The Unity Express Derails in DC

"One final word....Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the credentials committee."

-- Harold Ickes, Hillary Clinton Campaign representative, Washington, D.C., May 31, 2008

Saturday, the Democratic Party's Rules & Bylaws Committee (RBC), in a surreal act of political suicide, awarded Barack Obama 55 "uncommitted" delegates from the Michigan primary, even though he voluntarily removed his name from that ballot in a tactical move to curry favor with the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

As Ickes noted, "uncommitted" is a constitutionally recognized presidential status, the same as a named candidate, and therefore delegates earned by "uncommitted" cannot legally be reallocated to another candidate.

But the RBC didn't stop there. They also STOLE 4 delegates earned by Hillary Clinton in the Michigan primary, and transferred them to Barack Obama, as if punishing Clinton for winning an election that Obama boycotted.

Then the RBC had the audacity to call their ruling a "compromise" and cloak it in sugary calls for party "unity." Trying to shove unity down the throats of 18 million angry Democrats, a bit of a joke...Message to the RBC: See videotape of Harriet Christian from Manhattan, voter who was ejected from your meeting. That should give you a flavor of our reaction and a taste of what to expect in August, in Denver.

More from Ickes' closing statement on Michigan, which is already written into history:

"This is in the charter, this is not a bylaw..this is in the highest document of our party.. this is in the constitution of our party....fair reflection..you cannot take delegates from one candidate and give them to another..."

~interrupted by raucous cheers~

"Finally...there's been a lot of talk about party unity...let's all come together, wrap our arms around each other...I submit to you, Ladies and Gentlemen, that hijacking 4 delegates.... is not a good way to start down the path of party unity."


It's ironic, given his unique history, that Barack Obama would seek to benefit from an election in which his name was not on the ballot, especially since he removed it voluntarily. If anyone understands the importance legally of being on the ballot, it should be Obama...

In 1996, when Obama first ran for public office in Illinois, he employed a cut-throat gimmick of challenging petition signatures to knock long-time community activist Alice Palmer off the ballot for the state Senate. There is much more to the story, but the bottom line is that Palmer had been a mentor and supporter of Obama's before he steam-rolled over her in his eagerness to serve the public. Ms. Palmer, not surprisingly, campaigned for Hillary Clinton this year in Indiana.

Seems like the party elite and the hope-change candidate are clueless when it comes to "unity." But us regular folks have a pretty good idea of what needs to be done in Denver to unify the country.

Note on the Popular Vote: The silver lining for Clinton from the RBC's ruling is more like platinum: Now that the Michigan and Florida primaries have been "recognized," Clinton is justified in adding those votes to her popular vote total. At the end of the primaries on June 3rd, Clinton will be the official popular vote leader, even excluding Michigan. If memory serves me correctly, it wasn't so long ago that party officials such as Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and Donna Brazile were touting the popular vote as the appropriate metric for super delegates to certify the "will of the people."

Cross posted at TexasDarlin



TexasDarlin, all rights reserved
Not affiliated with the Hillary Clinton campaign

Tags: Alice Palmer, Convention, Democrats, DNC, Florida, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, may 31, meet me in denver, Michigan, nomination, obama, popular vote, RBC, Rules Committee, superdelegates, Washington D.C. (all tags)

Comments

260 Comments

Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Florida voters are PISSED, too.  Check it out:

by TexasDarlin 2008-06-01 08:45AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Harold Ickes, the man who derailed the unity express.

by BlueGAinDC 2008-06-01 08:47AM | 0 recs
Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap
Seriously, this is how he behaved for a large part of the meeting yesterday, while the various speakers were making their case:

by 2501 2008-06-01 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap

What a boor.

by parahammer 2008-06-01 09:01AM | 0 recs
Dressed :for the occasion like he was
going to clean out his storage unit.
Hell, maybe he was. About time. He's a relic. A has been. A corrupted politician from the past who has no respect for the party anymore.  
by TheFullBerry 2008-06-01 09:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap

Huh what is wrong in what he did. thats a rep from his camp that he does not need to sit and listen to since the speech that the governor was giving was already in all probability read by her supporters.

It is petty to draw attention to him about this. Stop looking to find faults w/ her or her team . The nomination is over and try to find reasons to win them over to obama's camp.

by aliveandkickin 2008-06-01 09:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap

Harold Ickes is a rep. from the Clinton Camp like Luca Brazzi was a rep. for the Corleone family.  

by Bargeron 2008-06-01 09:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap

May they both sleep with the virtual fishes.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-06-01 10:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap

Ah, the smell of unity burning in the morning.

by rankles 2008-06-01 12:52PM | 0 recs
WTF...

...does this prove? Maybe the guy has a bad back and can't sit for long periods of time. Besides, it was his own supporter he was supposedly disrespecting.

There are plenty of things about Ickes to find detestable. This isn't one of them...

by Steve in Sacto 2008-06-01 09:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Harold Ickes doesn't give a crap

Please.  One doesn't have to be looking directly at the speaker to pay attention to everything he's saying.  Besides, he already knows what this person is going to argue.

If you watch that video objectively, there's no story here.

In fact, I sometimes do the same thing he was doing when I'm at conferences and really focusing on what the speaker is saying.  The fidgeting and walking around actually helps me focus, and I don't think I'm alone in that.

by slynch 2008-06-01 10:28AM | 0 recs
I'm with you

When I read something I am pacing constantly, it helps me to focus.  Ickes doesn't deserve grief for that.

by Student Guy 2008-06-01 11:36AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm with you

I work for a company where the chief of global technology for our division recently decreed that all meetings will be held standing and walking; that includes those participants who join by teleconference.

Given the general level of management idiocy (cf any Dilbert cartoon over the last 10 years) I thought this was not half bad.

Anyhow, Ickes is reported to have such a foul mouth that people sometimes think he suffers from Tourrette's syndrome.  I am therefore immediately sympathetic, since my (permissive) parents' refusal to punish me for swearing allowed me to grow up with a mouth like a sailor.

by magnetics 2008-06-01 08:58PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Wow - amazing how quickly the HillarysVoices bots got you on the rec list!   Yea Bots!

by Virginia Liberal 2008-06-01 09:16AM | 0 recs
The following evidence

1) is the blog of a Republican tool

http://777denny.wordpress.com

Look in the blogroll for "anyone but Obama" links and you find someone's blog there.

I would dare say this denny guy who runs the blog is scared sh!tless about Obama.

2) follow this link which shows that the illustrious diarist believes Larry Sinclair even calling him my favorite Obama Trouble Maker (pity this was scrubbed isn't it):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:eNE e-CD09L4J:texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008 04/04/notes-from-an-ordinary-day+my+favo rite+Obama+trouble+maker+site:texasdarli n.wordpress.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&am p;cd=1&gl=us

by Student Guy 2008-06-01 09:30AM | 0 recs
Why do you hate the Michigan Democratic party?

After all, it was their proposal the the Rules committee adopted, and that Ickes so pettily called a hijacking.

Do the Democrats of Michigan, in the absence of a legitimate and DNC-sanctioned primary election, not have the right to determine the makeup of their own delegation to the national convention?

by tbetz 2008-06-01 09:42AM | 0 recs
That's a very interesting point.

Do the Democrats of Michigan, in the absence of a legitimate and DNC-sanctioned primary election, not have the right to determine the makeup of their own delegation to the national convention?

I'm inclined to say no, as a general rule.  However it does definitely deserve some thought.

As for this situation, I think that them doing so was perhaps the best possible solution.

by you like it 2008-06-01 09:47AM | 0 recs
Reserving rights is not

the same as fighting it in Denver.

I think those who want that will be disappointed by Senator Clinton's upcoming decision to unify the party.

I have no doubt that she will end this soon after the primaries are over.  She is a Democrat and will work to defeat McCain.

4 delegates are not worth it.  And the "prinicple" will be overcome by her desire to unify the party.  

by TomP 2008-06-01 10:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Reserving rights is not

You're living in a dreamworld, kid.

This thing is going to the convention.

by rankles 2008-06-01 12:54PM | 0 recs
You may be right,

but I really doubt it.

By the way, I'm 53.  

by TomP 2008-06-01 02:17PM | 0 recs
Re: You may be right,

Rankles is 112, so there.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-06-01 04:18PM | 0 recs
Another example...

... of the delightful dividends yielded by the Clinton message machine. Slash and burn politics at its finest.

Of course, what does the Clinton campaign leadership team care? All the results of a McCain presidency - more war casualties, loss of freedoms of choice, free speech, greater economic inequities, degradation of the environment - its just an abstraction to wealthy people like them. Won't hurt them one bit either way.

by odum 2008-06-01 10:50AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

You go to convention and the democrats lose. Period.

You're calling for nothing but suicide, plain and simple.

by Yalin 2008-06-01 11:19AM | 0 recs
Is YOUR comment snark?

Serious question.

by rankles 2008-06-01 12:55PM | 0 recs
Ridiculous

I am so sick of the Hillary won the popular vote arguement that has to rely on a series of twists and turns to be able to make such a claim. Counting votes from a state where no one campaigned is hardly a fair representation of the voters' will. What about the people who stayed home because the they had been told their state's primary would not count.

Also, I remember not so long ago the Hillary camp going on and on about the delegate count being what mattered. Seems a rather hypocritical turn about has taken place.

by chrisj 2008-06-01 01:17PM | 0 recs
Hillary should claim half the caucus votes

because she hardly campaigned in them and she should get 4 extra delegates each because she won the popular vote.

And she should ccount the primary votes she got into the pop vote if the state had both and have Obama count only the number of pop votes he got in the caucus, since he says the delegates should be devided according to the caucus votes and not the primaries.

by itsadryheat 2008-06-01 06:12PM | 0 recs
This is the same Ickes who voted to

strip the delegates from Florida and Michigan in December.

At this point the Clinton position on these states has longed since lapsed into parody.

The lies from Clinton on this issue are simply amazing.  More amazing, though, is that people actually believe them.

by fladem 2008-06-01 02:55PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Troll rated by cultural worker

by TexasDarlin 2008-06-01 02:59PM | 0 recs
Is this serious?

Snark question.

by Builderman 2008-06-01 08:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this serious?

I don't beleive it is snark.  To the HRC supporters it is totally reasonable to tell the voters of a state your votes will not count.  And then after the vote come back and tell them they will count.   Remember Ickes voted for the sanctions and HRC told Michigan their votes would not count.

HRC ran a great campaign but she is beaten.  I happen to beleive that almost all of her supportes will come back by November b/c another four years of Bush is something we can not risk.

by gunowningliberal 2008-06-01 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this serious?

Boy.. this lie about HRC saying Michigan should not count is still going around?  I don't know how many times I have to discredit it.

Please see direct HRC quotes back on November 11, 2007, in Washington Post.  She made it very clear that she felt back then exactly as she feels now.

So, you are misinformed or just spreading falsehoods for the hell of it.

by bobbank 2008-06-01 09:33AM | 0 recs
by MILiberal 2008-06-01 09:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Please provide a link

Maybe October 11th?

Oh, wait, that's the "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything" quote.

by TCQuad 2008-06-01 09:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Please provide a link

Yes, that's the one.  It was one month earlier than I remembered, sorry for the confusion.

Now why would you want to quote only half a sentence, ignoring the second part, which begins with "BUT"?

Perhaps I'll play your game and just quote half the sentence as well:

"I just personally did not want to set up a situation where the Republicans are going to be campaigning between now and whenever, and then after the nomination, we have to go in and repair the damage to be ready to win Michigan in 2008."

or this

"I did not believe it was fair to just say, 'Goodbye Michigan' and not take into account the fact we're going to have to win Michigan if we're going to be in the White House in January 2009,"

The fact is that, when she was winning, she still championed Michigan's stand to demand reform in the currently bungled system.  And she paid a heavy price for taking this principled stand in Iowa, where party bosses pressured candidates to remove their names from the ballot.

by bobbank 2008-06-01 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Please provide a link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xHRqi8ns vI

Lets be fair.  Clinton acknowledged the DNC Rules but did not necessarily agree with its decision stripping MI and FL.

However, same cannot be said for Harold Ickes:

http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/5/9 ickes_reverses_vote_to_seat_states

But Clinton clearly knows that there is no accurate way to measure FL and MI given the unfortunate circumstances that were not created by any candidate, including Obama.

This resentment that is being stirred, is a double edged sword if Clinton is seriously thinking about 2012.

by jv 2008-06-01 10:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this serious?

her supporters yesterday never denied this...

by hootie4170 2008-06-01 09:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this serious?

No, he set up a strawman by changing both her words and the words of the commenter who he was responding to.

by Jess81 2008-06-01 09:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this serious?

She said, "will not count", not "should not count".

Nice try bob.

by Jess81 2008-06-01 09:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this serious?

Welcome back to the Democratic blog, Bob.

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-06-01 10:10AM | 0 recs
Will we debate the meaning of "will?"

Should we?

Could we?

Shall we?

Parseparseparse.

by Addison 2008-06-01 10:59AM | 0 recs
She made clear her reasons for staying...

on the ballot (reasons I do not think respect the intent if not the exact language of the four state pledge).  But even if she was staying in to respect the Michigan voters and not cede the high ground to the Republicans, that does not mean that her statement saying the primary would not count is less clear in context.  She signed a pledge acknowledging that the delegates would be stripped form states that violated the time frame rules.  Now she complains that to do so or to allocate delegates in any way that differs from the results of a flawed primary.  I'm sorry that is just too inconsistent to be persuasive.

by nklein 2008-06-01 09:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this serious?

Hillarious

by kbal 2008-06-01 09:11AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I feel like you probably already had a diary drafted on this topic before Saturday, then added in quotes and video as appropriate.

by rfahey22 2008-06-01 08:49AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Much like the people who keep saying This or That is why I won't vote for Obama and I Swear I Was Undecided Before But He's Just Too Much of A...

(deep breath)

Bad Person Who Disenfranchises and Bowls Real Bad and Just Makes Me Wanna Vote For McCain AKA True Patriot 44.

by Firewall 2008-06-01 08:53AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Well, the diarist has wondered whether Obama is constitutionally disqualified from running because of dual citizenship, or something - check out her website.  That doesn't really seem like a mindset capable of unity, in my opinion.

by rfahey22 2008-06-01 08:58AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

If we have to trample a few delicate flowers to get to the throne, it's unfortunate, but a great many lives depend on our getting a Democrat into the White House.  Purity eludes us, as always.  Keep your eyes on the prize, Democrats!

by ReillyDiefenbach 2008-06-01 10:15AM | 0 recs
It didn't matter what happened yesterday

you were going to be pissed today.  I get it.  Nothing will make you happy.  Admit that what you really want is for Obama to crumple up, blow away, disappear and have Clinton take up the mantle with shouts of joy and wonder by all.

Sounds nice, but it ain't gonna happen and all the crying, whinging, chest beating, and namecalling in the world doesn't change that.

by Sychotic1 2008-06-01 08:52AM | 0 recs
If you want votes, get ON the ballot

Electoral politics 101.

by catfish2 2008-06-01 08:53AM | 0 recs
If you want delegates...

compete for them in contests that actually count.

Remedial Electoral Politics.

by you like it 2008-06-01 09:11AM | 0 recs
If you want delegates

Compete for them in contests that don't count... and then insist that they should be counted.

If Ron Paul had realized that, he would be the Republican nominee right now by virtue of the overwhelming advantage he holds in straw polls.

by MILiberal 2008-06-01 09:47AM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

Unless, of course, if you're Obama in which case you can be embroiled in the thick of Chicago machine corruption, can lose most of the heavy primaries, lose the popular vote, have not one but two of your "reverends" screaming their heads off on TV, take your name off the ballot and still cash in the delegates awarded by your insider friends and patrons in the party hierarchy.

And still be heralded as the second coming of Christ, the savior of the party and the bringer of hopiness and changeiness for all.

by DemAC 2008-06-01 09:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Is this snark?

Yes of course.

Everything about Obama is snark.

by DemAC 2008-06-01 01:08PM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

Two reverends?  Are you talking about Father Phagler?  He is a Catholic priest.  He was asked to speak at the TUCC as a part of a national UCC "sacred conversation on race."  The idea was to ask speakers with many different viewpoints.  They also asked a woman pastor to speak.  She was more mainstream.  Can we count her as one of Obama's pastors too?

I find it hard to consider TUCC responsible for Father Phagler's offensive remarks much less Obama.  Now if you want to task the Catholic Church with tolerating a priest with such misogynist views, I'd say you had a better case, since the Catholic priesthood and hierarchy have a well-known problem with that sort of thing.

by oldbattleaxe 2008-06-01 04:50PM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

Why do you think Obama withdrew his name from the ballot? Because it had already been decided that the election would not count. Many of the other candidates did aswell.

Clinton should have removed her name from the ballot, meaning ALL of the Michigan delagates would have been for uncommitted and (if allowed to) they could have voted for whichever candidate they wished at the convention...essentially becomming super delegates.

by smoothmedia 2008-06-01 09:35AM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

he removed his name because he knew he was going to lose by 20 points.

by colebiancardi 2008-06-01 09:44AM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

If there are no delegates awarded, there's no penalty to pulling your name off.

If you stay on, you give your opponent talking points to use against you.

If you pull off, you can gain in contests where there are delegates awarded.

No penalty + removing opponent talking point + gaining delegates elsewhere = remove your name from the ballot.

Change any one of those three and you wouldn't have seen him do it.

by TCQuad 2008-06-01 09:50AM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

your second point makes no sense.  How can Hillary use that against Obama, as they were both on the ballot?

to your first point, Obama's campaign had a plan in the works


"I'm doing a lot of extra work to make sure everyone in Michigan that wants to support Sen. Obama knows they must vote 'uncommitted,' " said U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich. "Voters can't write in his name because that will be considered a spoiled ballot."

"No matter who you are supporting there is a spot on the ballot you need to check off," said state Rep. Bert Johnson, D-Dist. 5, who endorsed Obama more than 10 months ago. He speculates that an "uncommitted" vote of 15 percent would be a setback for Sen. Hillary Clinton, the only front-runner on the Michigan Democratic primary ballot.

Johnson thinks the uncommitted votes will ultimately translate into delegates at the Democratic nominating convention, even though the Democratic National Committee has officially withdrawn Michigan's delegates. "We have way too many powerhouses in Washington to stand by and let Michigan go unrepresented at the national convention," he said, listing Conyers and U.S. Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., and Democratic Sens. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow.

http://ourmichigan.blogspot.com/2008/01/ uncommitted-is-vote-for-obama-in.html

as to your third point, we agree.  Obama removed his name to gain political points in the first-er states and gained thru that.

by colebiancardi 2008-06-01 09:55AM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

And to curry favor with Iowa voters, for which he was rewarded.

by LakersFan 2008-06-01 10:01AM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot
BULL SHIT. Why would Iowa voters care about a contest that was going to be held 2 weeks later anyway? You know, just because you and SoCalDarlin keep repeating this "curry favor" crap doesn't make it truer each time.
by Cochrane 2008-06-01 01:00PM | 0 recs
That's just not in accordance with the facts...

the demographics which have been predictive of most nominating contests in the U.S. demonstrate that Obama would be very competitive in a primary in Michigan.  That is why he is polling ahead of her in Michigan now.  It defies all logic that he would pull his name off the ballot just because he thought he would lose.  He lost in WV badly and in Kentucky badly.  Those losses were predicted months ago, but he made no move to get off the ballot in those states.  Why wouldn't he be consistent with those contests?  The reason is that no matter how much he lost by in the popular vote with the proportional system he would lose more by withdrawing.  I don't understand how you can seriously believe that, because you seem like a very rational person.

by nklein 2008-06-01 10:02AM | 0 recs
Re: That's just not in accordance with the facts..

your stats are for now.  Remember, the MI primary was on 1/15 - a lifetime ago.

and yes, he was way behind in the polls.  He and Edwards worked together on removing their names - both campaigns actively had their surrogates in MI tell voters to vote uncommitted if they wanted them.

My family lives in MI and they heard this on the TV, radio and newspapers.  There was no secret on why they were doing this.

by colebiancardi 2008-06-01 10:16AM | 0 recs
Yes, but even if he was going to lose...

how would it help him to take his name off the ballot.  You get delegates as long as you get over 15%.  And nobody is disputing that he would have gotten at least that.  So why take his name of the ballot?  It's just not logical unless you think two things: 1) he did it to gain favor in the first primary states.  I can definitely buy that argument or 2) he wanted to honor the four state pledge not to participate in states that violated the DNC timeframe.

by nklein 2008-06-01 03:16PM | 0 recs
Re: That's just not in accordance with the facts..

also, to try and equate MI with WV or Kentucky is absurd.  

Currying favors with Iowa and NH - that is one of the main reasons why he removed his name from the ballot.  

by colebiancardi 2008-06-01 10:18AM | 0 recs
I can buy that, but that does not make...

the election any more representative of the will of the people of Michigan, because either way everybody agreed that this vote wouldn't count.  Why is it all of the sudden absolutely vital that we include them when just 6 months ago nobody cared?  At least not Hillary at the time.

by nklein 2008-06-01 03:20PM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

Are you nuts? Hillary didn't even beat "uncommitted" by 20 points.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-06-01 12:05PM | 0 recs
Re: If you want votes, get ON the ballot

Oh, sorry, reality intruding here: Obama polls as well as her in Michigan, and despite being the only major candidate on the ballot and better name recognition, only got 55%.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled delusion...

by mikeinsf 2008-06-01 04:04PM | 0 recs
Is this spam?

Rhetorical question.

by Okamifujutsu 2008-06-01 01:59PM | 0 recs
If you want votes, play by the rules

Basic ethics 101

by mikeinsf 2008-06-01 04:02PM | 0 recs
The Unity Express Is Pulling Out Bound For Victory

4 Clinton Supporters on the Rules and Bylaws Committee voted FOR the Michigan Party's compromise.

from Salon:

But politics is ultimately about votes, and Clinton -- even though she had 13 supporters on the rules committee -- did not have them. When the committee took test votes over lunch (and holdouts like Donna Brazile, Al Gore's 2000 campaign manager, finally chose sides), there was a surprising 14-to-13 majority for evenly dividing the Michigan delegation between Obama and Clinton.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/0 6/01/dnc/index.html

That would have been the fairest solution and the one I would have liked to see, but the Obama people were willing to seek a broader based consensus and bring some of the Clinton supporters on board by going along with the Michigan State Party's proposal.

It was the Michigan State Party that is responsible for creating this whole mess, and it also is the Michigan State Party that is responsible for coming up with this messy solution. But make no mistake, committee members from BOTH SIDES signed off on this.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-01 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Why are you people promoting the video of that vile monster, Harriet Christian?

We should be repudiating that filth at the top of our lungs.  I don't want her vote.

by Pat Flatley 2008-06-01 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Bigots are fine as long as they're pro-Clinton and anti-Obama. Why else do you think TexasDarlin posts at No Quarter?

by Firewall 2008-06-01 08:56AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I'm stunned, to be honest.  If "that should give you a flavor of our reaction and a taste of what to expect in August, in Denver," according to the diarist, then the only concern should be whether all of the Linens & Things and Bed, Bath, and Beyonds in the Denver metro area will have enough white sheets to go around.

by Pat Flatley 2008-06-01 08:59AM | 0 recs
Stop slandering Harriett

She did a great job at her press conference and raised some convincing points:

And the democrats are throwing the election away...for what? An inadequate black male?

(He) would not be running if it was not a white woman dat was running for president

I'm from Manhattan

If alegre salutes her, she must be of sound mind and  body.

by 79blondini 2008-06-01 09:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Stop slandering Harriett

What's very revealing is that some of the diarists here are holding this person up as some sort of shining example, when they don't know how repellant that person is to the rest of us.

by rfahey22 2008-06-01 09:40AM | 0 recs
I'm astounded that TexasDarlin

would approvingly cite a cranky old bigot.

The Clinton camp is self-discrediting.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-06-01 10:26AM | 0 recs
and self-parodying

by annatopia 2008-06-01 11:34AM | 0 recs
If you're astounded...

you obviously haven't been reading her posts.  TexasDarlin has made her bigotry clear for awhile now.  What astounds me is that her disgusting, anti-Democratic diaries keep making it to the rec list.

by marley 2008-06-01 11:59AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm astounded that TexasDarlin

you mean like when Markos the BHO surrogate quoted Bob Novaks and takes his word as gospel (when it suits his purpose)? You must be just as outraged at him right? You must have links where you wrote insulting and degrading things about him like you did above right?

crickets

by zerosumgame 2008-06-01 07:28PM | 0 recs
Yawn.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzz.
You're still ranting.
Still raving.
Still angry.
Still bitter.
Still full of hate.
Still spewing vitriol against our Democratic nominee.
Still full of crap.
Still bursting veins on your forehead and spittle hitting your keybaord about how much you hate Obama.
Still advocating and praising voting for the piece of shit evil son of a bitch McCain.
Still trolling.
Still acting like a Republican No twenty five cent troll. Never ends. Never changes.
Was annoying before.
Now boring as all hell.

Ergo:
Yawn.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz .

by TheFullBerry 2008-06-01 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Yawn.

There is no nominee until August.

by wblynch 2008-06-01 03:08PM | 0 recs
LOL.

Denial ain't just a river in Delaware.

by TheFullBerry 2008-06-01 03:26PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

That's right! The popular vote is the will of the people.

by LA 2008-06-01 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
You made me laugh with that one. The "will of the people" had nothing to do with yesterday, much like our upcoming general election.
by zenful6219 2008-06-01 09:07AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

yeah, it was really much more the will of the Michigan Democratic Party, which is the group that asked for the 69-59 split.

The will of the people went out the window when Michigan was told that its primary would not count, and this was borne out when it saw nearly 150,000 Democrats vote in the Republican primary on January 15th instead of their own primary where the only choices were Clinton, Uncommitted and Kucinich. This is born out by the fact that Michigan was the ONLY state with a primary where turnout was lower than 50% of John Kerry's total vote in 2004 (in an election where 3 states EXCEEDED the Kerry total and all but 3 were above 60% of the 2004 dem vote). Michigan saw turnout at barely 30% of the Kerry vote.

As the RBC stated repeatedly yesterday, there was no good solution. To take the Obama 50-50 position was to ignore the fact that Clinton won the majority of votes. To take the Clinton position was to ignore the nearly one million Democrats who stayed home or voted to foil McCain after being told their votes wouldn't count in MI. And to take the Michigan Democratic Party's position was to just throw out the results while acknowledging that Clinton won the flawed primary where her only opponent was Dennis Kucinich.

If you can't get that, you're not interested in having a rational debate, and you should expect that people won't view you well for it.

by skaiserbrown 2008-06-01 09:48AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
What about the will of all the Obama supporters in MI? I am presuming there are more than ZERO.
by Cochrane 2008-06-01 01:02PM | 0 recs
Popular vote in a boycotted state

like Michigan is meaningless.  Hillary only wins the popular vote if you give Obama 0 votes in Michigan.  See the link in my sig.

by kellogg 2008-06-01 08:05PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
You can't have unity when the party disenfranchises half of the innocent voters who voted in good faith. They didn't have anything to do with the political scheming in either state that resulted in the primary dates being moved up. In Florida, it wasn't even the Democrats who wanted it. The party leaders in both houses of Florida's legislators tried to amend the bill to move the date back to Feb 5, but it was defeated. Michigan simply did not agree that Iowa and New Hampshire should ALWAYS have the privilege of so unfairly influencing our choices.
by zenful6219 2008-06-01 08:57AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Yes, here is the FL Democratic party trying to amend the bill, voraciously.

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-06-01 08:59AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
Ok...what is that supposed to prove?
by zenful6219 2008-06-01 09:09AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

"In Florida, it wasn't even the Democrats who wanted it."

If you watch the video, it proves the opposite.

by BlueGAinDC 2008-06-01 09:17AM | 0 recs
Yabbut...

Aw gee. You're right. Never mind.

by 79blondini 2008-06-01 09:38AM | 0 recs
The G.O.P. has unity when they disenfranchised

half of their innocent voters in Fl. and Mi. who voted in good faith.

How do you explain that? Maybe Republicans are acting more maturely than you are.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-01 09:27AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Clinton's people, including Ickes, voted for the .5 vote solution. If you want to vent ire, you should also be targeting them for capitulation. No Justice, No Peace!

by skaiserbrown 2008-06-01 09:55AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I'm not sure Clinton can add MI to her popular vote count (which is moot anyway) because the Michigan primary was invalidated.  The 69/59 split was to reflect what MDP believed the actual delegate count may have been had it been a valid election, based on collected data.

Therefore, there is no total vote count, just a delegate count.

by Tommy Flanagan 2008-06-01 08:57AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Exactly why Hillary's camp is so angry about that split because it confirms that the delegates were not based on any popular vote breakdown.

by sweet potato pie 2008-06-01 09:02AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Would you have preferred an even 64-64 split?

Because from the looks of things, Senator Clinton was not going to get 73-0.

by maxomai 2008-06-01 09:19AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

That would have been fine with me but the 73-0 was absurd. We are not in Russia so to think that she wins because she is the only person on the ballot despite the fact that it was not a sanctioned primary is absurd and insulting.

by sweet potato pie 2008-06-01 09:26AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

The Hillary camp was given a gift. They should have gotten zero.

by heresjohnny 2008-06-01 09:52AM | 0 recs
She wins the popular vote without MI

She is the people's choice in this years election she's just not the pols in Washington DC's choice due to their fear of losing AA's.

The party is split. Race-bating tends to do that, it leaves scars. Maybe Obama will win despite his race-bating, but he will do it without me.

by mmorang 2008-06-01 02:29PM | 0 recs
Re: She wins the popular vote without MI
Then you should go and find a nice, comfy blog that ISN'T trying to elect a Democrat for the Presidency.
   Maybe one with a yard, or a garden...
by haremoor 2008-06-01 05:06PM | 0 recs
Choo choo

"Unity Express" - what crap.  Outside of the Borg, unity happens when all sides of dispute decide that their joint interests should overcome their differences.  

Cynical and disingenuous manipulation of the agreed-on DNC slate of primaries, busing in rabid activists to disrupt a DNC meeting, inflammatory statements stating the dispute over seating the Florida delegation is "worse than slavery" -- that's not meeting halfway.  Those tactics are meant to sow discord and question the legitimacy of the process.

I'm not going to be mealy-mouthed and attribute this to "the heat of the campaign".  Time and again, Sen. Clinton's campaign has chosen the low road, and in their increasing desperation shown that unity is not their foremost goal.  Perhaps that's lost on a Clinton apologist, TexasDarlin.

by Twin Planets 2008-06-01 08:58AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Yep..
Having this person as our President would be a disaster for women.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCifpbfQl OM

by nogo postal 2008-06-01 09:02AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

ZOMG HE SO HATES WOMEN.

by ihaveseenenough 2008-06-01 10:10AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I can't wait for the YouTube videos of the massive crowd of Clinton protestors in Denver -- almost as large as the horde of 200 in D.C.  Rumor has it, the other 9,800 are still stuck on the Jersey Turnpike.

Look at the rec list -- decent, dedicated Clinton supporters are representing they are true Democrats.  Even with her massive email list, alegre couldn't get her delusional hate-filled diary on the rec list last night -- perhaps it was because she included the fake bruise lady and the ranting bigot as examples of real Clinton supporters.  No one wants you people in the party -- get it?  There's honestly not enough of you to make us give a damn.

by gchaucer2 2008-06-01 09:10AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
"One final word....Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the credentials committee."
More beautiful words were never spoken.
by Caldonia 2008-06-01 09:11AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Music to Republican ears.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-06-01 09:14AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
"More beautiful words were never spoken"?
What a dreary world you must live in.
by Kysen 2008-06-01 09:14AM | 0 recs
Mmmm, no

some of us actually read literature, political addresses, and science tomes.  This statement would rate below "It was a dark and stormy night . . . ."

by gchaucer2 2008-06-01 10:25AM | 0 recs
Yes. On to Denver! n/t

by DemAC 2008-06-01 09:21AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Until Clinton says "I'm dropping out."

Then maybe this asinine nonsense from her dead-enders will finally stop.

by Artemis Jax 2008-06-01 09:48AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Nope, then it just turns into this: http://writehillaryin.com/

by MarvinMouse 2008-06-01 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
Unity..
Edwards knows..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZbeJzsnY 2E&feature=related
by nogo postal 2008-06-01 09:14AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Ickes loves to fight.  

I think that he's been involved in quite a few debacles of exactly this type, always on the insurgent side.   (Initially Clinton was the establishment, then became the insurgent due to the severe mismanagement of her campaign).  

Ickes is also done.  It truly is Obama's party now, and the Clintons need to accept this condition, (just like everyone else did when Bill got the nomination in '92).  A useless power struggle will only hurt us in November.

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-01 09:15AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I take offense to the "It's Obama's party now"

When Bill Clinton was president, I never stated or heard that type of arrogance.

It is the Democratic party.  If Obama does well, like FDR, then he will be remembered as a shining star.  Otherwise, not.

by colebiancardi 2008-06-01 09:26AM | 0 recs
Is this snark?

When Bill Clinton was president, I never stated or heard that type of arrogance.

Serious question.

by sneakers563 2008-06-01 10:27AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I certainly did not mean to offend you.  It's a practical statement of fact, however, I will re-word the phrase:  "Obama is now the titular head of the Democratic Party."

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-01 11:10AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
You said Titular.
Misogynist.
by Kysen 2008-06-01 11:41AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

It's probably more sexist, than misogynistic!  ;-)

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-01 12:32PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
It's both!!
You sexist misogynist you!
;)
by Kysen 2008-06-01 12:40PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Alright, enough with the sexo-misogynistic behavior from both of you...er...I mean both of us.

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-01 12:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Is this snark?

Get thee behind me, Evil Twin  ;-)

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-01 04:58PM | 0 recs
Clinton supporters

have serious issues. Alot of them seem to be be very angry middle aged women who couldn't make prom queen during their younger years, have designated Hillary their heroine and savior, and the rest of us have to suffer for it as a result.

It is definitely not Obama and his supporters that are dividing the party.

by april34fff 2008-06-01 09:16AM | 0 recs
You Win!

You win the most ridiculous comment of the day!

have serious issues. Alot of them seem to be be very angry middle aged women who couldn't make prom queen during their younger years, have designated Hillary their heroine and savior, and the rest of us have to suffer for it as a result.

Then you write;

It is definitely not Obama and his supporters that are dividing the party.

You also win in the hypocrite division.

by soyousay 2008-06-01 09:21AM | 0 recs
that comment is not helpful

by annatopia 2008-06-01 09:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton supporters

I'm an Obama supporter and this is uncalled for.

by thezzyzx 2008-06-01 10:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Clinton supporters

My trolldar is pinging.  I'm an Obama supporter, so maybe I'm not reading this correctly.  You are not an effective advocate.

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-01 11:14AM | 0 recs
The Unity Express Derails in DC

I felt bad for Clinton, I think her supporters yesterday did her a disservice.  Obama has his own crazies, just like she does, but yesterday the focus was solely on them and they didn't do their candidate any favors.  When you embrace Larry Sinclair, you show how low-class you are.

by venavena 2008-06-01 09:23AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Dean finally noticed older women who vote and used to donate to the DNC are not happy with the way Hillary has been characterized, and they need to win us back, for our huge contributions and our reliable voting.  Some are admitting that he'll need her on his ticket to win, but won't do it, because of his Hillary Hating base.  (she has soooo much baggage, is the talking point, which isn't a unity kind of message).   I don't think Obama is smart enough to figure out how to win us back, he'll probably pick some other woman or a man who worked for her, thinking we're interchangeable and won't notice he's passed over the one that would work.  It's the Democratic Train Wreck Party.  

by anna shane 2008-06-01 09:24AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Democrats will rally around our nominee. Republican trolls will bend over backwards to justify their voting for McCain, sitting out, Nader support, and continued trolling against Barack Obama.

by Firewall 2008-06-01 09:27AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

anyone's fault but his?  If he passes over Hillary and picks someone else and he loses, won't be his fault, he's not McCain, and needs to do nothing more to win?  I fear you're right and that he'll go down and we'll be stuck with McCain.  

by anna shane 2008-06-01 09:28AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Democrats will vote for Obama. Republicans will vote for McCain. Doesn't get much simpler than that.

by Firewall 2008-06-01 09:29AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

just how Gore and Kerry won?  

by anna shane 2008-06-01 09:31AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Psst...Obama's neither Gore nor Kerry.

by Firewall 2008-06-01 09:33AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

not everyone agrees, and I think he's very similar to Kerry.  What's funny is how the media is finally talking about how he needs sto win older women, and independents, and she's already far ahead in those groups he'll need to win. And they say she has baggage? Sounds like excellent baggage to me.  Say what you like, and believe it, but she's great.  

by anna shane 2008-06-01 11:27AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Whatever, Anna. But Clinton's not going to be on the ticket.

It would be a huge mistake for him. She benefits from him losing or having something terrible happen to him. And he would lose by having to deal with the Clinton baggage that hasn't been vetted in the primary and, assuming he wins, with the two of them ready to leak to the media to undermine his presidency.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 11:59AM | 0 recs
If Obama chooses Hillary you will still

find ways to say "he never listens to her!" "he still says no mandates!" "VP is a slap in the face!" "he's telling Bill not to campaign - the nerve!"

I mean am I right or am I right?

by 79blondini 2008-06-01 09:46AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

For the first time in months, I did a "drive-by" at Kos just to see what they're saying. One diary was especially interesting. The Diarist was beginning to realize that Obama may just need Clinton supporters and they were all trying to figure out how to win them over. It's really rather late and there's been so much damage done. IMO, for the most part Obama and his supporters have been very short sighted...A losing strategy.

by soyousay 2008-06-01 09:36AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Perhaps you missed the two diaries within 24 hours by former Clinton supporters who were driven into the Obama camp because of Ickes' comments yesterday.  Also, I'd suggest looking at the diaries on this site by dedicated, hard-working Clinton supporters who actually want to support the nominee.  I am looking forward to working with you as well.

by gchaucer2 2008-06-01 09:59AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Great! Two....good for you. Good luck with that.

by soyousay 2008-06-01 11:58AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

While I know your "good luck with that" was sarcastic -- thanks anyway.  I still look forward to working with you to put a Democrat in the WH.

by gchaucer2 2008-06-01 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

You don't think Obama is smart enough? Gee, I would say he is a rather smart politician given how he just defeated the Clinton machine. Those that underestimate him do so at their own peril.

by sweet potato pie 2008-06-01 09:28AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

we'll have to see, all the data is not yet in. Cunning is a form of intelligence, but there are other signs.  I'm trying to help him get smarter.  

by anna shane 2008-06-01 09:31AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

That's so funny.

by interestedbystander 2008-06-01 11:43AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

BTW, data is a plural word. Datum is the singular.

And you want to see if the president of the Harvard Law Review, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago, is smart?

this must be snark.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

BTW, data is a plural word. Datum is the singular.

And you want to see if the president of the Harvard Law Review, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago, is smart?

This must be snark.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Oh, but remember, according to Hillary's campaign he was "only" a Senior Lecturer of Constitutional Law.

At University of Chicago.

Who was offered tenure track positions more than once and declined them.

Who the university itself says that is a "professor" by any normal definition of the term.

Or, as my friend who actually took classes from him said upon hearing the "senior lecturer" comment: "WHAT?  Get real.  He was always 'Professor' Obama."

But, you know, U of C. is haven for stupid people looking to teach.  No academic reputation there at all.

by synchronicity 2008-06-01 08:40PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Oh, but remember, according to Hillary's campaign he was "only" a Senior Lecturer of Constitutional Law.

At University of Chicago.

Who was offered tenure track positions more than once and declined them.

Who the university itself says that is a "professor" by any normal definition of the term.

Or, as my friend who actually took classes from him said upon hearing the "senior lecturer" comment: "WHAT?  Get real.  He was always 'Professor' Obama."

But, you know, U of C. is haven for stupid people looking to teach.  No academic reputation there at all.

by synchronicity 2008-06-01 08:41PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Sorry 'bout the double post.

by synchronicity 2008-06-01 08:42PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

"I'm trying to help him get smarter."  

It's good to see that you have retained a sense of humor!

by Purple with Green Stipes and Pink Polka Dots Dem 2008-06-01 01:17PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

The only way to win you back is to for Obama to concede, then for him to go into hiding.

He eschewed a 50/50 proposal on MI that he had the votes for....for Hillary and you.

Rather than stoke the RFK comment story, his one and only public comment on it shut it down in a single news cycle...for Hillary and you.

The guy has treated her with kid gloves the entire time. If that's not enough...tough.

by Reeves 2008-06-01 09:33AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

what an ugly supposition.  There is a lot he can do, he can back off his claim of winning, he can apologize to her for 'assumiing' she'd said the unthinkable, he can say he'd invite her onto his ticket if he's the nominee.  Or he can win the right way, at the convention. Believe me if it goes to Denver and he wins, he'll by the candidate I give money too, and I'll go back to donating to the DNC.

Your ugly guess about me shows the problem.  Then Barack doesn't have to try, he can say I'm a troll pug and who needs me.  Well, maybe he doesn't, he sure doesn't look worried.  

by anna shane 2008-06-01 11:32AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Back off his claim of winning?  Tell me, what did you think when Hillary offered Obama the VP when she was behind in every metric?  

by interestedbystander 2008-06-01 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

She's not going to be on the ticket.  No one could possibly think that she and Bill would be willing to show the message discipline they'd need in their roles.  

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 12:03PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

But, anna, I do appreciate that you've made it to the bargaining stage.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 12:04PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Obama isn't smart enough?  Good golly - then what does that make Clinton?  Because he has out smarted her at every turn, including yesterday, when he was smart enough to tell his supporters to stay away, and he let the Clinton fans embarrass her campaign.

by interestedbystander 2008-06-01 11:39AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

older women who vote and used to donate to the DNC are not happy with the way Hillary has been characterized, and they need to win us back, for our huge contributions and our reliable voting.

Uh, as that one poster repeatedly asks, is this snark?  Because it's not like Obama has set records this primary season for most money raised and most individual campaign contributors...oh, no, wait, he HAS!

And as for "the way Hillary has been characterized", frankly if you believe that she's been some unending victim of sexism while Obama has been treated with kid gloves, and therefore you're going to vote for McCain (because, ya know, his record and actions have been so much better towards the issues that apparently matter to "older white women") then there's not much anyone can say to you to change your mind, other than giving Hillary the nomination because...uh, she's Hillary.

by synchronicity 2008-06-01 07:50PM | 0 recs
Troll.
Troll.
Troll
Troll.
by TheFullBerry 2008-06-01 09:26AM | 0 recs
I submit the following piece of evidence

One is the blog of a Republican tool

http://777denny.wordpress.com

Look n the blogroll for anyone but Obama links and you find someone's blog there.

Two follow this link which shows that the illustrious diarist believes Larry Sinclair even calling him my favorite Obama Trouble Maker (pity this was scrubbed isn't it):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:eNE e-CD09L4J:texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008 04/04/notes-from-an-ordinary-day+my+fa vorite+Obama+trouble+maker+site:texasdar lin.wordpress.com&hl=en&ct=clnk& amp;cd=1&gl=us

by Student Guy 2008-06-01 09:27AM | 0 recs
Re: I submit the following piece of evidence

I first became aware of the diarist from reading Hillaris44 months ago. At the time, they were bragging about sending the sinclair videos to the Hannity & Limbaugh to get the word out.

When he failed polygraph tests they didn't apologize for it, nor will they now.

Hillaryis44 is the Harriet Christian wing of the campaign. The question is which campaign: McCain's or Clinton's?

by catilinus 2008-06-01 03:46PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
Another troll diary.  Another diary that overlooks the original posture of the DNC: that no FL or MI votes would count.
Now that they have appeased Clinton, she screams and cries that it hasn't gone far enough.  Anything short of lopsided victory for her is a sell-out.  So she "reserves" her right to appeal.  Guess what?  There was NO legal reason that she had to announce her "reservation".  That was purely political theatre.  She could have went ahead with appealing without putting it on the record yesterday.  But she didn't.  She wants everyone to focus on her and not the fact that she's lost.
As for the popular vote swindle, many football teams get more field goals then touchdowns but still lose.  The game aint about fieldgoals or popular votes.  Stop disenfranchising caucus states.
by jv 2008-06-01 09:28AM | 0 recs
Thank goodness, that this diarist

is on my personal list of diarists I now ignore. Think of the time I could have wasted. Life's very short.

by Travis Stark 2008-06-01 09:29AM | 0 recs
This blogger

Indeed, I am only here to show my evidence of the blogger's true intentions

by Student Guy 2008-06-01 09:32AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Well done.

by bobbank 2008-06-01 09:30AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

As in "stick a fork in it" well done?

by gchaucer2 2008-06-01 10:28AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

No, I am complimenting the author on a well-written piece.  And, as an aside, I admire her for refusing to be intimidated by the constant hostility and trolling that is thrown her way, in an effort to silence her.

Have a read of the responses - mostly personal insult with a total inability or unwillingness to address the points on their merits.

by bobbank 2008-06-01 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Merits?

MERITS?

LOLOLOLOL!

by Black Anus 2008-06-01 12:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Is this snark?

Not at all.  Why don't you stop and think for a moment about the precident that is set by saying "its ok for a 30-person committee to reassign delegates which were selected via a primary election."

No progressive, no Democrat, and indeed no American should support that move.  Obama can win the nomination with or without those few delegates being debated, so even those driven purely by self-interest should be able to recognize how patently wrong and offensive this is on its face.

by bobbank 2008-06-01 12:59PM | 0 recs
They should have

stripped both MI and FL of their votes and be done with it.

by GT 2008-06-01 09:32AM | 0 recs
From the evidence I've provided in this thread

the author wasn't interested in "Unity" but instead "any one but Obama", for reasons I can not tell as I don't know her.

by Student Guy 2008-06-01 09:34AM | 0 recs
Re: From the evidence I've provided in this thread

I'm shocked to hear that. I went over to Hillaryis44, and they seemed all supportive of Unity...with John McCain.

I think the Harriet Christian wing has spoken, as they did in the last election. Hillary is a Democrat...Hillaryis44, not so much.

by catilinus 2008-06-01 03:27PM | 0 recs
I disagree...

Michigan was not recognized.  That was what was so important about the 69-59 delegate allocation.  It was a precedent setting ruling that primaries that fail to include all candidates that are particpating in both prior and later nominating contests will NOT be the only measure of the Michigan electorate's intent.  We cannot have future primaries like Michigan's.  And the committee ruled that the delegates of the state party is the final arbiter of how the delegate's are allocated.  The party must respect the will of the voters, but when that will is absent due to a flawed primary the party must be the final determinant.  Just as if there was an earthquake in California on election day, you can not judge the intent of the voters of Michigan through such a flawed contest.

by nklein 2008-06-01 09:35AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Why do people bother engaging in logical, fact-based debate with this person? She writes racist, hateful screeds on behalf of NoQuarter and her own blog, and has been banned from here multiple times, although inexplicably allowed back each time.

http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/05 24/mystery-man-obama

Just leave her and other other nutjobs alone.

by authority song 2008-06-01 09:38AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

In case my comment was in any way ambiguous: yes, SoCalDarlin, I am calling you a racist nutjob.  

by authority song 2008-06-01 09:41AM | 0 recs
Nutjob...

...is much more polite than the word that comes to my mind.

I just read the link you cited above. F'ing disgusting.

by turnover 2008-06-01 11:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Nutjob...

I'm glad you read it. It needs to be posted in any diary this person posts, just so everyone knows exactly what kind of hatred we're dealing with here.

by authority song 2008-06-01 11:16AM | 0 recs
She was given a gift and you're too dense

to realize it. That's just sad.

ZERO.  That's the number that they both should have gotten but the STATE OF MI REPRESENTATIVES wanted to do something different and the RBC accomodated them.

by heresjohnny 2008-06-01 09:43AM | 0 recs
One more time for good luck

The following is evidence of the diarist's true intentions, I would have more but I discovered that Larry Sinclair takes articles and therefore the comments down from his blog, and since I don't remember the title of the entry I can't find it on google's cache.

One is the blog of a Republican tool

http://777denny.wordpress.com

Look n the blogroll for anyone but Obama links and you find someone's blog there.

Two follow this link which shows that the illustrious diarist believes Larry Sinclair even calling him my favorite Obama Trouble Maker (pity this was scrubbed isn't it):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:eNE e-CD09L4J:texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008 04/04/notes-from-an-ordinary-day+my+favo rite+Obama+trouble+maker+site:texasdarli n.wordpress.com&hl=en&ct=clnk&am p;cd=1&gl=us

Isn't it fun to be cited on a republican blog as something good?  Isn't fun to believe Larry Sinclair (have you sent him money yet)?  What great fun it is to pretend to mock unity when you never wanted it?

And now I am out.

by Student Guy 2008-06-01 09:48AM | 0 recs
Re: One more time for good luck

Really TD you should be so proud to be posted on republican websites.    

by realistdem 2008-06-01 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Considering every single other candidate supports Obama, the Uncommitted delegates would very likely have ended up in his camp anyway. Richardson, Edwards and Dodd have endorsed Obama. Biden supports him but has not endorsed.

by terra 2008-06-01 09:59AM | 0 recs
What's so horrible about taking this to Denver?

First off, there is no evidence that the diary's author is racist. I too have opposed Senator Obama, but it's based on what I regard as a thin resume, and less-than-impressive qualifications. I had the same concerns about John Kerry in 2004, but was never called a racist then; unfortunately, people have questioned my motives this year. Whatever.

But more importantly, why do so many people in this neurotic party become all apoplectic when Clinton supporters talk about taking this entire matter to the credentials committee in Denver? Shouldn't conventions be more than just a four day infomercial? It's no wonder very few people watch these things anymore.

Nancy Pelosi--looking more grim and depressed than even Michelle Obama--told interviewiers Friday that she "would not allow this fight to go to the convention". Bold talk from a Speaker who can't even get a meaningful anti-war proposal through Congress.

Many of these Obama supporters were around in 1980; I'm just curious: were they this indignant about Ted Kennedy taking HIS fight to the Democratic Convention??? His only ostensible purpose in doing so was to publicly snub and embarrass the President of the United States on the convention podium...and he did it for everyone to see.

I'd like to hear Bob Shrum--a major figure in that effort--tell us why he thinks it's so important that this race end this week...why it just CAN'T go to the convention....

Sounds like more double standards to me....a woman needs to shut up, fold her tent, and be ladylike in ending this thing quickly...
Kennedys on the other hand, are fighters, dammit! It was just great that Ted fought on to the 1980 convention (btw, he had roughly 1000 delegates to Carter's 2000....his position was nowhere near as strong as Senator Clinton's is today)

by BJJ Fighter 2008-06-01 10:01AM | 0 recs
Stop it with the logical fallacies.

Sounds like more double standards to me....a woman needs to shut up, fold her tent, and be ladylike in ending this thing quickly...

Straw man.

by you like it 2008-06-01 10:09AM | 0 recs
Plenty

I honestly don't know why people think the Ted Kennedy example bolsters their argument at all, considering that we lost that year.  You think it strengthens your argument, people like me think it's Exhibit A as to why this won't happen (yesterday's debacle is Exhibit B).  Maybe if the convention was held in June rather than August, you might have a point.  If you can credibly explain how giving the nominee only two months to campaign is a strategy that leads to victory, perhaps you should put it in a diary.  If you are merely arguing that she should suspend her campaign and hold out until August anyway, that is fine but it is conceding in all but name.

by rfahey22 2008-06-01 10:09AM | 0 recs
Are you serious?

The evidence of SoCalDarlin's racism is in her blog.  Read it.

Anyway I think most people acknowledge that Ted Kennedy going to the convention was a bad thing, although I wasn't around at the time, that's the conventional wisdom nowadays.

btw, did you just play the sexism card in a post where you're complaining about accusations of racism?  Haha, I almost missed that.

by Jess81 2008-06-01 10:13AM | 0 recs
Come on to Denver

There is nothing horrible, come on to Denver and join the party!  Did you think we were going to leave you behind because of this?  Come on to Denver in the spirit of our democracy.  Make the case for the issues we both care about.  Be a twin dynamo if you want to, but let's just remember that the enemy is McSame,  McSame bad Dems good : )

by Adept2u 2008-06-01 10:32AM | 0 recs
Denver...

...when Hillary supporters can't seem to scream, "DEN-VER! DEN-VER!" without throwing in a little "McCain 08! McCain 08!" the case for not having this go to Denver makes itself.

Enough Clinton supporters can't control themselves, and can't keep themselves in the Democratic fold, that they are sabotaging Hillary's attempts to prolong this.

by Addison 2008-06-01 10:56AM | 0 recs
Re: What's so horrible about taking this to Denver

TexasDarlin not a racist? Here's her magnum opus:

http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/05 24/mystery-man-obama

by authority song 2008-06-01 11:18AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC


I'm sorry, but your candidate has lost the nomination. She under estimated her opponent early in the game and didn't plan effectively for a real challenge.

Throwing a tantrum over the RBC decisions only further makes her campaign look weak and not ready to lead.

Hillary, after her loss in Iowa, reminded us all that this was a race for delegates. Yes, it is.

If you're getting ready to do a "Harriet Christian" on us, you might as well leave now.

by neonplaque 2008-06-01 10:03AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC
And, by the way TD
In 1996, when Obama first ran for public office in Illinois, he employed a cut-throat gimmick of challenging petition signatures to knock long-time community activist Alice Palmer off the ballot for the state Senate.

He played by the RULES.  An effective politician takes advantage of the rules. If other candidates can't play by the rules, how can they be ready to lead?
by neonplaque 2008-06-01 10:05AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

And why do you think those rules exist?

In Chicago, you have to make sure the signatures are real - They've had whole graveyards full of folks voting.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 10:45AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

so how are you going to help put the unity express back on track?  Writing more diaries highlighting how angry some Clinton supporters are while ignoring the fact that Clinton supporters also voted for the rules committee proposals?  Come on, join the many Clinton supporters and Obama supporters that want to make a difference.

by temptxan 2008-06-01 10:10AM | 0 recs
This is the same Ickes who voted for 100%

disenfranchisement before he voted for 50%?

Just checking.

-chris

by chrisblask 2008-06-01 10:14AM | 0 recs
I for one cant wait to unleash Hillary

On McSame who is our true adversary.  Senator Clinton should have a bully pulpit where she can tear him a new one.  He is the one for the endless lie war, he is the one for 4 more years of Bush.  I can't wait to see her continue to campaign on the 97.5 percent of other issues she and Obama agree hand in hand over.  It is now my dream to see her meet Romney toe to toe in some surrogate war and destroy him!

We should hail our warrior Hillary for her good fight and re-arm her for the one that really matters.

by Adept2u 2008-06-01 10:24AM | 0 recs
Pax Obama is NOT UNITY
The right to have loyal opposition is at the core of our nation's success to date and it's ongoing survival. For better or for worse, it appears that Obama's tactics of slap-down, arm-twisting, money-exchanging power grabs have won out over those who suggest another way to get things done. He's not the first politician to play this game, but it sure is fun watching the masterful control of the "backroom" politics and influence peddling at work, particularly since this was the candidate that would have you believe he is above all this.
Senator Clinton and her supporters have a right to be heard and to have their concerns heard and acted upon rather than being outrightly dismissed as seems to be the case if one follows the preceding comments.
The right to free speech continues to be a hallmark of our national constitution. Maybe the DNC RBC will come up with a rule that countermands this value also.
by pan230oh 2008-06-01 10:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Pax Obama is NOT UNITY

Yes, this backroom dealing bastard agreed in an openly-taped and attended meeting to accept two compromises that grant double-digit delegates to his opponent.

What a powermonger, that one. He somehow mind controlled Clinton supporters into voting for it, and beamed his plans for Michigan into the heads of the Michigan delegation, where they somehow believed it to be their own idea.

Obama = Lex Luthor + Gordon Gekko.

by Reeves 2008-06-01 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Pax Obama is NOT UNITY

Isn't that how backroom is defined -- a deal discussed in public and reached via compromise within the MI and FL delegates and ratified by neutral, Obama, and Clinton members of the RBC.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 10:50AM | 0 recs
Why vote for a prevaricator like Obama?

Here is a PARTIAL list of some less familiar Obama fabrications:

1. Obama Falsely Claimed He Was Fluent In Indonesian As A Child:  "Obama has claimed on numerous occasions to have become fluent in Indonesian in six months. Yet those who knew him disputed that during recent interviews. His 1st-grade teacher, said she attempted to help him learn the Indonesian language by going over pronunciation and vowel sounds but he struggled greatly with the foreign language.

(Kirsten Scharnberg and Kim Barker, "The Not-So-Simple Story Of Barack Obama's Youth," Chicago Tribune, 3/25/07) See also http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/a rchives/2007/04/rnc_to_blast_ob.html

2. Obama claimed credit for nuclear leak legislation that never passed on the Iowa Campaign trail. While he initially fought to advance his bill, Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators, removing language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks. The bill ultimately died in the Senate.  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/pol itics/03exelon.html?_r=3&hp=&adx nnl=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=pri nt&adxnnlx=1206471735-N3gNnyqHdwQQuQ V+DDZ1aQ&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

3. Fellow organizers say Sen. Obama took too much credit for his community organizing efforts. "As the 24-year-old mentor to public housing residents, Obama says he initiated and led efforts that thrust Altgeld's asbestos problem into the headlines . . .". But others tell the story much differently. They say Obama did not play the singular role in the asbestos episode that he portrays in the best-selling memoir 'Dreams From My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance.' [Los Angeles Times, 2/19/07]

4. Chicago Tribune:  Obama's assertion that nobody had indications Rezko was engaging in wrongdoing 'strains credulity.' "...Obama has been too self-exculpatory. * Tribune stories linked Rezko to questionable fundraising for Gov. Rod Blagojevich in 2004 -- more than a year before the adjacent home and property purchases by the Obamas and the Rezkos." [Chicago Tribune editorial, 1/27/08]

5. Sen. Obama campaigned saying: 'I passed a law that put Illinois on a path to universal coverage,' but Obama health care legislation merely set up a task force. " [Obama Health Care speech, 5/29/07; rebutted by State Journal-Register, 5/20/04]

6. ABC News: 'Obama...seemed to exaggerate the legislative progress he made' on ethics reform.  When Mike Gravel alleged that Obama had 134 bundlers, Obama responded by telling Gravel that the reason he knows how many bundlers he has raising money for him is "because I helped push through a law this past session to disclose that." Obama's amendment would not have required candidates to release the names of their bundlers."  However, "the measure never became law as Obama seemed to suggest." [ABC News, 7/23/07]  http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/ 2007/07/obama-exaggerat.html

7. The title of this NYT article says it all: Obama's Account of New York Years Often Differs From What Others Say
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/us/pol itics/30obama.html  One former co-worker, interviewed by the Times, had said previously on his own blog:

And yet I'm disappointed. Barack's story may be true, but many of the facts are not. His larger narrative purpose requires him to embellish his role. I don't buy it. ***I can't listen uncritically to Barack Obama now that I know he's willing to bend the facts to his purpose.

http://www.analyzethis.net/blog/2005/07/ 09/barack-obama-embellishes-his-resume/

8. There was the ever changing tale of where his 8 years of records from the Illinois Senate are: http://www.borderfirereport.net/latest/o bama-s-records-problem.html

9. There are his Illinois legislative accomplishments, which he advertised in Pennsylvania.  Only problem, his name was planted on legislation because Emil Jones wanted to make Obama into a U.S. Senator.  
http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/n ews/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/full

10. The Washington Post had a great tale of how Obama horned into the press conference on immigration reform, and claimed credit for work he did not do, greatly annoying Arlen Specter.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/03/23/AR2008032301706. html

11. Obama overstated the Kennedys' role in Helping his father.  He said the Kennedy family paid for his Kenyan father to travel to America on a scholarship and thus meet his Kansan mother.  The Washington Post said it was a "touching story -- but the key details are either untrue or grossly oversimplified."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/03/29/AR2008032902031. html?hpid=topnews

12. False claim in TV ad before Ohio primary blaming NAFTA for ending one Steven Schuyler's job:http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YjQ 5YmQ0NDhiNjliOWFhODU4N2U2MjhiZWQ1MTE4NDg =

Keep telling the truth, TD.

by katmandu1 2008-06-01 10:27AM | 0 recs
You left out his claim of visiting 57 states...

by BJJ Fighter 2008-06-01 10:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Why vote for a prevaricator like Obama?

National Journal? Run away, troll.

by authority song 2008-06-01 11:22AM | 0 recs
Stop lying

I've informed you MULTIPLE times about the Alice Palmer situation, but you're either too dishonest or too obtuse to acknowledge it.

Palmer publicly said she would not run again and would instead, seek former congressman Mel Reynolds' seat in a special election.  She went "all in" -- but lost the special election to Jesse Jackson Jr.

In the meantime - she had PUBLICLY backed Obama for her old seat.  She was quoted in multiple local papers saying "The people of my old district will be in good hands with his young man [meaning Obama]".

When she lost, reneged on her promise not to run again and scrambled to meet the fast approaching ballot deadline.

She broke her word to the people of the south side and to Obama.

Will you at least acknowledge the facts of the situation rather than your obtuse partisan spin on the matter?

Enough is enough.

by zonk 2008-06-01 10:28AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

so its adios, adios my little darlin'

keep that hankie that i gve you when you cry.

our affair has been quite heated

i thought i was what you needed

but the tie has come my darlin'

when we say goodbye

harder than yer husband...by frank zappa
seems appropriate.

by citizendave 2008-06-01 10:33AM | 0 recs
Harriet Christian?

See videotape of Harriet Christian from Manhattan, voter who was ejected from your meeting. That should give you a flavor of our reaction and a taste of what to expect in August, in Denver.

If that's how Hillary's supporters are going to represent themselves in Denver, I doubt the Party is very concerned.  Personally, I'd be overjoyed if people like Harriet Christian left.  There's no way she's representative of what the Democratic party should represent.  She should go crawl back under her rock.

by sneakers563 2008-06-01 10:34AM | 0 recs
Agree with that....

That display -- "throwing it away for a BLACK man!" -- is the last thing I would think any Clinton supporters want to hang their hats on.

by zonk 2008-06-01 10:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Agree with that....

How dare a black man challenge Hillary Clinton?

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 10:46AM | 0 recs
You're right about the emphasis too

It was clear that his "inadequacy" wasn't the only thing she found objectionable.

by sneakers563 2008-06-01 10:50AM | 0 recs
Re: You're right about the emphasis too

The really frightening thing is, that dreadful woman probably has no idea that she is a racist.

by interestedbystander 2008-06-01 12:00PM | 0 recs
Re: You're right about the emphasis too

More and more I find myself hoping that all the racists in the Democratic party will go over to McCain.

It'll hurt in the short term - may even cost us the election this year - but the party will be much better off for it in the long run.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-06-01 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Let's not pretend there was ever going to be peace with you and your friends.

See what happens when you and your group make it so clear that you will never be part of the coalition with Obama as the nominee, it give the rest of us the freedom to stop trying to convince you.

In other words we no longer care what you think.

So we now take you at your word, no peace, take it to Denver, blah...blah...blah..

We get it, point taken, thanks for the release and permission to ignore you.  

Just as a FYI, people willing to at least pretend they want to participate in real dialog remain relevant allot longer once their candidate looses.  

by nextgen 2008-06-01 10:35AM | 0 recs
As a note about Harriet Christian

TexasDarlin said the following: "See videotape of Harriet Christian from Manhattan, voter who was ejected from your meeting. That should give you a flavor of our reaction ..."

Now watch the video as who appears to be Harriet Christian is being ejected from the meeting (Near the end when she's being ejected). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Lpg6TRW9 qc.

If I am correct she is shouting "McCain in '08'.

Now, if this person is someone that the remaining Clinton supporters are saying is representative of how they will act (As per TexasDarlin's post), then this leads me to believe that they no longer will support the Democratic party in '08.

So why are they bothering to post on a blog dedicated to electing Democrats to government?

by MarvinMouse 2008-06-01 10:41AM | 0 recs
Re: As a note about Harriet Christian

Funny how this supposed Clinton supporter doesnt show up when one checks the political donation website.

by realistdem 2008-06-01 11:04AM | 0 recs
Re: As a note about Harriet Christian

Good catch!

by interestedbystander 2008-06-01 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

As an Obama supporter, I hope you spread that Harriet Christian video far and wide.  I'm sure the superdelegates will know what to do when they see it. And most Clinton supporters will be appalled as well.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 10:48AM | 0 recs
The HC video has eased my mind

I was worried about some Clinton supporters not supporting Obama in November.  But if Harriet Christian is in any way representative of them, I could really care less.  Let them be the new face of the Republicans.  Good riddance to bad rubbish.

by sneakers563 2008-06-01 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

yawn...there she goes again......Should I bother to read this diary? Input sought!

by feliks 2008-06-01 10:51AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

feliks,

Only read it if you have missed one of the Alegre/TD series over the last two months.  

There is nothing new to see here, trust me.

by nextgen 2008-06-01 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I've been waiting for Alegre's breathless iterations! She is why I visit here....

by feliks 2008-06-01 11:10AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Oh,

If your looking for Alegre look no further than NoQuarter where they had to put up a warning about Obama death threats.  Yes, people were posting death threats, what a sick place.  

Here is her latest masterpiece there at NoQuarter..

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/31/ thou-shalt-not-steal-updated/

by nextgen 2008-06-01 12:33PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

(a) Clinton's alleged present or possible future popular vote lead is great for the history books, and a great talking point for her supporters, but ultimately has proved meaningless vis-a-vis the process and unpersuasive to the superdelegates. So, it's a consolation prize in the race for the nomination, something that will be used to buoy the spirits of Clinton supporters for years to come. For further information, please contact non-President Gore.

(b) Numerous Clinton supporters defected to vote for the (admittedly stupid and indefensible RBC) MI delegate compromise. Unity is on its way in, a few dozen shouting RBC attendees notwithstanding.

(c) The Clinton supporters in attendance at the RBC meeting probably opened a lot of SDs' eyes, but not in the way they imagine. When they shouted "Denver! Denver!" and afforded no respect even to the most stalwart Clintonites on the RBC, they did indeed show a preview of what Denver might be like if Clinton is allowed to continue with these sorts of people as her vocal supporters.

by Addison 2008-06-01 10:53AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I agree with (c).  If there was any question left in the minds of the supers, the disrespect shown by her supporters at the meeting (and the classic unhinged rant of Harriet Christian) should make it clear they need to end this now.

They don't want the "inadequate BLACK MALE", so they'll vote for the old WHITE MALE of the other party.

I love how Meteor Blades over on dkos stated it this morning,

you McCainocrats are premeditating ballot support for an exclusive club of racist, union-busting, woman-suppressing, bedroom-peering, rights-scoffing, warmongering, torture-backing, buccaneering, global warming-denying, privatizing, public land-grabbing, Supreme Court stuffing, empire-building, Constitution-shredding raptors. All for self-indulgent revenge. You're unhappy that your candidate has not won the nomination. I understand that. Mine didn't win either. But you're not just unhappy, you're also willing to contribute to the election of someone who stands against most of what your candidate has been promoted as standing for. That, I don't comprehend at all. Emotionally, intellectually or morally. I get the feeling you would vote for George W. Bush in 2008 if the 22nd Amendment weren't in the way.
...
If that's what your telling me, if you're willing to force the American people to suffer for your chance to say nah-nah-nah, I'll have two words for you when you come around looking for my support for any candidate or any cause in 2012 or any other time in the future: Bite me.  

by neonplaque 2008-06-01 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

tD, You have no interest in unity, so don't talk about it being derailed.

At some point, you'll have to decide if you actually care about what elections produce -- people who make decisions that affect people's lives -- or keeping up the disunity and putting someone very harmful to the people into office.

by politicsmatters 2008-06-01 11:00AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Harold Ickes did more harm to the Democratic Party in thirty seconds yesterday than John McCain could do in a month.

by Beekeeper 2008-06-01 11:09AM | 0 recs
Oy vey
... awarded Barack Obama 55 "uncommitted" delegates from the Michigan primary, even though he voluntarily removed his name from that ballot in a tactical move to curry favor with the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

  • Is that why all the other candidates except Hillary removed their names as well?
  • The people who voted for "uncommitted" were clearly voting against Hillary
  • As you can see from Poblano's chart , the turnout in Michigan was massively depressed.
  • Does the fact that Obama had the committee votes for a 50-50 split in MI but didn't use them mean anything to you?
by obsessed 2008-06-01 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Oy vey

"Does the fact that Obama had the committee votes for a 50-50 split in MI but didn't use them mean anything to you?"

Obama probably had the votes to get anything he wanted from that committee.

by Sieglinde 2008-06-01 12:03PM | 0 recs
Ok - so it's 59 delegates, X 1/2 each

OR 30 delegates.   Which changes nothing.   Obama still has the numbers, so this will be irrelevant.  Clinton could win the argument at the credentials committee and it still wouldn't change the results.

by activatedbybush 2008-06-01 11:22AM | 0 recs
But Hillary will win in November REGARDLESS

and we are one HUGE step closer with this-yet another stomping in Puerto Rico.

Ale Ale Ale!

by LindaSFNM 2008-06-01 11:34AM | 0 recs
Re: But Hillary will win in November REGARDLESS
Seems to me as though you should lay off the Ale.
Though, at least it has a fairly low alcohol content.
by Kysen 2008-06-01 11:44AM | 0 recs
Why did Clinton supporters on the RBC support it?

by jaywillie 2008-06-01 11:48AM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

TD, I'm pleased to see you (at least implicitly) acknowledge BO's credentials as a street fighter.  

He's been running circles around you folks all year, and yesterday was another prime example.  Audacity, yes, but it also takes finesse, and that's what's made the difference.

I'm more confident about November than ever.

by redwoodsummer 2008-06-01 11:50AM | 0 recs
Michigan

There are many things that upset me about yesterday's "compromise".  But one that upset me the most are the 4 Michigan delegates that were stolen from Clinton.

Why steal delegates when Obama could win without them anyway?

by Sieglinde 2008-06-01 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

No Michigan delegates were stolen. Before yesterday, nobody had any Michigan delegates to begin with. There was nothing to steal.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-06-01 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

This is a funny Obama talking point.  No one had Michigan delegates to begin with is obvious.

But voters vote for delegates. The RBC don't vote to allocate delegates.  So what happened to the voters who voted positively for Hillary Clinton?  I think they got screwed.

by Sieglinde 2008-06-01 12:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

They would have been even more screwed had they not been able to give Hillary any delegates at all, which was the original arrangement.

Nothing was stolen. Obama was awarded delegates from Michigan, and Hillary was awarded even more. That was the compromise plan the state Democratic party came up with. It's not perfect, but I guess it was the best they could come up with, given that it was impossible to accurately judge the preferences of the voters of their state.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-06-01 12:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

But how can you compromise on the proportion of voters that voted positively for Hillary Clinton?

How can you compromise on the will of those voters?

Shouldn't they at least have the proportional number of delegates to represent them?

Who compromises on the will of voters in a democracy?

by Sieglinde 2008-06-01 12:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

And what about all the other voters in Michigan? What about their will?

What about the voters who:

- Didn't vote in the primary because they were told by everyone, including Hillary Clinton, that it wasn't going to count for anything.

- Wanted to vote for Obama (or Edwards), but voted for Hillary instead because she was the only major candidate on the ballot.

- Wrote in Barack Obama and had their votes thrown out. Over 30,000 write-in votes were thrown out; reports are that most of those were for Obama. That's around 5% of the total votes cast in the primary, so it's not an insignificant number.

Like Bonior said, there can be no fair reflection of a flawed primary.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-06-01 12:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

For the first group of voters that you cite, those who didn't vote, one could assume that they hurt Obama as much as Clinton.

The second group of voters are stupid, and probably account for a tiny fraction of the voting population.

The write-ins can be taken into account-- but as it stands, Obama got both Obama and Edwards votes by allocating the "uncommitted" all to him.

But this is not about who had the intention to vote for Obama.  It's about the intention of the voters who voted positively for Hillary Clinton.  There was a proportion of the population that positively voted for Hillary.  They ought to have FAIR REPRESENTATION if this is a democracy.

Who compromises, when there are hard numbers to base a decision on.  Therefore, there were stolen delegates.

by Sieglinde 2008-06-01 02:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

There were no stolen delegates.

Get it in your head.

NOBODY had any delegates from Michigan. The illegitimate primary they held in January awarded no delegates. There was nothing to steal.

The state party came up with their best approximation of what would have happened had they held a legitimate primary. They took into account the voters who voted, the voters who didn't vote at all, the voters who would have preferred to vote Obama but voted Clinton instead (18% according to exit polls), and the discarded write-ins, and made their best guess.

All it was was an educated guess - but they decided that it was better than pretending that the January primary was a legitimate election. The RBC ratified their decision.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-06-01 04:27PM | 0 recs
by Sieglinde 2008-06-02 04:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Michigan

Did you know that 18% of Hillary's MI voters said in exit polls they wanted to vote for Obama?  So I guess reapportioning 4 delegates seems about right, though he would actually be due more if the delegates were to actually reflect the intention of voters.

by interestedbystander 2008-06-01 12:35PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

yeah the RBC blew it big time.  

the party actually did harm to him from this ruling - but its not BO's fault at all.

by canadian gal 2008-06-01 12:13PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Hope and unity.  

It's amazing to me that we have reached a point where laudable goals like hope and unity are openly mocked.

by ottto 2008-06-01 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Don't get too worked up about it.  Check the diarist's history or her website and you'll know she never wanted anything of the sort.

by rfahey22 2008-06-01 12:24PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I know.  

I just thought I'd point out that the things that are being mocked are things that generally Democrats either have or aspire to.  

by ottto 2008-06-01 12:28PM | 0 recs
"How do you campaign against hope?"

Now you know.

Senator Clinton personally recognized Alegre, so it comes from the top.

-chris

by chrisblask 2008-06-01 06:38PM | 0 recs
I'm OVER unity

I've been watching for months while Hillary supporters complain about this or that supposed injustice and then pout and say that they're voting for McCain.  At first I tried to reason with them, I called for unity and promised that I would vote for Hillary if she won even though that would have meant the superdelegates taking things into their own hands.  No more.

He's ahead of McCain in the national polls, and even using conservative estimates like this site does on the electoral map vote counter - Obama is ahead of McCain.  If Hillary supporters want to jump on the Obama bandwagon I will happily welcome them, but I'm done worrying about whether or not you choose to do so.  If you want to quit the party and vote for McCain, I think it's a dumb choice, but go ahead.  We will WIN without you.

by Renie 2008-06-01 12:30PM | 0 recs
"McCain Supporters New Republican

Party Blog" Blogroll, Tex?

Do you care to Denounce and Renounce the McCain campaign using your efforts to put a Republican in the office?

You have previously engaged in debate in your diaries.  I think you would be well served in stating how you feel about being a McCain Supporters' Poster Child.

-chris

by chrisblask 2008-06-01 12:34PM | 0 recs
Don't let the door hit you on the way out n/t

by DrPolitics 2008-06-01 01:46PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

This Democrat is still with Hill.

by grlpatriot 2008-06-01 01:59PM | 0 recs
WRT the popular vote

The popular vote with MI comes down to the uncommitted currently.

With MI added for Hillary, she is +145k, not counting any of the 238k uncommitted vote for Obama. PR is giving her a much much smaller margin than expected due to the small turnout, and consequently, any reasonable estimate of Obama's share of uncommitted results in his earning more net votes, especially after Montana and SD.

by mattw 2008-06-01 02:28PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Michigan was not recognized as a legitimate primary, and thus nobody stole anything, and you know it.  The fair apportionment would have been 64-64, but Obama conceded some delegates to Clinton as a compromise.  Stop the grandstanding.

by gorebeatbush2 2008-06-01 03:41PM | 0 recs
You are just about

finished here -- sure, you can call your Republican minions in to get on the rec list -- that's the cheaters way.  But I am now looking at one after another great Clinton supporter diary replacing the venom.  These diarists earned their way on the rec list because they have something you will never have.  Respect.  

by gchaucer2 2008-06-01 03:54PM | 0 recs
O Darlin'

I await with bated breath to see what happens to you after June 4. From where will you cut and paste when the Clinton campaign starts using its website to promote the candidacy of the nominee?

by mikeinsf 2008-06-01 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

Hillary agreed to 'not participate' in the Michigan primary.  If she is considered to have 'earned' the delegates assigned to her, based on her appearance on the ballot, then she must have 'participated' in the election, against her promise.

So anyone concluding that Hillary had 'earned' delegates taken from her is also agreeing that she broke her pledge.

If, on the other hand, you agree with Hillary that the vote in Michigan wasn't going to count for anything, so it didn't matter if her name appeared on the ballot, then you also agree that the earlier results were invalid.

Take your pick.

by Wayward Son 2008-06-01 04:18PM | 0 recs
Haha, that's a good one, TD.

Yes, lets bring Harriet Christian before the Super Delegates. Her racist rants will surely win them over.

by Massadonious 2008-06-01 04:27PM | 0 recs
EXCUSE ME???

A quote from the blog: "Message to the RBC: See videotape of Harriet Christian from Manhattan, voter who was ejected from your meeting. That should give you a flavor of our reaction and a taste of what to expect in August, in Denver."

Did you seriously compare yourself and others in a GOOD WAY to that old racist hag?

I encourage everyone to watch the video, namely the first half.

She is clearly out of her mind, and clearly a racist.

Go ahead and associate yourself with that woman if you want, but I can't make any guarantee that I won't think a lot less of you.

by broncoelway 2008-06-01 05:05PM | 0 recs
Texas

Saturday, the Democratic Party's Rules & Bylaws Committee (RBC), in a surreal act of political suicide, awarded Barack Obama 55 "uncommitted" delegates from the Michigan primary, even though he voluntarily removed his name from that ballot in a tactical move to curry favor with the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire.

As Ickes noted, "uncommitted" is a constitutionally recognized presidential status, the same as a named candidate, and therefore delegates earned by "uncommitted" cannot legally be reallocated to another candidate.

But the RBC didn't stop there. They also STOLE 4 delegates earned by Hillary Clinton in the Michigan primary, and transferred them to Barack Obama, as if punishing Clinton for winning an election that Obama boycotted.

This is a masterfully framed synapsis of the issue.  Kudos to you.  

by BPK80 2008-06-01 05:06PM | 0 recs
Indeed...

Love how she mentioned that some Hillary supporters on the RBC voted for the compromise.

Oh wait, no she didn't.

by Massadonious 2008-06-01 05:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Indeed...

"Compromise"

Give me all of your money.

Wait, let's compromise; give me half.  That's fair, isn't it?

by BPK80 2008-06-01 05:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Indeed...

Call it whatever you want, don't call it a compromise if that somehow offends you.

Fact of the matter is, some Hillary supporters on the RBC supported it. From what I read, their particular votes changed the outcome. But, even if it didn't, some Hillary people obviously thought it was fair enough to support it.

But, don't let facts get in the way of yours and TD's outrage. Carry on.

by Massadonious 2008-06-01 05:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Indeed...

In order to give something, one must first possess it.

Hillary had no Michigan delegates to give before yesterday.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-06-01 09:58PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

I sense the Obama supporters feel nervous tonight.

by katmandu1 2008-06-01 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: The Unity Express Derails in DC

His favorable rating is LOWER that HRC.  And his unfavorable rating is HIGHER than HRC.   The number is worse against McCain.

by JoeySky18 2008-06-02 06:11AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads