Senator Hillary Clinton began her campaign for the Presidency brilliantly. She launched online, beckoning the country to a "conversation". Her first ad focused on people who were "invisible" to the Bush Administration. Brilliant, even moving.
The only question , for any candidate, would be whether this would survive the test of time, i.e., was she authentic, did she really want to hear us, or would she yield to special interests? As detailed in "How Handlers Have Hurt Hillary"( January 5, 2008), her handlers succeeded in conveying the she did not. But, perhaps that was just Mark Penn and Howard Wolfson, and not Senator Clinton herself.
Then, the admission. At the YearlyKos convention, she not only admitted taking lots of lobbyist and PAC money, she vigorously defended the whole system. At the last debate we learned that she voted for the Bankruptcy Bill ,but then said "I'm glad it did not pass". Why then would she have voted for it? No one can know with certainty but one wonders if there is a relationship.
Now, the insult. The Clintons are telling us that they do not care who the voters have chosen, they will take the nomination even if they lose the elected delegates. The superdelegates (unelected for Presidential preference, and much to do with prior personal relationships and/or benefits) can put them over the top.
Lanny Davis---staunch Clinton, and Joe Lieberman, supporter, and present at the creation of the superdelegates---has said that the superdelegates were designed to enable the party establishment to blunt an insurgency. [Thanks ,Lanny for your honesty.]
Or, take Harold Ickes, senior member of Clinton's camp. He contends that superdelegates should not be "swayed by the voters" (!) but should support the person they think is best fit to be president. "Automatic delegates are supposed to exercise their best judgment", Ickes said. [Ickes even used a Karl Rove technique, e.g., as Republicans try to pull the wool over peoples' eyes by changing the name of the "inheritance tax" to the "death tax"; Ickes calls superdelegates "automatic delegates". Ickes insults not only our rights but our intelligence.]
There it is, fellow voters. You and I do not count. We need people like Harold Ickes first to insult us and then to make our choices for us.
And, they appear to be willing to tear the party asunder to win, although it will be a pyrrhic victory. Can anyone imagine what the party will be like if the person---Obama or Clinton--who wins the elected delegates has the nomination taken from them by the party elite? Might as well just get used to "President McCain" (i.e., a 3rd term of GWB).
In "Supersolution for Superdelegates" (February 9, 2008), it was suggested that if either candidate is willing to take the nomination despite losing the elected delegate count, that people should rise up and vote for the other. At the time of that article, neither had declared their intentions, and the hope was that both would agree. That would make the Democratic Party democratic.
The candidate that would change the nomination via unelected superdelegates cannot seriously expect the people to believe that their voices will be heard when that person is President. In her tearful moment Hillary Clinton said that politics to her was not about power but about helping people. Really, by taking the nomination from a popularly elected person, thwarting the will of the people?
No one who takes the nomination away from the person who is popularly selected can pretend at the same time to be hearing the peoples' voices.
Obama has said that he believes the nominee ought to be the person who gets the most number of elected delegates. That is the right position, it respects the popular will.
Voters in Wisconsin, Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Hawaii, Pennsylvania and others can do something to prevent this: show'em that voters will not be taken for granted, will not be insulted, and do not need or want Harold Ickes to make their choice for them. Vote for Obama in droves, as he will respect the outcome of the elected delegate process no matter what. That provides the chance, the hope, that he will respect the voices of the American people when he is President.
Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, has gone from "let's have a conversation" and "you have been invisible", to DROP DEAD!, all in just a few months.