Indeed, I have often wondered where Shakespeare is when you really need him.

The "whore" comment was in reference to yesterday's report on a diary at dKos by Obama supporter DHinMI reporting on his sexual fantasies involving a 44 year old Hillary Clinton; the frequent misspelling of Clinton as "clitnon" and, well there's more but I'm feeling too modest tonight.

But, just for the record, I am not advocating public displays of patriotism.  Indeed, just the opposite.    Like Sen. Obama, I find the expectation of allegiance to the flag, as opposed to the allegiance to a set of ideals, as a "distraction."

and none mentioned in your comment.

I think it's a beautiful diary.

You guys really don't get poetic license, do you?  I recently watched an extended video of H. Clinton and B. Obama at a "patriotic" event.  H. had her hand on her heart.  O. had his hands at his side.

What O. does, that's what I do, whether its the pledge of allegiance or the national anthem.

When my 13 year old daughter asks me what to do when she is expected to say the pledge of allegiance, I tell her to recite the following: "I pledge allegiance [pause] to liberty and justice for all."

I share O.'s generally attitude about these required public displays of patriotism.  And I'm really p.o.ed that, having finally found a candidate that shares my views, I'm not supporting him.  I'm not supporting him because he doesn't seem to be able to explain why he thinks what he thinks.

Is that clear enough for you?

There is a big difference between the left, liberals, progressives, libertarians, etc.  My purpose in this diary isn't to discuss ideology, but rather sociology.  We all begin with lofty ideals.  As long as we stick with our ideals, we're fine.  The problem occurs when we are no longer articulating our ideals, but rather our superiority, be it moral, intellectual or strategic.

History is rife with wonderful ideas eventually going horribly wrong.  What is striking is how telescopic the process has become.  In the last round, the Republicans did it in a couple of years.  We've managed to do it in a couple of months.

And, just for the record, I don't buy into the Republican frame.  I resent the expectation of public displays of patriotism.  We'll be going to the Little League parade this Saturday, with all the trappings of disembodied patriotism.  As for every year, this will be another opportunity to teach our kids the finer points of loving one's country.

because I bet she would have given a great answer.

She wouldn't have been offended to be asked.

Did Hillary make a statement about NOT wearing a flag pin?  hmmmm...nope, she didn't.  Obama did

not that I disagree with his comments on why he doesn't wear one - in fact I agree with them.  But I am a lefty liberal, not mainstream America, so if I were running for president, you'd better believe I would not make statements about the flag pin.  

Also, a note to the diarist: what you're talking about is well outside the campaign talking points, and, lest you become any more "depressed", I suggest you ignore completely the folks whose head this went right over.  There will be several.

On your core issues that the Democratic Party has lost sight of, you seem to be aiming these problems toward Obama's ideas.

First universal healthcare...Just because Obama does not agree with a mandate does not mean he is not trying to achieve UH.  He has a different route on how to get there....Some people may say a more "realistic" approach when it comes to congress.

Next counting every vote....Now I know many Clinton supporters raise the argument of FL and MI, but I would argue that yes, I believe in counting every vote but I also believe rules should be followed to ensure voter integrity.  Now we can argue about this until the cows come come home, but I believe my argument has some clout.

Finally you mention respect for the commonfolk and a new agenda...Now I do not exactly know what you mean, but a candidate who has taken the grassroots movement to a new level and the turnout of our Democratic primaries tells a different story.  As far as Democratic agenda, I see both candidates making strong cases for the middle class in that the address new jobs, tax breaks, and a stronger educational system.

So I am sorry but I do not see what you are seeing.

Respectfully-

Please clarify who is in this rising "left" and identify its "new agenda." Is it "based nakedly on power and the premise of moral superiority"? If so, why aren't these people attracted to the Right Wing as you describe it?

Your post has an entertaining "all this has happened before, and all this will happen again" vibe to it, but between the vague and false premises it seems rather unsound.

You wrote:

"It has been fascinating for me to watch this unfold, but also difficult - for the first time in my adult life I feel that the Democratic party has become somewhat alien to me."

Agreed, but like the diarist, I am less "fascinated" than depressed by this turn of events.  I find myself now hoping for an Obama nomination and a subsequent lopsided loss in the hope that these events may curtail the movement you speak of and relegate it to a mere temporary lapse of collective judgment.  

During the run-up to the Iraq war, I was stunned by the coverage of the merits of the case for war.  I recall two editorials, one in the Economist and the other in the Washington Post trying to make the case for war.  The editorial in the Post in particular was notable because within the pages of the very issue in which the editorial appeared was evidence confounding the editor's analysis.  It was as though all of the people warning of disaster were encased in glass, screaming warnings on which the general public and the press took no notice.

So your reference of feeling like you are in the twilight zone struck home with me.  I feel like I'm back in glass house saying, "wait a minute, that's not quite right."

Here are two examples from writers I generally respect.  Dahlia Lithwick at Slate was pondering, after Sen. Obama's big race speech, whether Hillary should give one as well.  However, Lithwick's suggested topic was that Hillary should give a big speech about Bill.  It didn't seem to occur to her that maybe Hillary should give a big speech about sexism in American society.

A second case occurred when NPR was interviewing Dana Milbank about the recent Petraeus hearings in the Senate.  Milbank was asked about which of the three Presidential candidates had passed the commander-in-chief test.  Milbank's response was that Sen. Clinton had undoubtedly asked the best question.  Millbank then suggested that perhaps that means that she should stay in the Senate asking those good questions.

Maybe liar is a strong word to use, because this may have been unintentional, but this has been part of an email smear that has been forwarded to me many itmes by older relatives. It makes me sick.

I recently watched an extended video of Hillary Clinton with her hand on her heart and Barack Obama with his hands at his side during a patriotic moment.  It was clearly the intent of the video to draw attention to Obama's way of expressing his patriotic sentiments.  I do the same as Obama whether it is the national anthem or the pledge of allegiance.  That was the point of departure for my diary and it wasn't intended as a back-handed complement.  I am genuinely sympathetic with his personal choice.