academic,  liberal,  bloggers.