The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Archives => Politics => Election 2008 => Topic started by: Wretched Excess on February 12, 2008, 03:00:47 PM
-
I honestly thought this would become a bigger issue much sooner than this, but you can already see the outline of what will become a bloody brawl beginning to form.
NAACP Head Wants Barred Delegates Seated
WASHINGTON — A prominent civil rights leader has told the Democratic National Committee that refusing to seat delegates from Florida and Michigan would disenfranchise both states' minority communities.
In a Feb. 8 letter to DNC Chairman Howard Dean, NAACP chairman Julian Bond expressed "great concern at the prospect that million of voters in Michigan and Florida could ultimately have their votes completely discounted." Refusing to seat the states' delegations could remind voters of the "sordid history of racially discriminatory primaries," he said.
The DNC penalized Michigan and Florida for moving their primaries to earlier dates in violation of party rules. Both states were stripped of their delegates, and the party's presidential candidates signed a pledge not to campaign in either state. Florida lost 185 delegates; Michigan, 128.
Since then, facing the prospect of a drawn-out delegate battle with Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign has pushed hard for both states' delegations to be seated. Clinton won Florida's primary Jan. 29 and Michigan's Jan. 15, but was the only candidate to appear on the Michigan ballot after the other candidates removed their names.
In an interview, Bond said the NAACP had taken no position in the race between Clinton and Obama and would not endorse either candidate. He sent the letter on behalf of the voters in Michigan and especially Florida, where the Republican-controlled legislature and governor changed the state's primary date.
"It struck me as making the voters, including minority voters in Florida particularly, victims of the Republican legislature in Florida. I wanted to get Chairman Dean to find some way to rectify the situation," Bond said.
The DNC has said it would allow both states to hold a different contest, probably a caucus, that would comply with party rules. Either state can also appeal the penalty to the DNC credentials committee, which will not meet again until this summer.
Story (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/02/12/politics/p123924S47.DTL)
-
It struck me as making the voters, including minority voters in Florida particularly, victims of the Republican legislature in Florida.
Of course it struck you that way. You didn't want to be struck blaming the DNC. That would be too honest and not sound near sinister enough for your agenda, Mr. NAACP.
-
Why does the NAACP act like black people are the only people on Earth? They do know that they are the minority, Right? Trample over everyone else to get what THEY want. The NAACP is more dangerous than the Klan.
-
Why does the NAACP act like black people are the only people on Earth? They do know that they are the minority, Right? Trample over everyone else to get what THEY want. The NAACP is more dangerous than the Klan.
You are right. The KKK was honest about their goals (which is unusual for a democrat institution).
-
NAACP Head Wants Barred Delegates Seated
In an interview, Bond said the NAACP had taken no position in the race between Clinton and Obama and would not endorse either candidate. He sent the letter on behalf of the voters in Michigan and especially Florida, where the Republican-controlled legislature and governor changed the state's primary date.
"It struck me as making the voters, including minority voters in Florida particularly, victims of the Republican legislature in Florida. I wanted to get Chairman Dean to find some way to rectify the situation," Bond said.
Story (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/02/12/politics/p123924S47.DTL)
Oooh, looks like the Clintons found somebody ambitious and Black to use as a tool to take out Obama, probably in exchange for a cabinet post or ambassadorship later I would guess...or possibly a Supreme Court nomination.
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
What is amazing is them having the audacity to suggest that somehow minorities were singled out in this case. This would only work on a badly written episode of "Law & Order."
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
What is amazing is them having the audacity to suggest that somehow minorities were singled out in this case. This would only work on a badly written episode of "Law & Order."
So, basically any episode of Law and Order featuring McCoy trying a case, then?
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
What is amazing is them having the audacity to suggest that somehow minorities were singled out in this case. This would only work on a badly written episode of "Law & Order."
So, basically any episode of Law and Order featuring McCoy trying a case, then?
He loses more motions than a lead brick.
-
I guess the mental giants at the DNC had no clue that there would actually be a close race for the nomination. Now these jokers in the NAACP are pimping for Clinton. What would be fair is to seat the delegates from MI & FL and let them vote for whomever they want because Obama did not campaign in either state;
therefore, a uncontested election. This should be fun.
-
AWWWWW GEES!!!!!!! :thatsright:
-
Awesome. I wonder what Julian's problem is with Obama. The smart thing would have been to keep his mouth shut even if he really believed this, much less put it in writing. :popcorn:
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
What is amazing is them having the audacity to suggest that somehow minorities were singled out in this case. This would only work on a badly written episode of "Law & Order."
So, basically any episode of Law and Order featuring McCoy trying a case, then?
He loses more motions than a lead brick.
Yeah, but the defendant still ends up in jail, may be on some other charge. But as long as the bad guys go to jail, it's a win.
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
I'm afraid it already has flown. the lesson of the 2000 election "aftermath" in florida is that where the law is silent, mischievous lawyers are more than capable of creating chaos, especially when they are assisted by activist state judges.
and the phrase "disenfranchising minority voters" was used intentionally to open up nearly countless areas of potentially valid legal arguments.
I posted an article by ted olsen yesterday that spoke to the possibility of this whole thing winding up in court.
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
I'm afraid it already has flown. the lesson of the 2000 election "aftermath" in florida is that where the law is silent, mischievous lawyers are more than capable of creating chaos, especially when they are assisted by activist state judges.
and the phrase "disenfranchising minority voters" was used intentionally to open up nearly countless areas of potentially valid legal arguments.
I posted a thread by ted olsen yesterday that spoke to the possibility of this whole thing winding up in court.
**** the "disenfranchising minority voters". **** them right in the earhole. That's one dead horse that needs to rot away.
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
I'm afraid it already has flown. the lesson of the 2000 election "aftermath" in florida is that where the law is silent, mischievous lawyers are more than capable of creating chaos, especially when they are assisted by activist state judges.
and the phrase "disenfranchising minority voters" was used intentionally to open up nearly countless areas of potentially valid legal arguments.
I posted a thread by ted olsen yesterday that spoke to the possibility of this whole thing winding up in court.
**** the "disenfranchising minority voters". **** them right in the earhole. That's one dead horse that needs to rot away.
I didn't say that I liked it or that I thought it was right. I just said that it was a potentially fruitful avenue.
-
Awesome. I wonder what Julian's problem is with Obama. The smart thing would have been to keep his mouth shut even if he really believed this, much less put it in writing. :popcorn:
it's another example of the quandary that the democrats will find themselves in if this thing ever blossoms into an actual battle. democrats have been constantly saying (and rather mindlessly, I might add) "count every vote" since 2000. Hell, Corpse Kerry and Princess Johnny all but ran on "count every vote" in 2004.
well, people voted in MI and FL, and john dean took their delegates away. what are they going to do about it?
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
I'm afraid it already has flown. the lesson of the 2000 election "aftermath" in florida is that where the law is silent, mischievous lawyers are more than capable of creating chaos, especially when they are assisted by activist state judges.
and the phrase "disenfranchising minority voters" was used intentionally to open up nearly countless areas of potentially valid legal arguments.
I posted a thread by ted olsen yesterday that spoke to the possibility of this whole thing winding up in court.
**** the "disenfranchising minority voters". **** them right in the earhole. That's one dead horse that needs to rot away.
I didn't say that I liked it or that I thought it was right. I just said that it was a potentially fruitful avenue.
Not directed at you, personally. I get pissy everytime I hear about disenfranchised voters. I haven't even REALLY figured out what one is.
-
This won't fly.
The USC is silent on political parties -- as long as the same rules apply to everyone, they can have any rules they want.
I'm afraid it already has flown. the lesson of the 2000 election "aftermath" in florida is that where the law is silent, mischievous lawyers are more than capable of creating chaos, especially when they are assisted by activist state judges.
and the phrase "disenfranchising minority voters" was used intentionally to open up nearly countless areas of potentially valid legal arguments.
I posted a thread by ted olsen yesterday that spoke to the possibility of this whole thing winding up in court.
**** the "disenfranchising minority voters". **** them right in the earhole. That's one dead horse that needs to rot away.
I didn't say that I liked it or that I thought it was right. I just said that it was a potentially fruitful avenue.
Not directed at you, personally. I get pissy everytime I hear about disenfranchised voters. I haven't even REALLY figured out what one is.
Us Conservatives are 100% disenfranchised, since we have no candidate to vote for.