And yet one more example of the incompetence of her campaign? That they have failed to notice that evidence of her hypocrisy is still up on her website. Luv it.

you know what I discovered in watching the RBC today and the reasonable tone (for the most part) they struck in moving ahead with their motions and the perfectly reasonable compromise votes - is that Clinton has been doing this 'Full seating of delegates' argument for so long, and so loudly, that she had me half convinced she knew something nobody else knew and that the committee could very well reverse itself.

I should have known better! This should be a lesson on just how 'out there' the Clinton campaign has been for a couple of months now!

Hillary didn't keep her promise. It may or may not be technically accurate to characterize that as "cheating," in the sense of dishonest conduct; I don't know for sure whether she meant the promise when she gave it. (Call me cynical, but I tend to think of not keeping campaign promises as "being a politician"... :-P )

But to characterize it as "cheating" is inflammatory, and doesn't help to unit the party: What she's done has certainly not been the same as "cheating" in the sense of not following the rules, because the current situation is exactly what the rules allow: the Rules & Bylaws Committee approves delegate selection procedures, and the Credentials Committee handles any challenges to seating delegates.

But Obama won the party today. He gave her 23 delegates and won the party.

He could have had MI 50/50 by one or two votes. He gave her the more generous split and a 4-1 victory in Committe votes and won the party.

He did what I admired about him as a state legislator in IL: he'll take an issue and convince the other side that the issue is in their best interests, and make them happy. It's what happened today and Robert Wexler was the perfect vehile to execute it. It was good, to everyone, on all levels.

Hillary engaged in vote suppression and disenfranchisement of those people who trusted her promised that FL/MI primaries are "obviously not going to count for anything". She does not have a single shred of moral ground to stand on. She should not have gotten a single half-delegate from the unfair FL/MI primaries. It's only through her total lack of conscience and Obama gentlemanly gesture of reconciliation that she walks away with a net of 23 delegates from her vote suppression scheme, straight into the junkyard of history where she belongs.

I am clueless on how Hilary has been allowed to continue her campaign. Do people not see what she is doing. She claims to have so much faith in her campaign, and her ideals, yet cannot commit herself fully behind it. People are contributing to her campaign because they believe in the cause. Hilary happily accepts their hard earned money with out flinching, but when she runs out of money she decides to loan money to her own campaign. This is a loan folks, she will get every cent back when it comes to claiming it on her taxes. Where is the commitment Mrs Clinton. Your supporters believe in you more then you believe in yourself. Keep letting your true followers blow all their money on a candidate who is doing nothing but destroying the chances for her party. And it doesn't matter to her, because it is not on her dime. Maybe someone should look into the fact that the republicans put her in the race as a plant to destroy the democrats chances?

"shall not campaign or participate in any state which schedules a presidential election primary or caucus before Feb. 5, 2008, except for the states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, as “campaigning” is defined by rules and regulations of the DNC."

It would be good for someone to go look up the DNC's definitions of campaign activity as defined in the rules and regs.

Beyond that, she said it didn't count and then went 180 degrees the other way when those votes became crucial to HER interests. She agreed to the DNC rules and then she backed down from them when it was needed for her personal reasons and claimed that she was just about people's right to vote. Patently, clearly self-serving and a form of cheating.

Also remember that now, as one of the primary arguments she makes in favor of her candidacy in November, she insists she has won the popular vote if you count Michigan and Florida. So even if she didn't "participate" in Michigan, which I think she did, she's now insisting that her form of non-participation should certainly count. Where would the popular vote count be had Obama's name not been taken off the ballot? To Clinton that's immaterial, evidence of her being quite disingenuous and underhanded.