Would Senator Clinton propose we cancel the primaries, the caucuses and the convention if she does not like the verdict of the voters? Perhaps the insiders can hold the convention in the Capitol Rotunda without the interference of elected delegates.
It is revealing that Lanny quotes the history of the past, not even the 1990's, but the 1980's. He quotes the dead hand of a past that is abhorrent to the enormous majority of Americans who want business as usual in politics ended, and want the future to begin, now.
In Lanny's world, and Senator Clinton's world, the primaries mean nothing. The caucuses mean nothing. The surge of voters in record and historic numbers means nothing. The American people, except for party insiders, mean nothing. Democracy means nothing.
They quote the 1990's, and they quote the 1980's, and argue for a restoration of the past, a coronation of the insiders, a contempt for the voters of America. Voters do not exist in this world of the past, unless they serve some tactical and manipulative purpose for those who seek power for themselves and those who believe they are smarter, and more worthy, than those who go to the polls.
If voters want a future that is different they are ignored, disgarded, thrown away as though the primaries did not happen. As though caucuses did not happen. As though voters did not vote. As though elections have no meaning. As though democracy has no purpose.
This is the kind of elitism and arrogance of power that the American people reject in record numbers. It is an elitism that argues that a few Americans in the inner circles of power are morally, intellectually or politically superior to the American people who are not invited into, or respected by, these insider circles of power that are so out of touch with America in 2008.
In this view, the American people are rabble who cannot trusted, their dreams for America are refuse to be discarded, by those who claim to know better than us what is right, when in truth the only thing they know is what gets them the power they crave, regardless of the cost.
I know more than my share of superdelegates and propose that both Hillary and Lanny are wrong. The supers will not throw out the verdict of those who attend the primaries and caucuses. They will not stomp on the democratic rights of those who vote for their candidate. We shall see, who is right.
I will let Lanny claim the mantle of the 1980's and let Hillary stand for the restoration of the 1990's with the tactics and attitudes that are held in near universal disrepute by the people of a nation who want true change, authentic change, and a better future.
This is the year when the people are right and the politicians are wrong and the future is now. Barack Obama is winning this nomination because he embodies the best of the past, the movements of the present, and the hope of the future.
Sooner than the experts believe the superdelegates will join the people rather than resist the tides of history and the aspirations of voters.
In America the people rule and those who do not honor this, will be left behind.
If Americans are serious about doing either, best to just get a veto-proof Demo Congress, see what happens over the next 4 years. Obama is probably way too nice a guy to be stuck with the Presidency anyway.
But, whatever happens, I'm not voting for the Repo Man.
He threw up the Exelon crap without mentioning that Mark Penn worked for them and Hillary cosponsored the bill he was ranting about. He spat forth a list of votes that Obama made in the Senate without acknowledging that Hillary voted for those same things. The real list missing was the ones that Obama didn't vote for and Hillary did like the ban on the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas and the instant replay of the Iraq vote aimed this time at Iran. Also missing were these very real bills that Hillary couldn't be bothered to sign on to:
S.692 : A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a Hospital Quality Report Card Initiative to report on health care quality in Veterans Affairs hospitals.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack
No Hillary
S.117 : A bill to amend titles 10 and 38, United States Code, to improve benefits and services for members of the Armed Forces, veterans of the Global War on Terrorism, and other veterans, to require reports on the effects of the Global War on Terrorism, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack
No Hillary
S.1084 : A bill to provide housing assistance for very low-income veterans.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack
No Hillary
Obama, McCain and Clinton and tax form release
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/15/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin
Obama earmarks versus Hillary's
http://obama.senate.gov/press/070621-obama_announces_3/
Hillary Clinton a porker
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...&refer=home
Obama and environmental issues
http://presidentialprofiles2008.org/
Obama and Pakistan and Hillary's naivity
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/06/navarrett...ref=mpstoryview
Obama's economic plan gets an A- and Hillary's a C.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...id=opinionsbox1
Obama's health care plan preferred
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print...7353949449.html
Obama's legislative achievements:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8010303303.html
Where's the beef? The beef I have is with the fact that the Clinton campaign has once again stooped to lying and belittling the very real campaign of Barack Obama and his real experience that goes beyond that hot air filled 35 years that Hillary claims. That is where the beef is!
"Young Ambition"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rleUPHX8yfM
Great Luck!
~HK
I don't see her picking up many states (since most of them don't matter). Heck I even see Washington state going all in w/a third party.
Don't talk about "fair" assignment of super delegate votes -- Obama has given over $600,000.00 to super delegates to buy their endorsement and Senator Clinton has spent about $200.000.00 in the same way.
All the more reason why the rules governing super delegate votes that have been in place for over at least the last two decades must stay in place. Namely, super delegates can cast their vote for the candidate they want whether the people in their home state voted for or against that particular candidate.
I'd be willing to bet you'd be singing a different tune if YOUR candidate was the one to benefit from actually allowing the people to choose who they want for president. Do you mean to say that, the rules being what they are at this point, Clinton has every right to woo ("buy") Superdelegates, but Obama does not?
Which is it. Are we playing fair or not here? Are we playing by the rules or not here?
Superdelegates were an undemocratic idea from day one. I'd like to know the name of the individual who first came up with the notion that some lucky chosen individual might receive a call from some multi millionaire politician, go on a date with that millionaires daughter, be interviewed like a giddy sixteen year old American idol finalist on CNN by Anderson Cooper, all to court their vote, which as it turns out carries more weight than mine.
Every American citizen's vote should count the same, and the fact that Hillary is now scrambling about trying to work the numbers her way is rather sad. She wept, saying this election is too important to blow (not in an intern sense ) and I believe that too. But blowing the election this time doesn't mean losing the presidency, it means trampling democracy, which has been trampled ad nauseum lo these past eight years.
People say you can't change horses in mid stream, well we're on a drowning donkey with this system of superdelegation. The Democratic party has always been the party, at least to me, that represented fairness, and justice, and all I can see with these superdelegates is a system rewarding the elite with more power than they already wield.
No one has accepted the challenge and answered my question. Why does Hillary Clinton, a fellow American citizen's vote, carry more weight than mine.
No, once again, don't explain the superdelegation system as C.S. Lewis said " An explanation of cause is not justification by reason ". Why is it fair these new American Idols are even in a position to sway an election in the first place. This is the single biggest hypocrisy facing the Democratic Party today and must be reconciled, and resolved or this donkey is going to drown.
There's only before the fact and after the fact, and we're in the before the fact phase, months away from the potential disaster in Colorado. When do these things get resolved, the faulty Diebold machines, the existence of these creatures of outrageous entitlement called superdelegates?
IT has to be before the fact. Some will say yes, but four years before, but there's no sense of urgency following an election. After the theft of the presidency in 2000, people needed time to fully reconcile what the hell happened.
The answer is for these superdelegates to be removed from the equation. To have their status demoted. Of course it won't happen, but thats what needs to happen. They must be terminated.
And the candidates, who themselves possess super delegate status need to do the right thing, in the eyes and name of democracy, and rescind, revoke, reject, repudiate their super delegate status. Show the American people an act of courage, for once, and stop calculating the numbers, or worrying about losing the election by alienating those who relish their roles as enemies to democracy, the remaining superdelegates.
Some say that would be burning bridges, but I've always held the bridges to hell should be burned, and that is the kind of nation we're heading towards if we don't do away with such hypocrisies as the system of superdelegation.
Not after the fact, but now.
That is the only way for a fair and democratic process. People seem to be staring at the numbers, concerned for whom the superdelegates will choose, when the entire system itself is inherently unjust to begin with. And those who take part in it should feel ashamed for the hypocrisy.
As long as Hillary and Barack continue to walk around wielding superdelegate status, wielding a vote with more power than any ordinary American citizen they are enemies to democracy. And the GOP can have a field day with that, should they need any more ammunition.
The super delegates must be stripped of their super powers, or we need to invent a new "super tar" and "super feathering" system for them.
Secondly everyone wants change in the country not just your candidate.
"The dead hand of the past that is abhorrent" how poetic but the past has given us Martin Luther, Bobby Kennedy and Nelson Mandela so lets play the dead hand and see how it works out instead of despising it. What happens if the tide of history(how romantic) and the voters,including those in Florida, happen to support Hillary? Will you be still playing that romantic tune?Or will you be playing the blues?
The right thing is to obviously give the person who has won the most delegates within the rules. Otherwise, they will wound their own party in a potentially mortal way. That would be stupid.