Oh the horror - superdelegates (of any race) will face huge backlash from us crazy cultish Obama supporters if they try to thwart the will of the people. How undemocratic of us to assert that we have the power to support any candidate we choose for any election, and there could be consequences at the ballot box for anybody who ignores this fact.

Once again, wasn't this supposed to be the "fun part" of the campaign. Why do bullies cry when they lose?

Bad timing for this story, coming on the heels of the story about the Clinton campaign pressuring even pledged delegates. As usual, the Clinton campaign whines the most about this kind of thing, while doing the exact same thing if not worse.

"To intimate that you may face a challenge for what you believe in, I just think that's over the top," explains Palmer. That's almost funny. Is Palmer suggesting that voters whose beliefs differ from his own ought to support him anyway? That stands made on principal are above reproach (unlike, perhaps, the rest of his positions, taken simply for the sake of expedience)? Frankly, I can't think of any better reason to challenge an incumbent than for his beliefs, and the manner in which he acts on them.

What's most striking here, though, is the defensive posture. The article doesn't cite a single reason for these leaders to support Hillary. There are many, of course. These leaders could stand up and say: "I support Hillary for her track-record on civil rights issues; it's important to me that when white politicians champion the issues of our community, they be rewarded with our support." More than a few of them could level with their constituents: "When Hillary's husband held political power, he introduced programs and allocated funds that benefited our district - that's the sort of behavior we want to encourage." And, in some cases, they might offer this rationale: "The Clintons offered my family members administation jobs, and they treated me with respect. I feel personally loyal to them, and that trumps the views of my constituents."

Even that last, most crass rationale trumps what's presently on offer - defiance of the voters for the sake of defying the voters. Palmer and his ilk are advancing a tautological claim - that their principled stand in support of Clinton is principled because it's a stand. If they wish to survive the wave of discontent from their constituents, they must offer more than that. They need to give a cogent reason for the stand. And then, they deserved to be judged on how persuasive that reason may be.

Wow. I just read about rumblings from the Clinton camp that they're planning to go after Obama's pledged delegates too.

Boy. Both candidates had better tamp this down. This is getting out of hand. Democratic voters are already anxious about the prospect of having their will thwarted by "elite" superdelegates -- we don't need to have voters anxious over losing their "pledged" delegates as well.

Cripes. Howard Dean? Al Gore? Somebody? Time to speak up and reassure the voters???

JJJ says something vaguely threatening and these guys need to hold hands and cry? No wonder Congress can't get anything done even if they hold a majority. These guys fold faster than boneless chickens.

Grow a spine!

My guess is that the "pressure" isn't coming from the Obama campaign (at least not at this point). Most likely constituents and fellow power brokers in their state machines.

That or this was another attempt to distract the public at large.

i like the Clintonite's claims of "intimidation" of these poor repressed elected officials. they are feeling pressure FROM THEIR CONSTITUENTS, otherwise known as voters, who chose to back a different candidate than the one these officials have hitched themselves to.

of course there is going to be pressure, and i hope it serves as a lesson for "superdelegates" and the like to hold off on throwing their support one way before the contest has been decided or at least contested.

Ok, let's try this again.

Uh, thank God there isn't any pressure on super delegates that are white, hispanic, eskimo, asian or pacific islander male or female (I hope I covered all ethinic groups that I could think of. If I missed someone, I am sorry.) Luckily the only people getting pressure are the african-american super delegates and that keeps getting reported in the media, over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again. Whew, I was worried there for a minute.

This is BS.
It's a plant by the Clinton camp to remind their WHITE voters that Obama is black.

Crazy obamaloons seem to find fault in everything clintons do... jesse jackson jr. few days back explicitly threatened of the consequence they'll face if they dont back the black candidate! if that is not playing the race card, i don't know what is!

ThompsonLives - sorry to disappoint your hypersensitive fragile heart!
but thats not playing race card - 50% of democratic voters who happened to be blacks voted 80% for obama in SC primary.. it seems perfectly okay for all the racist obama supporters to point out that hillary is winning states becoz of latino votes! but it seems to be there is a double standard when it comes to pointing out that obama is winning these southern states becoz of blacks.
Ofcourse for obamaloons like you, its not enough! but that's okay... it is said, not to push the cultist followers too much, they get depressed and take drastic action!

rationality doesn't go with obamaloons!

What is the context for this?

The only explicit example of such pressure cited in the article was Obama supporter Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s recent assertion that black super-dels not backing Obama might risk facing a primary challenge down the road.

gee, and here at ObamaElection Central, we never mention the fact that Jesse Jackson Jr. pressured a Congressman Cleaver by asking him if he wanted to be the ONE person to deny an African American the chance to be president....

we never mention it, even though it is highly relevant to the claims made that there was
'an effort to "pester, intimidate, question our blackness" for not supporting Obama.'

Because we all know that Barack Obama isn't about race, transcends race, and would never use race as an issue in pursuit of the nomination.

....except, of course, when its to his advantage.

How horrible would it be if we found out white people where pressuring white people to vote for Hillary because she is white? And to vote against Obama because he is black.I thought the African-American movement has been telling us we have to look beyound the color of one's skin, and judge a person by the content of their character. Does that only apply to white people. Are African -American's not held to the same standard? I don't think it can be justified any other way that 9 of 10 African-Americans will vote for Obama. They know the Clinton's aren't racist. I believe from the start that African-American's were going to find something, anything to distort and claim it to be a racist comment by the Clintons in order to justify not voting for them. Why not just be honest and say you are voting for Obama because he is black instead of playing race cards. That will not help us in the long run. What goes around comes around.

"i'm neither here to make friends nor to influence anyone ... blogs are infested with crazy cultist followers.. and my mission is to point out to the rest of the innocent readers - how absurd, illogical and crazy obama supporters hv become!"

You contradict yourself here. Pointing out the absurd or illogical IS seeking to influence the "innocent".

Think hard & try again later ;-)

pkj-that I heart lamp ad is bugging me too

lois plain - a typical obamaloon with too much time in his hand - hip, young, naive, lazy and stupid!

Coming from an obamaloon- i feel so better now!

Bono, please do keep advocating as the voice of reason for Clinton.