With all good intentions towards you penguin, tell that to my kids. Tell them why bitter and divisive people split the party and got yet another right winger elected. Tell them why this kind of nonsense is rec'ed to the top of the list at a Democratic forum every time it's posted and gets ample enough airtime that it find legitimacy.

It's not Democratic. It's not Progressive. It's single-minded, tunnel vision with the intent to deliver for one candidate at the expense of all else. How in the world can we call this NetRoots. It spits in the face of everything that Jerome and Kos wrote about in the "This Ain't No Party" chapter of "Crashing the Gates."

I don't engage Alegre or many of the others with similar reasoning here at MyDD for the simple reason that their candidate was running in contested elections. I disagreed with them and found much of their writing awful. Tonight is a very different story. The implication that Obama won't win and that Hillary will carry the mantle in 2012 serves no NetRoots purpose other than to drive people away from the person who was named the presumptive nominee. It's designed to create the impression that we've put the party in danger.

What really puts the party in danger is sentiment like this that suggests we're going to lose. There's nothing about this dialog that contributed to the election of a Democrat to the highest office. Nothing. It is driven by a cult of personality movement that discredits everything that Hillary Clinton has worked for as a Democrat. It places her above the party on the night when the party has loudly spoken to the world about who will be carrying our banner into battle. I can't stomach that.