Bill Clinton: Florida, Michigan Penalty “Appropriate”

I agree… Full representation!

Seriously, if the roles were reversed and Obama was the one asking the delegates in these two states to be seated, would anyone actually think Clinton would feel the same way as she does now (which she didn’t feel last year when her chances of winning were higher)?
If she somehow scams her way to the nomination, the Democratic party will be forever known as a joke and Clinton appeasers.

If it’s HRC – I’ll vote Bob Barr (L).

Bill is for the half delegates in Michigan and Florida.
McAuliffe (Hillary’s campaign manager) wrote in his “What A Party!” book, that in 2004 as DNC chairman he told Michigan they would never be allowed anywhere near the city of the DNC Convention.
Ickes votes to punish Michigan and Florida.
Hillary told New Hampshire public radio that Michigan votes can’t count because they refused to listen to the DNC rules.
Now, all of them are saying count the votes as they were cast. Obama gets 0 from Michigan because his name wasn’t on the ballot.
Florida is a full vote.
Anything other than Hillary’s proposal would be a travesty of justice.
No wonder polling numbers this week started showing Obama improving in Michigan and Florida.
In Michigan, Obama is ahead of McCain, while Hillary is trailing McCain.

Send Hillary back to New York, so that she can voted out of the Senate in the next election. She lies, cheat, grovels, whines and will say anything to get elected. Is it any wonder that the vast majority of Americans think she is very untrustworthy. She is like the woman in fatal Attraction!

Voters in FL and MI were repeatedly told their votes would not count. How is it fair to disenfranchise those who stayed home because they were told votes would not count? The only “American” thing to do is play by the rules. Anything else would be “UnAmerican”.

Let’s not kid ourselves here. She’s got more of an emotional attachment to her naval lint than she does with the voters in those states.
According to the statements above, her ego is now so out of control, she’s even at odds with her own campaign. WOW!
Old woman shakes fist at cloud.

Wait a minute. So the Clintons are proposing NO PENALTY for these two states who violated the rules. That they should be treated exactly the same as the 48 states who stayed within DNC rules. This sets a dangerous precedent for future nomination contests. Get ready for Iowa and 49 other states to all vote on the same day in 2012. There is no way they could enforce any penalty down the road of MI and FL receive no penalty for violating the rules.

Bottom Line: She pledged to honor the rule last Fall. She has broken her word. Ask yourself one question: What does this say about the character of this candidate? How will that character represent the honor of the United States? She broke her word. THAT is despicable. Period.

I agree… Full representation!
Pelosi, Dean, Kennedy, Kerry – are on to destrying the party’s chance to win in November. We do not know what their agenda is!
What’s Pelosi doing anyway in the Congress after they won the House?? Nothing so far!!!

Rules mean nothing if they are changed every time someone does not like them. Clinton is self-serving and basically trying to cheat her way to the nomination. The DNC leadership needs to step up and take charge – as is their job. All these calls to “count the votes” seem just slimy to me. This is a fairness issue, and simply “counting the votes” is not fair as anyone with a conscience can see.
But if you are hellbent on changing the rules, then I alternatively propose we change the rules to make the primaries winner-take-all affairs, change the legal voting age to 60, and allow cats and dogs to vote (their barks and meows need to be heard). In that case, we could REALLY guarantee a Clinton “victory”. These alternative rules are just as fair as what Clinton proposed.

By insisting on rewarding those who break the rules, Hilliary is demanding that the voices of the majority of voters who did abide by the rules be taken away. Do we want to join the ranks of third world countries where the ballot boxes are stuffed by the juntas and machine politicians? thus destroying the will of the people who express their choice by the rules in play at the beginning of the contest. If destroying the will of law-abiding voters is Hilliary’s idea of how to run the country, then she has proven that she lacks the judgement, good will, respect for America and the basic qualifications required to handle the leadership of the country. In fact, if she persists in making these unreasonable and lawless demands, I think she should be removed from office as a U.S. Senator.

Just wondering if you are trying to count all the votes in Florida and Michigan how do you count the people who stayed home because they were told the primary would NOT count? Just wondering…

Same way you count all the people who could not attend the causcuses.

I think the DNC needs to have a severe “house cleaning”. I think Dean and Pelosi have waaaay to much control and the Super Delegates are a farce! Most of them don’t even endorse the way their states voted, so it takes the power out of the American voter. As for Florida and Michigan, they need to rethink their statesmen at the next election….it was their officials that broke the rules and moved up the primary, unfortunately, the good citizens of Michigan and Florida are having to pay the price.

DNC will stand by the rules in place.
HRC will cry foul. Claim to be “standing up for the little guy”.
See WILL take this to the floor.
Hillary’s negative polling #’s 100%

If she takes it to the convention now, even after May 31st when her own committee seats half the delegates, she will be finished politically as a Democrat, Independent, or Whig, if you prefer.

Super Delegates came to be so that they could vote for whom ever they thought would be the best candidate. Period.
They do not have to vote according to their state.
If they did, what would be the point?
They were appointed Super Del’s best of their experience and Party standing.

Why should a few people at the DNC be more influential than over 2 million voters. That is crazy!

I find this augments a bit senseless. They ALL agreed not to count MI and FL. They even signed an agreement before the Primary started. So where is the problem the rules committee can seat them as they see fit. I would look for a 50 percent seating. Although you are all disagreeing on something that will NOT matter. They could seat them as voted today and the math doesn’t change? Please explain if I am wrong.

Independent – Absolutely correct. All indications are they will seat both delegations at half strength as punishment.
The rest of this: popular vote, electoral college, electability, is smoke filled, coffeehouse crap.
He will be the nominee. Nothing can stop that now.

Popular Vote
Total = Current + MI(Uncommited for Obama) + Florida (Actual)
Clinton
17,419,000 = 16,221,000 + 328,000 + 238,000
Obama
17,490,000 = 16,676,000 + 238,000 + 576,000
Delegates
Total = Actual PD + Actual SD + MI (Uncommited Obama) + Florida (Actual)
Clinton
1952 = 1500 + 280 + 69 + 103
Obama
2084 = 1657 + 307 + 51 + 69

Independent – What would you like to discuss?

Thanks Texas at least there is one person here who is sane. We need to get on to the issues.

If Hillary wants to count the
Michigan popular vote where she was the
only major candidate on the ballot, then
all of the uncommitted votes should go
to Obama since his name wasn’t on the ballot! Otherwise No Deal!

Obama has offered Clinton deals before for seating MI and FL, but she refused to accept anything unless it gives her the nomination and rewards these two states.
Clinton is not trying to negotiate. She wants to dictate terms. This is a ruse and must be confronted.
The Rules Committee has to seat the two States somehow, but should only award half of the popular votes and delegates. They should also strip all superdelegates as punishment.
Clinton will not, of course, accept this as it does not give her the nomination.

I guess if Bill is okay with it then the Clintons have spoken!

phony – Your labels don’t apply. If you look at voting, he has garnered huge support from Independents like me and moderate Republicans. He has shown a willingness his entire career to work with people across the aisle, much like McCain has.
I am personally glad that we are finally going to have an election on the issues most Americans care about, and not the fringes of the Republican and Democratic Parties.

Correction to:
  Posted by: Lee C. ― U.S.A. | May 22, 2008 1:25:49 PM
141 delegates left to “earn”.  (I gotta stop trying to do math in my head while I’m typing.)

Independent stated:
“Now I have to decide whether the split in the Democratic party is going to be so big that I have to go with Nader or Barr.”
I’m beginning to feel the same way.

How is it no one is mentioning that less than two months ago, this advocate for the voters was stating quite clearly that the pledged delegates had no requirement to vote along the lines under which they were chosen? The voters only count if they are in her favor. Clinton is an opportunist.

Remember how Obama ran uncontested after he and his campaign managed to get all other opponents running for the Illinois legislature disqualified??
We’ve got some sharp and competitive legal minds on both sides who are refining their arguments to present before the DNC Credentials Committee.
Don’t be surprised if you read about “fair and equal application” a lot in the next few days.
Several other states that also moved up the date of their respective caucus or primary suffered no delegate loss or sanctions.
The DNC is going to have to explain this, and if no penalties were meted out for South Carolina, New Hampshire or Iowa, then it will be very interesting to see how the DNC Credentials Committee digs themselves out of this inconsistent application of applying penalties to some states and not others.

How anyone can honestly believe Obama is a change from the same old political games is beyond me. He said his association with Rezko was a ‘dumb’ decision, that he didn’t know Wright was a rascist, that he wasn’t putting down small town workers, that he wants a bipartisan administration.He was voted “Most Liberal Senator” title last year, he wants gun controls, made a deal with Rezko even while knowing Rezko was under investigation for corruption,lied about not knowing Wright’s agenda, and told a liberal San Francisco audience what they wanted to hear about rural ‘hicks’. He told Judicial Watch he had no records from his term in the Illinois legislature and is using a Madison Avenue slogan ‘Change We Can believe In’ to try to get in the White House. He comes from a wealthy Hawaiian family even though he tries to portray himself as one of the downtrodden. 100 years ago he would have been called a snake oil salesman.

Just for the record, Obama did run campaign ads in Florida after pledging not to do so.
And his name was on the ballot in Michigan and he chose to take it off.
And Hillary and the DNC agreed to re-votes in FL and MI – completely paid for – but Obama called in his team of lawyers and put a halt to it.
So how are the votes as they stand unfair in a razor thin primary race where the weaker of the two candidates is apparently to be nominated because the voters of these two states (which we need to win in the GE) are being ignored and dismissed?

SNL writers – are you guys paying attention to the news? This skit is nearly written already.
Obama’s team laying out the ‘rules’ at a news conference – what’s in-play:
- Church membership? “No”
- Rev. Wright? “No”
- Ayers? “No”
- Rezko? “Hey, we already said that was a boneheaded mistake. No more.”
- Flag pin? “No”
- Michelle Obama? “No”
- Race? “No”
- Bitter Americans? “No”
Media: “So, Mr. Obama, what exactly can we ask you about?”
Obama: “Let’s focus on my legislative record. Oooh, and the fact that I opposed the Iraq war at arms-length, when I didn’t have to vote on it.”
Media: (….Silence…mumbling amongst themselves – “What legislative record?”)
Obama: “Ok, then, if there are no questions, let’s wrap this up. I’m all fired up and ready to go.”

I can’t believe that a woman would vote for a candidate that will select at least two more Supreme Court Justices that are going to be Alito and Roberts like. I guess love is so blind that you are willing to cover your eyes and give away your freedom.

Scoreboard:
Magic number needed to win nomination 2025
Obama’s state wins 33 plus (*) lost 18,
Delegate count 1967 +/-.
Clinton’s state wins 18 lost 33,
Delegate count 1771 +/-.
Campaign War Chest:
Obama 50m or more
Clinton (25m) in the red
(*) Territories
Obama all the way!

Healing the Democratic Party will not come from Obama, it’ll come when he’s defeated.

Texas Voter -
It seems that you read BHO’s autobiography carefully, but you did not believe what he said as you quoted them. Thus, you can support him.

Yavo – An exit strategy? No wait, it’s only her husband and her campaign that has that, not her.
My mistake.

You go TP. Good for ya and BHO.

Thoughts on Florida and Michigan:
1.) Let the Punishment Fit the Crime.
2.) Punish the crooks, not the victims.
3.) FLorida:
All candidate’s names were on the ballot. The citizens of Florida did not reschedule the Primary date. Hillary Clinton did not campaign in the state, as pledged. Barack Obama, on the other hand, had TV ads, and possibly radio ads, running in the state prior to the vote. The citizens of Florida voted in good faith. The results of the vote have been validated and certified by the Secretary of State of Florida. Therefore, the delegates of Florida should be allocated to the candidates as is, without any reduction or reallocation. There is no need for a revote.
As to punishment, a substantial fine, in the form of a contribution to the DNC campaign fund, which needs the money, would be appropriate.
4.) Michigan:
As in Florida, the citizens of Michigan did not move the date of the Primary. Initially, all three candidates, Clinton, Obama and Edwards, were on the ballot. For some reason, Obama and Edwards CHOSE to remove their names, telling their supporters to vote “UNCOMMITTED” (wink, wink). The voters voted in good faith, at least for Clinton. The vote totals have been validated and certified by the Secretary of State. Michigan could not arrange a fair revote, since Senator Edwards had dropped out. Clinton’s delegates should be allocated to her in accordance with the vote. Since there cannot be a fair revote, and since no one can tell which of the “UNCOMMITED” votes belong to Obama and which belonged to Edwards, and since Edwards has now endorsed Obama, he should be awarded the delegates allocated to the “UNCOMMITED” vote.
As to punishment, the State of Michigan should, like Florida, be assessed a substantial fine, payable to the DNC Campaign Fund.
5.) Do not disenfranchise the 2,013,677 voters who cast their ballots for Clinton and Obama in Florida and for Clinton and “UNCOMMITTED” in Michigan.
6.) There are 50 states that should FULLY PARTICIPATE in the Democratic Party Primary races, not 48.
7.) Florida and Michigan were not the only two states to have advanced their Primary dates, so, if Florida and Michigan are penalized, the others must be penalized, too. What is sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose.
8.) The DNC has a duty and responsibility to the voters first, to the candidates second and to the states last. To not exercise this accordingly would be dereliction of duty and irresponbile in the extreme.

If it is unfair NOW to Michigan and Florida voters to not count their votes, why was it apparently okay BACK THEN when the decision was initially made by the DNC? What has happened between now and then to make it unfair?
Clinton needs to answer this question.
It looks like these are her options: (1) She could say it was unfair back when the DNC made the initial decision. (But then why didn’t she stand up for Michigan and Florida voters back then? Did she not have the guts to do so? Or did she not have the wisdom/discernment to see its injustice back then? Or what?)
(2) She could agree that it’s not unfair now to not count Michigan and Florida votes. (But, of course, there goes Clinton’s argument for counting the votes.)
(3) She could insist that it is unfair now, but it wasn’t back then when the DNC made their decision. (But then she desperately needs to point to something that has subsequently happened between now and then that made what was once fair suddenly become unfair.)
None of these options are good for Clinton.

Senator Clinton won both states fairly and squarely, not man to man but woman to man.
To Commander Guy, of course this is only about the Voter’s and THEIR VOICES that MUST be heard.
The reason why voters in Florida and Michigan voted for Senator Clinton,is because we know She is the only one who CAN and WILL help us when nobody else will.Senator Clinton is a modest but very charming woman. She fill people willShe is not big headed and inexperienced
like Obama

As a school administrator I am always asked why “kids these days” don’t have the personal integrity and quality of character that adults expect. I often point to professional athletes like Terrell Owens and the refusal to abide by their own agreements and their own word. Now I may start pointing to the Clinton refusal to abide by the agreements made by everyone, and I do mean everyone, about how to deal with the Michigan and Florida violations. Everyone agreed that both of those states violated the rules and that there should be a consequence. But now that there may be an advantage to one side or the other those who agreed on the consequences want to change the rules. They want to “hold out” like professional athletes do when they don’t want to agree by the contract they signed. In this case Hillary knows the value of Florida and Michigan and is using it just like T.O. uses his leverage to get his contracts renegotiated. This is pandering in the worst way. It is just like arguing for a gas tax break when we all know it can’t happen and wouldn’t work anyway. Hillary is a smart woman but she knows she is pandering, the leadership of the DNC knows she is pandering, I know she’s pandering and so do you. If you like her then pandering is okay. But let’s face it she is demonstrating a pretty serious lack of integrity by going against the agreements that she made months ago. At this point I will have to start referring to her as the Terrell Owens of the political arena. And everyone knows that T.O. is only in it for himself.

I believe that Hillary has if anythng disqualified herself for the V.P. slot and has not earned it. She and Bill since Day 1, or at leasst after Iowa, began to fuel a racial and gender division within the Democratic Party and the country as a whole. She has aligned herself more with McCain and the Republicans than with the Democratic Party! She has been cold and calculating, devoid of conscience in some instances. It would be very unwise for Barack to pick Hillary as a running mate. Their word is not their Bond and they cannot be trusted to live up to earlier intentions as in the battle for votes which she earlier signed off on and said these votes would not count.
Hillary is whining. But not only is she whining, she is distorting the facts. Clintons made a big deal about Barack whining and said “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” I think they should take their own advice!

Yes. Just that simple.

It is interesting how these two sides fight over the stupidest things. Fact–there are two candidates who will accomplish positive things and one who will not. Vot for the one who will not if you want. It is your right. Just remember the saying about “cutting off your nose to spite your face.”

How is Hillary the best one to run this country. Look how she ran her campaign, it’s been in deep trouble. And we’re going to trust her with this country. And economists keep saying that her and McCain’s gas tax was a hugh mistake yet she wouldn’t listen to them. Sorry we already have someone like that in the white house, someone who won’t listen because they feel they are always right.

Good luck, America.
When you vote someone, at least you should have enough trust.
Anti-Iraq-war is the only credit for Obama. But not so sure now whom he stands for after all Uncle Wright-like connections. It will take time to prove rather than just divorcing one after another.
What else are SO FAR LEFT?
“The Emperor”s New Clothes”
One see the clothes.
One see the color.
One see the body.
Are you thoughtful or simply over exicted about the new clothes?
No blame if you admire the body.
No blame if you like the color.
But those who design the new clothes?
No much more than a bunch of political guys.

Well, I just got off the phone with the DNC. Seems like they are getting a lot of “input” from all sides, and then some. I spoke to a very nice young lady, who listened very patiently and said she would pass my “input” on the the special section Dr. Gov. Howard Dean has set up to handle “input” for the PUBLIC MEETING on May 31 about Florida and Michigan.
She did agree that indeed the “Super Delegates” ARE NOT supposed to be endorsing or supporting ANY candidates NOW and that they really do not come into play until the convention in Denver. However, she also said that some of them are very strong-minded and that the DNC really can’t control them, as they are all State level. She agreed that they are supposed to be unbiased and open-minded, using their wisdom and experience to choose the STRONGEST candidate who they think will be able to win the General Election and the White House for the Democratic Party. She also said that while that is the IDEAL, many of the “Super Delegate” are somewhat less than compliant, but that again, the DNC cannot discipline them. I guess it is somewhat like trying to herd and control cats.
We also discussed penalizing Iowa, South Carolina and New Hampshire, the three states that also moved up their voting dates, and she said she would pass that suggestion along. As far as fining the State Party of Florida and Michigan instead of halving their delegation strength, she found the suggestion interesting, perhaps in view of the fact that the DNC is seriously lacking funds. She said she would pass that suggestion along.
Lsstly, I brought up the problem with Caucuses vs. Primaries. I explained how unrepresentative the former were and how easily they could be manipulated, and suggested that for the next election, the Democratic Party require all states to have primaries and to disallow caucuses, but she said the DNC could not do that because that would infringe on the right of the states. So, I guess those who are really interested and who live in Caucus states will have to work through their local governments to change that, if that is what you want. I also told her that there is a lot of talk on line about not voting Democratic if Obama is either the Nominee or on the ticket, and I reiterated my own intention, as a Registered Independent, to either vote Republican or not at all, in that case. I also told her that there was a lot of interest in starting a Center Party, in view of the fact that the alternatives we were left with do not meet the needs of those of us in the middle. She said she would pass that on, and on that note, we ended our conversation

Hanna said:
“Women are far too intelligent, etc…”
GO HANNA, GO. You win with class, inclusing the quipping bit.

Sorry, make that “including the quipping bit”

“I say count every vote cast, no matter how illegitimate. If the rules don’t apply, the rules don’t apply! ”
Favoring either Clinton or Obama, the rules of the DNC should not override a voters right to express their opinion by voting. The FL and MI votes should count and the state officials responsible should pay, not the voters. Please see my post at 3:01:37 PM.

I’m with Hannah and Emily on this one now:
When rules become inconvenient they must be changed. Everyone knows this.
The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present.
HIllary won MI – FL. As Long as Hillary won these states it does not matter that the candidates did not campaign there or if Obama’s name was even on the ballot. The Voters cannot be disenfranchised by their party, especially the Florida voters who were disenfranchised in 2000. Obviously, these inconvenient rules must be changed and these delegates must be seated.
Rules apply to little people. They do not apply to Rove and they don’t apply to Hillary.

Sorry Bill, even CLinton hack Terry McAuliffe has stated in the past that the penalty (to which her people agreed) should be upheld. This is a passage from Terry’s book in which he rips Carl Levin a new one for the same thing.
“”I’m going outside the primary window,” [Michigan Sen. Carl Levin] told me definitively.
“If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses,” I said. “We will have chaos. I let you make your case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost.”
He kept insisting that they were going to move up Michigan on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.
“You won’t deny us seats at the convention,” he said.
“Carl, take it to the bank,” I said. “They will not get a credential. The closest they’ll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it.”
We glared at each other some more, but there was nothing much left to say. I was holding all the cards and Levin knew it.”
Such selective outrage from the Clintonistas is just embarrassing. Don’t diminish real principles by crassly co-opting them when they suit your needs.

The only way she can come out ahead on any possible “count” (delegates or popular vote)…is if Obama is not awarded any delegates or votes in Michigan. In other words, the 55 Uncommitted delegates and 575K popular votes would dissappear or go to her.
Clinton supporters…is that the idea of fairness to you? Because it seems to me that those 575K voters who made it a point NOT to vote for Clinton would be rather disenfranchised.
Posted by: seajay
========================================
What are you talking about by referring to 575,000 voters? The only number in question is the 238,168 UNCOMMITTED, which I suggested be given to Obama, to smooth his ruffled feathers and feed his overinflated ego. After all, he did embarrass a lot of his supporters and anger a lot of Democrats in Iowa the other night. But maybe he has a problem with being premature on occasion.

To NC-DEM
Your points are well-taken. Thank you.
However, maybe my opinion should not be irrevelant. Many rules are changed to fit the intent they try to serve. A vote in a primary can be every bit as important to an individual (or more so) than a vote in the general election. After all one might prefer to live under either McCain OR Clinton than Obama (I use this as example – switch the names around if you like). Thusly, it is my opinion that the DNC is in need of overhall, although it’s a little late for the present situation.

Since the voters in the Michigan primary who voted “uncommitted”, obviously were not voting for Clinton, delegates selected for that choice should be able to vote for any candidate they wish, other than Clinton. They can vote for Biden, Edwards or Richardson if they please…

Really Hillary supporters? You cannot tell me if this situation was reversed that you would not be tearing down the walls about how crooked this is. I don’t understand how people support her. I can’t grasp even a hint of what they see in her – honestly.
Lastly, the only way Obama will be “unelectable” is if Clinton supporters decide to sulk and vote against Obama. I can’t stomach her, but I sure as he*@ would hold my nose and vote for her over McCain. It’s a no brainer if you really care about the issues.

This isn’t really about the poor little people in FL or MI (who Hillary already drop-kicked when she agreed to sandbag them a year ago), or what makes sense.
It is about dragging out the primary process while she continues to make her case – in oh such a polite way – that “real, hard-working” Americans won’t vote for a black guy in the general election, and challenging the party elite to make a choice between their principles or winning the election.
It is interesting that it is the sanctimonious, politically-correct liberal party that is proving thatlarge portions of its most committed voters will NOT vote for Obama – because he is black. Since neither candidate has any demonstrated experience at anything, and neither have offered any real policy positions, the only reason they have given anyone to vote for (or against) them is because they are respectively black and female. It looks like racism is alive and well in the Democratic party.

The voters of Fla. filed a lawsuit against the DNC. One plaintiff a delegate for Hillary, one plaintiff a delegate for Obama. It is against the Civil Rights Act to change the seating of delegates. I guess this is news everywhere but not on ABC.

Hillary has every right to fight for two states which would vote for her in November and not vote for Obama—I can assure you FL is a sure thing for McCain if Obama is the nominee, MI, who knows?
The fact is that Obama’s relationship with Wright may be a mortal wound, though the MSM & Dem-pollsters will try to spin it as of no consequence.
Of course, the attacks on Wright, a total nutjob devotee of Farrakhan, are completely incorrect by standard Dem “what’s mine is mine & what’s yours is negotiable” ethos. Why did Obama support the TUCC if that Church was a hybrid of anti-American and anti-Christian scream-sermons? G-d Damn America & The Golden Boy sat in his pew and nodded, or was he absent, or was Michele screaming about her low SATs as part of a plot by “Whitey?” Maybe it’s all on tape. Maybe Hillary has it and will nuke Barack-o if he doesn’t come around. This will all hemorrhage gradually out throuhout the campaign until October, when the ultimate smoking guns against Angry Michele will be exposed, although Obama will shriek and the MSM will tut-tut & the lefty blogosphere claim dirty tricks and throw endless tantrums and spew their pablum all over the net.
Does the MSM even investigate any of this close to damning evidence, or does the blogging community have to do what used to be investigative journalism.? The MSM—FoxNEWS & the WSJ excepted—has becoming a cheerleading squad for far-left Obama. And Hillary as a candidate who can win a dozen states Obama will lose—he got all those delegates from caucus states with few electoral votes—and most will vote Repub as well.
If Barack had a 20-year relationship with an off-the-wall whack-o Farrakhan supporter, doesn’t that trump the Hagee flirtation by McCain?
Strap on some frontal lobes over there on the left, if they’re not completely burnt out. Obama is going to crash & burn. Or as the LA Times would put it, The Magic Negro has run out of tricks.

I think they should allow each state to vote again. This time they should make sure that both candidates are on the ballot. This would ensure that all democrates in both states have a vote.

Lee C. wrote:
“informed Democrat I have a question for you. Why do you ignore Hillary and her three visits to Florida? Then going to Florida to claim victory on the night of the Primary. If you are so informed you would know that the Democratic Pary was aware of the Obama Ads as he stated he would not run them if they violated the rules of the party. I guess you are unwilling to consider all the facts?”
I am informed because I acknowledge all of the facts.
1) Hillary and all canidates were allowed by the DNC to campaign in Florida
2) BHO campaigned five times in Florida and held four fundraisers
3) Shame on the biased Dean-Pelosi DNC for knowing BHO bought advertising and advertised, running the ads full blast in Florida (and still lost) and did not disqualify the liar and rule breaker
4) Hillary claimed victory because she …. WON
Stop drinking the BHO kool aid from the same cup as Jim Jones offered in Guyana before it is too late for America.

It’s not really about enfranchisement here. No one is guaranteed that in the primary/caucus season. The Democratic and Republican parties form their own rules, from what I understand more or less independent of rights granted by the amendments of the Constitution. The entities simply aren’t directly affiliated with the state or federal government, so such amendments don’t apply to them. Voting in the primaries is a privilege, not a right. Michigan and Florida knowingly broke the rules, and now it’s time to pay the piper.
Call me ignorant, but I also fail to draw any significant similarities between Obama’s campaign and George W. Bush’s campaign in 2000. Your argument, Buddy, reeks of unsupported rhetoric.