A Change is needed

Two more primaries are occurring right now in Indiana and North Carolina, and while the focus is clearly on who will end up with what percentage in these contests, the bottom line still comes down to this:

Super-delegates.

Sen. Clinton has to perform well in order to continue pushing the message that she is the one who is in a better position to beat Sen. McCain in November, but with the way the Democratic Party assigns delegates, odds are neither one is going to end up with a huge boost in numbers after today’s votes are cast.

The Democratic party needs to make some changes in the way the primaries/caucuses/etc are handled.

My preference; get rid of the caucuses, throw the concept of super-delegates out the door and base the nomination on a truly democratic process… vote in the primary, winner of the states wins the delegates.

Pretty damn straightforward if you ask me… and then, and only then, would we truly have a system where everyone who was eligible to vote had the ability to do so, and the decision of who gets the nomination would be made by the voters themselves…

What a concept… a concept that should seem more vital now that Sen. Clinton’s campaign has openly stated that the campaign will attempt to get their allies on the Democratic Convention’s rules committee to seat the Michigan and Florida delegations… something that would not only give approval to breaking the rules, but would also showcase how dysfunctional the Democratic party can be at times… which is something we do NOT need right now.

(I am going to assume everyone reading this knows about MI and FL and how the legislatures in Michigan and Florida decided to hold early primaries despite the DNC telling them they would be held accountable and that their votes wouldn’t count… and how all the major candidates agreed not to campaign in those states… and that most voters stayed away from the polls in those states because they knew that the results would be insignificant) [Co-editors note: And don't forget that Sen. Obama's name did not even appear on the ballot in Michigan as he knew that the votes would not be counted due to violating the parties previously established and agreed upon rules - sorry for interrupting, Scott]

Ms. Clinton has wanted to seat those delegated for some time (electoral math shows she has no chance in hell to win without those states), and she now plans to use the rules committee that she stocked with her own allies to swing a backroom deal that would, essentially, thwart the will of the majority of Democratic voters.

Big, big mistake.

I personally will vote for whomever gets the Democratic nomination, but I know for certain that others won’t.

If Clinton wins in that manner, not only will a plethora of voters stay home in droves on Election Day, but it would be easy for Sen. McCain to paint her as the candidate who’s willing to do anything to satisfy her (blind?) ambition.

In other words, it’s one thing that might throw the election to the republicans and give us four more years of Bush 2: Electric Bugaboo.

And we can’t have that, can we?

Make it stop

(HT to Daily Kos)

The Clinton campaign is getting a tad obsessive-compulsive as they have started an on-line petition aimed at, what else, forcing the DNC to recognize the delegations from Michigan and Florida or else promise to hold new elections.

Michael Kempner, a Clinton donor and PR exec, says; “For whatever reason, the DNC seems to be captive of the Obama campaign. The fact is that many, many long-time supporters both financially and non-financially, that have a very different point of view. We very much want to put them on notice.”

Kempner then went on to say that the campaign wants DNC chairman Howard Dean “to exercise some leadership.”

Wow… first, let’s start with the fact that the DNC is NOT captive to Sen. Obama but, in fact, is captive to its own rules… and in abiding by those aforementioned rules, Dean is showing some fantastic leadership.

Why in God’s name should the DNC help Florida and Michigan skirt the rules when 48 other states were able to abide by them? It doesn’t make sense… and as far as new elections go, Dean has said all along that he and the DNC would recognize new contests in both states, but both states passed on that option because, well, because they’re idiots…

None of this has anything at all to do with Dean or Obama but more-so two state’s (bipartisan) decisions to chuck the rules in the toilet and do what they wanted to do…rules be damned. And now, just like we teach children to do, the DNC is abiding by the rules… but Clinton and her people – knowing there is no math anywhere in this world or out of this world that will give her the needed number of delegates – are trying to browbeat HER OWN PARTY… AGAIN... to do what benefits them… rules be damned.

Explain to me again why she has any supporters left?

Please stop, you're making a spectacle of yourself

I don’t want to start trashing Sen. Clinton on this blog as I used to have profound respect for both her and her husband… respect though that I see being tarnished with some of her and President Clinton’s actions in the last few weeks.

Despite that, I've tried to hold my high ground and have refused to get into trash posting like I've seen on other blogs... but what she said this morning on NPR was simply too much for me to ignore.

First you should know that Ms. Clinton, along with Sens. Obama and Edwards,
signed a pledge not to campaign OR PARTICIPATE… and this morning she appeared on NPR:

Clinton: “Well that was his choice, remember. There was no rule or requirement that he take his name off the ballot, and his supporters ran a very aggressive campaign to try to get people to vote uncommitted. So it wasn't that he didn't participate at all. In fact there was a real effort to get people to vote uncommitted and I still won 55% of the vote.”

NPR: “You say that was a fair result even without Barack Obama's name on the ballot?”

Clinton: “Well that was his choice, Steve”

NPR: “Wasn't it the Democratic Party's choice that it would not be a result that be counted and most people took their names off the ballot?”

Clinton: “No...I think that the Democratic Party said that they would not under the circumstances count the votes. But we all had a choice as to whether or not to participate in what was going to be a primary. And most people took their names off the ballot, but I didn't. And I think that was a wise decision because Michigan is key to our electoral victory in the fall. And I think if there is to be any difference between my proposal that we count those votes and any other course of action, it should be a complete redo of the primary. Nothing else is fair and I feel strongly about that.”

So how is this NOT a direct and unequivocal violation of her pledge to the DNC and Democratic voters?

Simple… it IS a direct and unequivocal violation of her pledge to the DNC and Democratic voters… she’s just choosing to change the rules to benefit her, because she wants the presidency so badly that she’s under the impression that she’s not only destined for it, but that the office is somehow owed to her.

My favorite part of her interview was her saying; “…we all had a choice as to whether or not to participate in what was going to be a primary. And most people took their names off the ballot, but I didn't. […] And I think if there is to be any difference between my proposal that we count those votes and any other course of action, it should be a complete redo of the primary. Nothing else is fair and I feel strongly about that.”

Really Ms. Clinton? You’re going to bring up fairness? Seriously? Explain to me and everyone else in this country how the hell it would be “fair” to count two states who broke the rules… how would it be “fair” for you to go back on your pledge?

Fair...

Ms. Clinton’s actions of recent weeks reminds me that we haven’t seen someone like this – someone so intent on getting elected president that they would even throw their own parent under the bus to achieve it – since one Richard Milhouse Nixon ran for president… and we all know how well THAT one turned out.

And before I get flamed for making a parallel to Clinton and Nixon, keep in mind that I’m not comparing the person per se, but rather the lengths they would go to in order to achieve this specific goal…

Sen. Clinton is starting to make a spectacle of herself, and a fall from grace when you're as high-up as she is, can really hurt...