War on the Floor?

It appears defeated Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is a sore loser.

Speaking to supporters - who've formed a group called "PUMA," which stands for "Party Unity, My A**" - Hillary said that while she wasn't going to ask for a floor vote at the Democratic National Convention, if her backers wanted to call for one, she thought that was appropriate. She went on to say that, of course, Obama would continue to have her full support no matter what.

Riiiight. And Bill didn't inhale, nor did he have sex with "that woman."

Hillary was quick - too quick, really - to point out that she's done more to support and campaign for Obama than any other recent Democratic second-place finisher has done for a front-runner. I guess that's why we've seen her on TV stumping for Obama so much of late.

I checked her website, and couldn't really find anything plugging Obama. There was a very large banner on the home page that said, "SHOW HILLARY YOUR SUPPORT." Seems she needs money to pay off her campaign debts. On her blog page, there's a place where you can click to contribute, and a lucky winner gets to have dinner with Hillary.

Just like selling a night in the Lincoln bedroom. No thanks, Hill. I don't think I'd have much of an appetite. Tell you what: why don't you sell the china and silver you snitched off Air Force One when it was flying you and Bill to your new digs in New York? That stuff should fetch a pretty penny on e-bay.

But back to the convention. I read in one article where a Dem strategist justified the notion of a floor vote to give closure to Hillary's supporters basically said that when 1,800 delegates out of 4,400 voted for somebody else, there's bound to be some "latent animosity," and the way to fix that is with a floor vote.

Why is there "latent animosity?" There already was a vote, and their candidate lost. Last I checked, 1,800 is less than half of 4,400, right? Didn't the majority win, as happens in a democracy?

This is what has always confused me about Democrats - seriously. A neighbor of mine, after Bush Sr. won in '88, said, "Well, he's not MY president." So I asked him to which foreign country he was moving, since Bush was the President of the United States, and was therefore President of all US citizens? What, if I don't like the turnout, do I get my own personal, private President?

And when Bush II beat Gore, he was declared the winner and Gore conceded. Then Gore sued over Florida. Then the party revised history to say that "Bush stole the election in the courts." He was the defendant, not the plaintiff, for crying out loud.

Now, the Hillary camp wants a revote. How many times? Until Hillary wins, of course. They can't accept democracy - they just want their way, or else they'll get cranky. Why don't Democrats like democracy? Maybe they should change the party name.

Here's another part of this that is irksome to me. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people on message boards and blogs decry anybody who voted for Bush. One mature individual called Bush a "retard," and said "the only bigger retards are the people who voted for him."

I'll say this: if Obama wins - and I think that's more of a when than an if - he will be MY president, for better or worse. And if he totally screws up and tanks the country, I will be critical of HIM, but I would never, ever criticize anyone for having voted for him. In my opinion, they will have exercised their free will and their constitutional right, and I cannot be critical of that.

But what the heck - I happen to believe in democracy.