Noam Scheiber thinks it is. I think there’s a more important concern: the national Democratic Party doesn’t want or need progressives like me protecting it.

Far more important are the questions: how’s our country doing? And our communities and families? You and me?

If the national Democratic Party spent more time answering those questions and providing answers to the problems we’re experiencing, it would have no problem maintaining its strength. Although some of its brighter elected members and leaders are doing that. But too many members aren’t.

Clinton’s perfectly justified in pursuing the nomination and if the party’s ripped apart by her doing so, it’s because the party as a whole has enormous weaknesses within some of its elected members. Clinton’s pledge is to support and defend the Constitution which protects us all. And the Constitution notes that protection against enemies, foreign and domestic, is part of the duties of our elected government.

Some Democrats think the citizenry should also be protected from economic ruin and the time-tested way of doing that is support for policies that build and strengthen a strong middle class, while adding a safety net for those poorer. Yet members of both major parties refute or abandon that. Parties and our country can be weakened by that.

Party members like delegates, its governing principals and its top elected lawmakers ultimately make the party strong or weak.

This year, Democrats have a choice for president between a candidate saying those elected lawmaker party members have to change to strengthen the country. Another claims they’ve got more experience creating that change successfully. I’d like the party’s voters to determine who’s right. If they choose wisely, the country will be bettered and the party will thrive.

If voters or delegates elect a candidate who doesn’t produce change that betters the country, the party will suffer and could be eventually destroyed. Which is exactly what should happen. If the party doesn’t advance the country, it fails and deserves to go to history’s dustbin.

So let Clinton and her supporters say and do what they feel will benefit the nation. If they convince enough people, they get the chance to prove their assertions. If the outcome of the primary or general election results in President McCain, they’ll deservedly share the blame.

Americans will feel more pain that way and after the performance of Bush, if the party proves too weak or unwise to capitalize on that, then the party, for the umpteenth time, will fail. And that really should be the final nail in its coffin. Because our nation’s best interests is really the destination. The party’s a mere vehicle designed to get us there. And when those vehicles break down due to a collective failure they should be towed to the junkyard and a replacement vehicle bought.

Clinton can’t vote herself in. That’s a collective act. And if she gets past the huge hurdle to gain the nomination, only to lose the general, she’s smart enough to recognize how much anger and blame will be directed her way. And we will owe her no more protection than we owe the party if it’s proven defective once again.

What deserves protection is for party candidates to do whatever the hell they want, and to accept the consequences, even when they get it wrong. And more than that, our country and its inhabitants deserve to be protected first. If we fail at that, that endangers everything we and our ancestors have struggled and sacrificed for and a political party is the least compared to that.

That doesn’t mean I agree with Clinton’s decisions, motives or methods. I think some politicians offer little more than a suicide pact to voters. Vote for them and we all can go down together. That’s the risk inherent in having a democratic means of deciding these things. And if you think that’s what McCain or Clinton or Obama will do to the country, either vote against them or satisfy your death wish.

She gets to make her case. We determine the outcome. I support that. If at some point I think too many of my fellow citizens are voting for ruin, I can always leave, and so can you. In the interim, if the party’s elected members and delegates choose a self-destructive path, it’s much easier leaving that. It’s really the least of my concerns. I’m damn near homelessness and much of my family is not doing a whole lot better. And I personally feel Clinton won’t do anything about that. But she has every right to pursue her goal, despite that. I only have one vote and I plan to use it for the betterment of the country. Which won’t, in the foreseeable future, be used to support the status quo if that’s all the two major parties can offer.

Just as Clinton has every right to continue, I retain and revere my right to vote wisely, unwisely or not to vote at all.