This message was self-deleted by its author

[Algernon Moncrieff]

57. As one who makes no secret of being pro-Hillary, I'd say these things:

1) The primaries are a good thing. The process forces the candidates to sharpen their position points; serves to take the vital signs of the party rank and file; and serves to vet the candidates before the GE.

2) Having made the point in #1 above, the process serves to bring out the worst in DU. I was here in '08. Then and now, it has brought out a level of nastiness that neither attracts me to engage in threads nor makes me want to read the pointsd put up for the otther Dem candidates. Nevertheless, when Obama won the nomination over Hillary in '08, I threw my wholehearted support behind Obama.

3) At the end of the day, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley are not the enemy. Any of the three would be light years better than the most agreeable of the GOP field (Pataki, I guess....)

4) The point in posting this was not to complain so much as to see what can and shold be clarified. My perspective is that the rules have not been applied consistently, and that if a ccertain omment about Hillary is deemed to be hate speech, and that same certain comment is made about Sarah Palin, that comment is also hate speech.

5) In looking at the rules, at one level, I understand that the owners have reserved the right to do what they want. At another level, I've seen posters of both the pro and anti Hillary Clinton persuasion who have had time outs or who are going through life with 2-3 hides who remain among us, and then I see NYC-SKP who had an incredibly clean record, and made a comment that (as has been pointed out elsewhere) has been made before at DU, and was tombstoned. It's like any umpiring or officiating in any sport: the players and the fans want consistency and clarity.