On the day of the North Carolina and Indiana primaries, I couldn't hold back any longer - for so long, I had been free riding on the generosity of others, and as a financially challenged student living thousands of miles from the action, there was only so much I could do.  Eventually, I just had to pony up, and here's what I wrote at the time:

I just hope it's not too late to count.  I'm not sure exactly what did it for me, and it's only $20, but it's all I could afford. I'm a student living in London with no income, and getting drained by the exchange rate.  I've been free riding up until this point, but no longer.

Amazing, another "Democrats divided" story.  You'd think that with the hate much of the right wing blogosphere felt towards the Republican candidates, they might have been worth a story.  But now wired.com takes up the traditional media torch and makes sure it's absolutely clear that Obama has problems from the left too, not just right and center.

Just a quick polling update here from SurveyUSA and Rasmussen - also a few points from ARG (for what they're worth) in North Carolina and Gallup.  Essentially, Obama is holding steady or improving by virtually any measure. No recent poll nationally, or in the upcoming states, has him suffering significantly from his 9 point loss in Pennsylvania.  Quick numbers:

As of this moment, about 9:25 PM Eastern Time, there are less than 15% of precincts reporting, a Clinton margin of 6%, and most networks have already called Pennsylvania for Clinton.  But I took a quick look at some critical numbers, and this thing could end up really, really, really close.

Apparently, the activities of a 1960s fringe radical are very relevant to the 2008 presidential election.  At least ABC says so, even though Barack Obama was less than 10 years old when the group in question was active.  10 years old.  I think the limit of my political activism when I was 10 was simply grasping the notion that my parents voted for Bill Clinton (if that).  And yet, Barack Obama is confronted with an endorsement he neither solicited nor accepted, from a man whose questionable tactics were conceived at a time when the only tactics on Barack Obama's mind related to G.I. Joe.  Not that it matters that former President Bill Clinton (no relation to Hillary, right? Right?) pardoned Susan Rosenberg and Linda Evans, two members of the same exact organization in 2001.

It was suspected by many that Public Policy Polling's results in North Carolina on March 24th (the first NC poll after Wright) represented an outlier.  Obama's lead, which was previously 44-43, had increased dramatically to 55-34, a simply massive swing.

A couple of weeks ago, Anne Estabrook, a wealthy moderate businesswoman recruited by John Ensign and Mitch McConnell to run against Frank Lautenberg, dropped out of the New Jersey Senate race after suffering a stroke.  This left the New Jersey Republican Party in the unenviable position of choosing between Ron Paul devotee and former Libertarian candidate for governor Murray Sabrin and State Senator Joe Pennacchio, a kind of crazy backbencher from Morris County.  

Indeed, things looked so good for New Jersey Republicans that after more than half a dozen state legislators and other current and former officials declined to run, one county chair floated the name of, I kid you not, Rudy Giuliani, and someone else said "How about Mike Huckabee?"  This left Pennacchio the de facto leader for the Republican nomination, despite the discomfort of party leadership. Just a few examples of Pennacchio's brilliance:

Because sometimes, this community is more about people than it is about candidates.

Obviously things have been neither pretty nor peaceful lately here at DailyKos, but as in all things, there are good times and bad, thick and thin.

But you know what? Instead of tips and flames, recs and HRs, let's just give thanks for the decent, thoughtful people who post here on a regular basis.

I have no spur to prick the sides of my intent, but only vaulting ambition, which o'erleaps itself, and falls on the other...

Macbeth, Act I, Scene VII

...As for the pleasure in hubris, its cause is this: men think that by ill-treating others they make their own superiority the greater...

Aristotle, Rhetoric

I bear a charmed life, which must not yield...to one of woman born, I will not yield
To kiss the ground before young Malcolm's feet, and to be baited with the rabble's curse.
Though Birnam wood be come to Dunsinane, and thou opposed, being of no woman born,
Yet I will try the last. Before my body I throw my warlike shield. Lay on, Macduff,
And damn'd be him that first cries, "Hold, enough!"

Macbeth, Act V,  Scene VIII

I don't mind debate.  I don't really mind attacks all that much either, as long as they're grounded in a relevant truth, or point out significant policy differences.  Not a single Democrat has complained about the debate between mandates or no mandates in the candidates' respective healthcare plans.  

But I'll tell you what I do mind, and what I won't tolerate: irrelevant and untrue personal attacks, selling out the Democratic Party, adopting numerous Republican smears against one of our own, and simple and outright hypocrisy.

So to you, Hillary Rodham Clinton, please note the status of my fingers.  Four are down.  One isn't.  

One of the main complaints in the blogosphere with regards to Barack Obama is that his words and actions serve to confirm right wing talking points, memes, narratives, etc.  As an Obama supporter, I can't staunchly disagree - sometimes I do wish he would say and do certain things differently.  I think in part because the expectations for Hillary Clinton are lower in the blogsophere, relative to Obama, her shortcomings are sometimes less notable, if only because we expect their presence, and we hold Barack to a higher standard (which is a compliment to him, in my opinion).  But the fact of the matter is that as a Democrat with what can still be described as considerable popular support, Hillary Clinton has an obligation to a cause that is larger than any one candidate, and that is the success of the Democratic Party and the advocacy of progressive policy (I, as many of you do, consider the two to be largely correlated).  In this respect, Hillary Clinton has utterly failed as a presidential candidate, and (despite suggestions of Obama's flaws), has on the whole been much worse in serving that obligation.

There's been a tremendous discussion going on over at OpenLeft with regards to potential VP choices for Barack Obama.  While many of the more conventional names have been thrown out there, including Kathleen Sebelius, Janet Napolitano, Wesley Clark, Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, Jim Webb, Sherrod Brown, there has been less discussion of other individuals less prominent in national Democratic politics but might be a better fit for an Obama campaign, and (hopefully) an Obama presidency.  After all, is there any better way to demonstrating a commitment to change than reaching beyond other Senators and Governors, and into the back bench of the House and out into the military, academia and other backgrounds?

Yes, I said it.  Barack Obama loves Republicans.  It seems that one of the main points floating around various corners of the blogosphere is that is that Barack Obama is not nearly partisan enough, that he is too interested in working with Republicans, etc. You know what? They're right.

Alright, I've had it pretty much up to here with this nonsense.  Much has been made of the total meltdown of Obama surrogate Kirk Watson on MSNBC, and how he really reflected poorly upon the Obama campaign.  As an Obama supporter, I'd be the first to say that is exactly the case.  I'm not deluded into insane apologias for my candidate or his campaign.  Another thing Obama gets criticized for is his use of right wing frames on social security, the separation of church and state and on other issues as well. But as Kagro X so perfectly demonstrated on the front page, the Clinton campaign is going above and beyond, moreso than any instance of Obama adopting "right wing frames."

Some say that supporters of Barack Obama are simply devotees to a cult of personality.  Young people too ignorant to remember the fights of years gone by embracing empty post-partisan rhetoric.  They don't know what it really takes.

Some say I don't care.  Some say that millions don't care, that they are projecting their hopes and dreams onto a candidate. Obama is full of nothing but hot air - he stands for nothing, and so everyone stands with him.

I'll tell you what:

They've got it wrong.

There's a diary on the recommended list right now written by a dismayed supporter of Hillary Clinton, suggesting a threat of leaving the author's party of many years in favor of John McCain in the general election; this being due to the potential nomination of Barack Obama, and the rhetoric of his campaign and of his supporters (perceived by the author of that diary to be offensive to people of some indeterminate older age).

Before I begin, I would like to say that I am an Obama supporter, and I do find myself discouraged at the least by the actions and statements of a small minority of my fellow supporters, as they often are not a positive reflection upon Senator Obama and his body of support, and are sometimes tinged with words hurtful to those who may be older or of a different sex; that said, the existence of an offensive minority of supporters (especially on DailyKos) is equally true of Clinton or Edwards, and Dodd and Richardson and Kucinich previously, so I would hope that all of us would put our worst subjective emotions in check when considering the statements of these minorities.

WARNING: This is an extremely long diary - read ahead at your own peril.

...to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting.

Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.

If you look through the few diaries and comments I've posted here at DailyKos, it's very quickly apparent that I'm a bit of an Obama partisan.  I happen to like Barack Obama quite a bit, and will do so almost no matter what.  That said, I never had a lot of hatred or disdain for Hillary or Bill Clinton; in fact, I was a big fan back in the 1990s, and thereafter. I generally felt that they made the best of a bad situation, I suppose.  I've lost some of that respect I once had, given recent events of the campaign that need not be rehashed, but in watching the debates, even though I thought Obama did a great job, I was reminded of how Hillary isn't so awful, and that I would support her 100% in November.