The Talking Dog provides a great essay on the tone some have chosen to use in the media and online in opposition to Senator Clinton. There is an extreme in our civil discourse that should not be crossed, and too many have been crossing it, while far more have been ignoring instead of challenging it.

It’s time for that to change, too.

Go read TD and think about it. And don’t say “well, turnabout’s fair play.” It isn’t. It wasn’t fair even in middle school where tit-for-tat originated. And it should be left there, among the immature and illogical, because rude, hurtful and hateful advances nothing.

Yes, we should, and can.

And as I interviewed Dolores Huerta 16 years ago, she also deserves enormous credit for what they both achieved. Each played a critical role. So call it political pandering, but in this era where anti-immigrant sentiments are strong in some swing states, it’s still rather risky for Obama to take this position.

Though if we really were to celebrate the pioneers who promoted the ideas that Chavez and Huerta utilized, we also ought to have holidays for Fred Ross and Saul Alinsky. Still, it was Chavez who fasted and put his health at the greatest risk to drive home the message and gain public support. So it remains a great idea.

Then let’s have one for FDR, Eleanor Roosevelt, Susan B. Anthony, Harriet Tubman, George Marshall, and a few dozen other greats. After all, we should each get six weeks off each year, just like most Europeans do, along with their national healthcare and their capacity to separate church and sex.

Si, si puede!

They don’t seem to be blaming it on Obama, as he performs a hair better in the polls than Clinton there.

Polling in Florida displays a much bigger gap favoring Clinton, but that may have less to do with the primary disqualification than to the demographic biases present in a state full of senior citizen women, and a fair number of racists.

I certainly wouldn’t oppose a revote, because I believe the two states would split, with Obama winning Michigan. Anyone suggesting the first vote should stand is simply playing games while rooting for Clinton. The lack of any real campaign there makes the original results flawed.

So let a re-vote settle the controversy once and for all. If Clinton’s supporters think she can repeat those results, I say, let’s do it. On the level playing field of a revote, And then they’ll run out of excuses for why she’s in second place.

After all, every Republican is not a warmonger convinced that we’ve got to stay in Iraq forever.

Another Pennsylvania Republican who supports Mr. Obama is retired Major General Walter Stewart, a township supervisor in Burks County who says he has given money both to an anti-Bush Texas Republican, Rep. Ron Paul, and Mr. Hagel, who he said was his first choice for president this election season.

General Stewart said he was supporting Mr. Obama because he could not endorse a candidate who voted to authorize the war in Iraq, which he compared to King George’s decision to send the British army and Hessian mercenaries into New York Harbor in the Revolutionary War. In 2004, General Stewart said, he supported Mr. Kerry, the Democratic nominee, over Mr. Bush. “I think there is a general feeling in the military that this war in Iraq has been a catastrophe,” he said.

I’ve asked around, via friends and family who are active or military veterans (19 in all), and roughly 2 out of 3 agree with Major General Stewart, pretty close to the same percentage of US civilians with the same view.