All:

Excellent NYT Op-Ed by Geraldine Ferraro, who was integrally involved in the creation of the superdelegate system.  An excerpt:

“[T]he delegate totals from primaries and caucuses do not necessarily reflect the will of rank-and-file Democrats. Most Democrats have not been heard from at the polls. We have all been impressed by the turnout for this year’s primaries — clearly both candidates have excited and engaged the party’s membership — but, even so, turnout for primaries and caucuses is notoriously low. It would be shocking if 30 percent of registered Democrats have participated.  If that is the case, we could end up with a nominee who has been actively supported by, at most, 15 percent of registered Democrats. That’s hardly a grassroots mandate.  More important, although many states like New York have closed primaries in which only enrolled Democrats are allowed to vote, in many other states Republicans and independents can make the difference by voting in Democratic primaries or caucuses.  In the Democratic primary in South Carolina, tens of thousands of Republicans and independents no doubt voted, many of them for Mr. Obama. The same rules prevail at the Iowa caucuses, in which Mr. Obama also triumphed.  He won his delegates fair and square, but those delegates represent the wishes not only of grassroots Democrats, but also Republicans and independents. If rank-and-file Democrats should decide who the party’s nominee is, each state should pass a rule allowing only people who have been registered in the Democratic Party for a given time — not nonmembers or day-of registrants — to vote for the party’s nominee.  Perhaps because I have endorsed Mrs. Clinton, I have noticed that most of the people complaining about the influence of the superdelegates are supporters of Mr. Obama. I can’t help thinking that their problem with the superdelegates may not be that they’re “unrepresentative,” but rather that they are perceived as disproportionately likely to support Mrs. Clinton.”

What Ferraro is noting here is that a primary is for determining a NOMINEE - NOT a president.  Thus, while one could argue that the Reps and Inds who voted in Dem primaries will also vote in the general election, those people may actually VOTE for the GOP nominee in the general election, thus having skewed the Dem nominee process.

“I may be a cynic, but I’m a fairly knowledgeable political cynic...[I]f [Obama supporters] are actually upset over the diminished clout of rank-and-file Democrats in the presidential nominating process, then I would love to see them agitating to force the party to seat the delegates elected by the voters in Florida and Michigan. In those two states, the votes of thousands of rank-and-file party members will not be counted because their states voted on dates earlier than those authorized by the national party.  Because both states went strongly for Mrs. Clinton, standing up for the voices of grassroots Democrats in Florida and Michigan would prove the integrity of the superdelegate-bashers. The people of those states surely don’t deserve to be disenfranchised simply because the leaders of their state parties brought them to the polls on a day that had not been endorsed by the leaders of our national party — a slight the voters might not easily forget in November.”

Brava!  In all the dissing of Hillary re seating the Michigan and Florida Dems, I have heard NOTHING about how patently UNFAIR it was to disenfranchise them in the first place.  Ferraro is courageous here in scolding her party for having done so.

Here is the link to the full piece:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/opinion/25ferraro.ht ml?_r=1&hp;=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print

Peace.

Good thought Mike B.

I think we need UN intervention though. This regime has been engaged in Crimes Against Humanity, and Crimes Against the Peace for 7 years now, right here in the good old US of A.

Yep, we need a major rescue. I’m not sure that NATO is up for it, but maybe…

What ever she says ‘not to do’ is what will be done. This political mess we have for a government in this country is sooo convoluted and the political speakese soooo unbelieving that it is a perfect place for the last great repressive government in the world. It will collapse and it will not be pretty.

I just bought a lovely little plot in the Algarve, which has the second largest U.S. expatriate community in the world (largest is in Spain).

Always fancied Portugal this time of year...LOL.

Peace.  (seemingly getting ever more distant...)

^ we could have a beer or two together.  Let me know when your coming.  The dollar goes a long way here.  Oh, and good healthcare is cheap and available.

This is a classic example of CYA.
In beltwayspeak, telling the “superdelegates” to respect the will of the people is tantamount to saying the hammer of God will fall on them if they don’t support Hillary.

France is nice. I just got my visa. Not sure when I’ll be able to use it, but at least it’s there.

Getting out of here could be way tougher than getting into France or any place else, to accomplish the survival that the expat is exercising, wherever he or she may be.

Good luck!!

From the article linked by P.T.

“That doesn’t deter a few Jewish political wheeler dealers (elected by no one) from stirring the boiling cauldron.”

***

And therein lies the truth. Just that simple. Polls have been on-going in Israel for months on who would make the best American president. Best for them. And I suspect were we to dig into other countries deep enough, we might find preferences there too.

Believe it or not, I see a shift, small to be sure, but there all the same. People are getting tired of the conflict in the Middle East. Yes, even a lot of Jews.

As the article points out, “… surveys conducted by Jewish organizations show that the candidates’ positions on interior affairs, especially social issues like workers’ rights, abortion, stem cell research and medical insurance, interest the Jewish Democratic voters more than their positions on moving the American embassy to Jerusalem or evacuating some illegal outpost in the territories.”

In other words, American Jews, just like non-Jew Americans worry about the same things all sane Americans worry about. Their vote will be based on who they perceive as most likely to eliminate that which repub control has imposed on us and restoring a level of sanity that promises to improve things for everybody.

Removing Bush/Cheney, the repub control of congress and the unhealthy influence of hard-right neo-cons, including AIPAC will follow part and parcel with democratic control. Then the trick will be to stay on our toes and make sure a new president and a new congress remember, their allegiance is to the United States. First, last and always!

Then it really will be up to We The People, wont it?
Are we up to the task?

By the way, and for what it’s worth, polls in Israel over the last six months favor Clinton and Giuliani. Thought you might find that interesting.

Click http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/954434.html

I watched SiCKO last night for the first time.  Just when I was beginning to get beyond all this stuff and now I’m worse off.

Remember the expat living in France who said, “in France, the government is afraid of the people; in the US, the people are afraid of the government?”

To all you expats, including my son, I’m working on joining you.

“Humm...I can’t think of anything…

Still, maybe mine isn’t the largest expanding of imaginations…”

“I do think that they have a respect—it’s not just following the returns, it’s also having a respect for what has been said by the people..”

Pelosi, take a hike.  The People spoke back in November 2006 and your reply was that “.. impeachment is off the table.”

So don’t try and sound like you’re actually concerned about WE the People, because you’re not.

You’re just another overblown, political hack who takes orders from the MIC and the Zionists and you don’t give a damn about the “people” or the Constitution.

You and the rest of your buddies should be dragged off to the La Brea Tar Pits and like the dinosaurs of old, be enshrined for posterity.

Get lost, Nancy, you’re nothing more than a derrière kissing buffoon.

Another corporate fiasco for the presidential primaries brought to you by our very own and trustworthy msm.
Where are the issues? Where are the stances each wannabe takes on the issues? Where is the concern about what needs to be done in this country if by chance the current incumbents are voted out of office? And particular the issue of a totally separated big business/money interests from the government?
Since these are missing I don’t see any hope from any of the wannabes because all through the primaries and the campaigns there will be nothing but negative mud slinging shit to keep from having to face up to the issues and take a stance on them. And the money boys will buy another presidency.

I dunno Thomas,

This would mean that she’d vote for whichever repug he tells her to vote for, (at best) or just cancel the whole election thing period. (That would be if she REALLY does what he wants her to do).

So, I guess it’ll depend on what he has to offer.

Humm...I can’t think of anything…

Still, maybe mine isn’t the largest expanding of imaginations…

“I know, I know…I’m just saying…”

Definate conflict of interest eh ...

Nancy will not be making her selection until George W tells her who to be for.Of course she’ll fight like the Dicken’s but in the end she will do what ever George W wants her to do.

WAIT…Forget Nancy, she’s irrelevant anyway. (well, not so irrelevant at thwarting the will of the people for political expediency.  She’s certainly managed do THAT well enough.
But…never fear…it’s Al Gore to the rescue…AGAIN.

Democrats Look for Way to Avoid Convention Rift
By Don Van Natta Jr. and Jo Becker
The New York Times
Saturday 16 February 2008
“ Former Vice President Al Gore and a number of other senior Democrats plan to remain neutral for now in the presidential race in part to keep open the option to broker a peaceful resolution to what they fear could be a bitterly divided convention, party officials and aides said Friday.
Democratic Party officials said that in the past week Mr. Gore and other leading Democrats had held private talks as worry mounted that the close race between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton could be decided by a group of 796 party insiders known as superdelegates.
The signs that party elders are weighing whether and how to intervene reflects the extraordinary nature of the contest now and the concern among some Democrats that they not risk an internal battle that could harm the party in the general election.
But they also provided an early glimpse at the complex set of tradeoffs facing party leaders, from their desire to make their own influence felt to their worries about offending the candidates and particular constituencies - not to mention the long, sometimes troubled relationship between Mr. Gore and the Clintons.
The issues party leaders are grappling with, they said, include how to avoid the perception of a back-room deal that thwarts the will of millions of voters who have cast ballots in primaries and caucuses. That perception could cripple the eventual Democratic nominee’s chances of winning the presidency in November, they said.”
Well, they need to do more than ‘avoid the PERCEPTION’ of it, they need to make sure it doesn’t happen – NO BACKROOM DEALS! Another reason why I’m not all that ‘secure’ with Nancy’s involvement. I’ll trust the other ‘elders’ though, and be grateful for Big Al’s input.
The remainder of the article is at the link.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021608Z.shtml

Humm, I just thought of something that Louise or somebody else reminded us, and now it’s here again. I don’t think Bill Clinton should be a Superdelegate. Nope, he needs to sit this one out. He can cast his one vote for Hill just like every other private citizen that only gets to cast one vote.

Now, if he was any kind of a statesman, with any kind of ethics, he’d see the conflict here, and just not exercise his superdelegate vote.

I know, I know…I’m just saying…

Now that we have allowed the mainstream media (read: military-industrial-banking-agribiz-big-pharma complex) to choose the two weakest Democratic candidates, allowing petty grievances to disable the unity necessary to win--whatever democrat eventually wins the nomination-- would please Karl Rove to no end.

Ms. Pelosi no doubt knows much of which we are unaware. Remember, when asked about the crimes of the Bush Administration, she replied, “You don’t know the half of it.” Second-guessing Pelosi won’t get us a majority in Congress, nor will it help win the (once)White House, now running blood red in the aftermath of KG(W)B, otherwise known as the clown prince.
Next we should concentrate on impeachment of Supreme Court Justices who assert that torture is perfectly legal.

Please let’s not add to the carnage by internecine war among democrats.

By Blackspeare, February 16: “… now the Super-Delegates will be able to chose the candidate with the best chance of beating McCain----whoever that is...”

Thanks but you actually missed my main point, Blackspeare. It takes a TEAM to win the election. That team should already have been put together by now.

Like building a house, it takes constructive effort and co-operation. That is not happening with the Dems who merely think that they are “winning” by attacking each other.

You could say that at least half of the $200 million spent has been wasted on defining the differences between the two opposing Dems camps. That is really stupid!

It is an indulgence which could cost them severely as it is exacerbating tensions in the community in ways many people are unable to consciously define yet.

Loyalty has exited through the back door and that has yet to show in many ways. I really don’t want to ahve to continue putting labels on the different groups but thay are conflicting and very unproductively.

Is it his age that makes his so “incompetent?”

Qualifications for being a super delegate-zero.

Recently I saw one of these super delegates on a TV interview. He was 21 years old, had never voted in his life. His experience with politics was working as a volunteer in a campaign office as a teenager. Currently a college student. He refused to say who he would vote for, the will of the people or his own choice, claiming he wasn’t certain. I feel so much more confident now knowing that our future choice for President lays in the hands of incompetents such as these.

Clinton campaign finance director Jonathan Mantz met with donors from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in a Washington hotel lobby when the AIPAC supporters were in town for other business, the Wall Street Journal reported on Feb. 14.

However, given the political sensitivity of the Iraq War—and AIPAC’s support for neoconservative strategies in the Middle East—many rank-and-file Democrats view the pro-Israel organization with greater suspicion these days. But the Clinton campaign apparently feels the risk in reaching out to AIPAC is worth the reward.

Hey D.C.

You posted, “One is supposedly there to correct the errors and over-enthusiasms of the other.”

You just about hit the nail on the head so to speak.  The Democratic Party hierarchy was pretty clever in devising the concept of Super-Delegates.  They knew they had a mixed bag of potential nominees and just couldn’t totally trust their rank and file to select the candidate with the best chance of winning in November should the contest be close.  And close it is indeed and now the Super-Delegates will be able to chose the candidate with the best chance of beating McCain----whoever that is!!!!!

Comments from Rep. Nancy Pelosi, (D) California, are about as useless as GW Bush and Co. promising to follow the Constitution.  Ms. Pelosi, has absolutely no credibility with the voters and the general public, reasons are many but among them the caving into the current administrations demands for the funding of the immoral and illegal takeover of a sovereign nation, Iraq. The Democrats as a party have not stood as the opposition and firmly rejected the demands of an illegitimate and otherwise immoral president.  For Ms. Pelosi, to stand and say that the votes of the people of Florida and Michigan, cannot and should not count towards the eventual nominee, is beyond the pale of decency and fairness.  Yet, the Democratic Party, has the nerve to solicit funds for the campaign for the President of the US. How dare they disenfranchise the voters of two key states and then have the gall to solicit funds for the Democratic Party.  I am appalled at the lack of fundamental fairness and decency that the Democratic Party has shown in the run-up to the nominating convention and have serious doubts that this party, is the voice of the people that it so loudly proclaims.  Can we, the American public trust any organization that regularly backs people who are beholden to special interests and corporations that use their millions of dollars to obtain access to the candidates?  I would surely hope, that this would be the case. But sadly to say, this is the hard truth of the matter and without reform of both parties, Democrat and Republican, we the people will not have any say in the running of our government.  What I believe is that to have any control over the burgeoning and systemic corporate takeover of the government of the US is a citizens revolt, which would drive out the greedy and selfish corporations from the halls of power and replace them with ideals which the founding fathers envisioned.  The Preamble to the Constitution, said it best and if we cannot abide by this system then we must take up the mantle of dissent and force those in Washington to listen to us and work not for the corporate welfare, but the common good of all the citizens of the US.

OK, Nancy bashing seems to be taking center stage here. Far be it from me to scold, because no-one is more guilty of Nancy bashing than me, but maybe we should pay attention to what she’s saying here for the right [no inference intended] reasons.

Nancy sees the potential chaos that could come out of seating a candidate by virtue of previously made up minds. Rather than by virtue of the obvious “voice of the people.”

This may prove to be a problem for those who seeing their candidate fall behind are counting on the superdelegate vote to put the “behinder” ahead. [couldn’t help it] Likewise, it would be a problem for those seeing their candidate ahead deprived of the nomination because of pre-pledged superdelegates.

Maybe nobody knew about the whole superdelegate issue before. There are people who never pay attention. And maybe the righteous outrage that will surely come from Florida and Michigan is a real wound in the side of the Democrat Party, but those States did know the rules. Whether or not the rules were arbitrary or blatantly fickle, they were in place, and the individual States initially had signed on.

[By the way, this is one instance where we actually need to give credit to mainstreammedia. Because few of us would know about superdelegates if they hadn’t raised the issue.]

The real fault here lies with the Party Leaders in those States. Followed close by the Party Leaders nationally. There needs to be a REAL effort made before the next go-around to decide exactly what will guide the individual States to set their primary/caucus dates. Those decisions when made, need to reflect a standard accepted across the board, by everybody.

Meanwhile, I for one am very glad to see Nancy take this position. It tells me some of those e-mails, Fax’s, phone calls and petitions are getting through. And Party leadership is/are paying attention to them. This is important, because over the last couple of weeks a few superdelegates, when contacted by the press have said they will not switch their previously given pledge to one or the other candidates. Nancy’s message clearly puts them on notice that they will be expected to listen to the “voice of the people.”

It needs to be noted, when you start plowing through local papers, those superdelegates who remain uncommitted state they will throw their vote behind the candidate who gets the most popular votes. The few who say they will base their choice on who they view as the most “electable” are, interestingly enough, the ones that have been in the establishment “echo chamber” the longest.

It really is a non-issue. I think we can all agree no matter who the democrat candidate is, they are in for a shit-load of garbage getting dumped on them, because that’s the way the republicans campaign.

In a perfect world, a new election in Florida and Michigan would be called for. But this isn’t a perfect world. And besides, when you put this in the context of a race to win, how many races are stopped mid-run so the rules can be changed? I cant think of any. If it proves the rules were unfair, or arbitrary they are addressed and changed before the next race.

I say thank you Nancy. Obviously, in this situation you are listening to the “voice of the people”.

Ms. Pelosi has become the poster child for the saying “You have to go along to get along” and in so doing given us voters every reason to doubt that something will change.  So why did she say what she did?  Is she worried that the decision will be made by Howard Dean?  Is she coppering her bet?  And what about the voters in Florida and Michigan, will they still follow the party choice if they are left out of the selection process?  Lets face it, some part of the progressive side of our thinking wants to praise those states for breaking with the party line but then some sort of reasonable side says “But they did break the rules”.  Maybe her speech is actually a call for help in the sense that she wants feedback early enough to make a decision that will keep the party on track to win this election?  Think she’ll read these posts?

Yes nancy, be on the lookout for cindy Nov 4.  I hope she cleans your clock.

^ that because of Pelosi the voters are shunning Hillary?  Pelosi hasn’t exacty been a guiding light.

Along with the McCain camp, Nancy Pelosi endorses Barack Obama - by inference! Now what does that mean.....???

In the government, there is a senate as well as a congress. In the Democrats’ heirarchy, there are delegates as well as super-delegates.

One is supposedly there to correct the errors and over-enthusiasms of the other. But no, we don’t want that to interrupt the NWO agenda, either.

So never mind if the Democrats nomination scramble destroys a viable and successful TEAM as long as ONE candidate is more popular than the other in the end.

What does that leave them with when the real contest begins? A three-legged horse or a two-legged dog??? This is a path to self-destruction for the Democrats and an end to democracy for the USA.

Considering the fact that she is overwhelmingly a Hillary supporter. Wonder what prompted her to do this?

Too bad her sincerity is consistently in question. Yep, Ms. Impeachment-off-the-table Pelosi has not a shred of credibility as a legislature entrusted and elected to do the business of the people. WHy should anybody believe anything she says?

Besides, she can’t even close her eyes. The lids are permanently botoxed in place. Seems like she’d be worried about the latest warnings from the FDA on that stuff.

More lectures Nancy?

Be sure and give anyone who breaks the rules a good talking to.

That’ll snap em back in line.