Chicago Rules Committee

The great day has arrived. Today something historic will happen.

No, we don’t expect common sense to prevail today at the Rules Committee meeting. We don’t expect the voters of Florida and Michigan will have the votes they cast, as they cast them, respected or counted.

But something else, will happen.

That something is what Nancy Pelosi, the Katherine Harris of this election cycle, fears most. That something is what Howard Dean, author of the 48 state strategy fears most. That something is what Donna Brazille fears most, That something is what Barack Obama fears most.

The Barack Obama/Howard Dean 48 State Losing Strategy

* * *

Recall the arguments that Obama used to make. “To know me is to love me” Obama would say. ‘My supporters won’t vote for Hillary but Hillary supporters will vote for me’.

Now Obama knows better.

In many quarters, to know Obama is to loathe him. In poll after poll, state after state what is clear is that Hillary supporters – women, latinos, white working class voters, rural voters, African-American Hillary supporters – will NOT vote for Obama under any circumstances.

Yet, smart people like Celinda Lake (and dummies in Big Media) continue to make the argument that Hillary Clinton supporters will “come home” to the Democratic Party no matter who the nominee is. These usually smart people are betting that Democrats will be force fed “unity” and will eventually vote for the nominee of the Democratic Party based on issues.

[We will resume our series Voting For Barack Obama, Part III early this coming week and analyze why Obama cannot be trusted on any issues and why it makes sense to reject Obama – on the issues (abortion, Supreme Court appointees, gay rights, healthcare, Iraq, NAFTA).]

The argument of these usually smart people collapses when we look at what will happen today.

The historic event today will NOT be the Rules Committee meeting.

The historic event today will be the organizing that will take place in advance of November.

In most election cycles, Democrats fall in line and fight for the nominee. In 2004 Dean, Edwards, and Clark supporters all fell in line immediately when it was apparent that Kerry would be the nominee. Kerry won the popular vote and more delegates than all his opponents by far. After March Kerry effectively won every primary by wide margins. Early in the 2004 cycle all Kerry opponents had conceded. Not so in 2008.

In 2008, Hillary will have won the popular vote. Hillary has won the most votes from Democrats. The primary elections continue into June. The candidate – Hillary Clinton – opposed by the Democratic Party establishment and Big Media continues to win, by 40% margins, late primaries. The revulsion, with the force fed on Democrats Obama, grows.

So what historic event will happen today?

The historic event is that the majority of Democrats will begin to organize 3 months before the Democratic? convention in opposition to the force fed, Big Media, candidate. 3 months before the Democratic? convention Democrats will be gathering emails and other contact information to fight against the Democratic? Party establishment.

Today networks of Hillary supporters from all parts of the United States will meet and organize and plan and build lists and circulate millions of emails day after day – 3 months before the Democratic? convention – all without costing a cent.

In late August, the Democratic? convention, 3 months before the general election, will be forced to vote to disenfranchise the voters of 2 very big and very important swing states.

Today, the Hillary Clinton army will make it clear that there will be no November “unity”, no “healing” without Hillary at the Helm.

* * *

The Rules Committee meets today, May 31, 2008 from 9:30 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. The meeting will be at the Marriott-Wardman Park Hotel, 2660 Woodley Road, NW, Washington D.C.

Hillary Supporters will rally at 7:00 a.m. (ET) until about 4:00 p.m. outside the hotel.

C-SPAN will broadcast the Rules Committee live. Broadcast starts at 9:30 a.m. (EST). Watch online HERE

Before the Rules Committee broadcast, C-SPAN will host a call in program on Washington Journal. The call-in program will be from 7:00 a.m. until 9:30 a.m.

Washington Journal: Support Democrats (202) 737-0002,
Washington Journal: Support Pres. Bush (202) 737-0001,
Washington Journal: Support Others (202) 628-0205

Congressman Robert Wexler will represent Obama from 7:15-7:30 a.m.

From 7:30 to 8:00 a.m. Gordon Trowbridge of the Detroit News will answer questions.

From 8:00 to 8:30 a.m. Congresswoman Corrine Brown of Florida will speak on behalf of Hillary Clinton.

“>Obama not getting the votes of Hillary supporters.

A New Birth Of Freedom

The Democratic Party is in the first stages of a Civil War.

It is a war that must be fought.

The Democratic Chairman, Howard Dean, is a tragically blind figure whose legacy will not be the “50 state strategy” he promised to implement. Instead Howard Dean will be remembered as the chairman of the 48 (47? 46?) state strategy.

The Howard Dean folly of the 48 state strategy is compounded by a twisted definition of “unity” propounded by Democratic? establishment figures who have sought for months to shut down the primary elections. This past April:

An increasingly firm Howard Dean told CNN again Thursday that he needs superdelegates to say who they’re for – and “I need them to say who they’re for starting now.”

“We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time,” the Democratic National Committee Chairman told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “We’ve got to know who our nominee is.”

It might be news to Chairman Dean, but we know who our nominee is — Hillary Clinton.

It apparently is also news to Chairman Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi but now is not the time for healing – now is the time for fighting. And we will fight. We are joined by millions of women, latinos, white working class, and rural voters, and a small but tough, smart, and tenaciously loyal under withering attacks, group of African-Americans.

“Healing” will not take place by the audacity of hope and band-aids. The “unity” Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi want is the “shut-up” kind. We are not shutting up.

* * *

E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post has been writing obtuse columns about Hillary and the presidential nomination race. In one particularly silly piece Dionne premised that Hillary will have to abandon efforts to block Obama’s nomination. She can keep fighting, or she can become a powerful figure in the Democratic Party. She cannot do both. Dionne forgets the Ted Kennedy example. Kennedy fought all the way to the convention in 1980 against a sitting Democratic president, lost, and returned to the Senate more powerful than ever. Of course, Kennedy was a man.

Today, Dionne writes another silly article. Dionne starts off on the right foot. The premise is that women are angry about how Hillary Clinton has been treated during this campaign. However, Dionne spends the entire article only talking to “leading female politicians”. Dionne’s narrative seeks to diminish Hillary as a “politician” and limit the anger to other “female politicians”. News flash for Dionne: women, women from all strata are angry.

How much anger is there among women about how Hillary Clinton has been treated during this campaign? Some of the nation’s leading female politicians will tell you: quite a lot.

From the beginning, she’s been treated very badly,” says Therese Murray, president of the Massachusetts Senate. “No woman would have run with Obama’s résumé. She wouldn’t have been considered.” But Clinton has been “demonized by the press and the talking heads. How do you get away with that?”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) says she is regularly approached “by women of all races, of all ages, of all faiths. They stop me, grab my hand and say, ‘Look what they’ve done to her, we were so close.’ They wanted this for their daughters and granddaughters. . . . It’s so heartbreaking.”

For Rep. Darlene Hooley (D-Ore.), the evidence that “sexism reigns supreme” lay in the wide availability of offensive anti-Hillary paraphernalia in stores and on the Internet. For Barbara Johnson, president of the Minneapolis City Council, Clinton may have been the victim of “ageism” as much as sexism. The message, she said, was: “Your time is past, it’s time for somebody new to take your place.”

Many women, said Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), “knew we had made many strides. They asked, ‘Aren’t we past this? What’s going on?’ They’re not happy with what they see as sexism, permitted by the media and in some cases encouraged by the media.”

The silliest part of Dionne’s article is in painting Obama as an innocent in the sexist campaign:

If there is good news for Barack Obama in any of this, it is that the rage felt by Clinton’s female supporters is directed in large part toward the media. “The anger is aimed much more at you all,” said Lt. Gov. Elizabeth Roberts of Rhode Island. Added Murray: “Obama wouldn’t have gotten to where he got today if it weren’t for the bias of the male media — no offense.”

It’s true that campaigns and political movements use anger as a bargaining chip. The message is: Appease us or we will cause trouble. The Clinton campaign is hoping that such rage will strengthen its hand in the battle to seat pro-Clinton Michigan and Florida delegations at the party’s national convention, even though those states held early primaries in violation of party rules.

But the conversations I had this week with prominent female politicians from around the country who support Clinton suggest that the fury and disappointment is more than short-term maneuvering. In many cases, it is rooted in the empathy of women who themselves broke gender barriers at various levels of politics.

Instead of “no offense” Murray should have said ‘offense intended E.J.’. Dionne does not examine himself nor his sexist Big Media buddies. Instead Dionne tries his best to paint the anger of women, or rather the “female politicians” he interviewed as whiny, “dream deferred” weepers. That’s not the case buddy.

A better job is done by David Paul Kuhn at Politico. Kuhn did not restrict his interviews to “female politicians”. Kuhn relied on empirical data instead of force feeding his opinions via selected quotes from “female politicians”.

Barack Obama’s favorability ratings among white women have declined significantly in recent months, particularly among Democrats and independents, presenting an immediate obstacle for the likely Democratic nominee as he moves to shore up his party’s base.

According to a new report by The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, half of white women now have a negative perception of Obama.

Forty-nine percent of white women view Obama unfavorably, while only 43 percent hold a favorable opinion. In February, 36 percent of these women viewed Obama unfavorably, while 56 percent had a positive perception of the likely Democratic nominee.

Over the same period, Democratic white women’s negative view of Obama increased from 21 percent to 35 percent, while their positive view decreased from 72 percent to 60 percent — roughly the same rate as white women overall.

Kuhn, utilizing empirical data, raises the question which Howard Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi do not want asked. Dean/Obama/Braille/Pelosi want the “healing” and “unity” narrative to be accepted as fact. The question remains: whether white women’s support for Clinton would translate into problems for Obama in the general election.

Pew also found that among self-described Clinton supporters, the negative shift against Obama is more severe among women than among men.

The Pew findings come as Obama’s campaign struggles to close up the primary race while also attempting to avoid the perception of pushing Hillary Rodham Clinton out, for fear of offending her most loyal supporters — the largest bloc of which are white women.

Still unknown is whether white women’s support for Clinton would translate into problems for Obama in the general election.

Kuhn aptly takes note that usually, after most primary fights, there is Party unity. But, Kuhn also notes that this time it is different – Hillary supporters are not going to fall into the “healing” or “unity” trap.

Intraparty divisions that arise during the primary season are typically mended over the course of the general election. Bill Clinton struggled with college-educated Democrats in the 1992 primary, as John F. Kerry did with young Democratic voters in the early stages of the 2004 race. Both candidates won back these blocs in the general election.

But the Democratic primary race of 2008 is without modern precedent, insofar as black support for Obama and white female support for Clinton are tied up in the symbolism of each candidate’s historic presidential bid.

“There is some sense of the visceral investment with Clinton,” said Celinda Lake, a Democratic strategist. Lake believes once the general election is under way, these same white women will gradually move away from McCain over issues, with the expectation that Clinton will campaign on Obama’s behalf if he is the nominee.

“In the long run, women will watch Hillary Clinton’s reaction, how she’s treated by Barack Obama,” Lake added.

This is not about injured feelings. This is not about whiny women. This is about a Big Media tool Chicago thug who has used sexism, race-baiting, and gay-bashing to trash Hillary and her supporters in order to implement a vision of the Democratic Party which we find repugnant.

It is about issues Hillary supporters care about. It is about trust in the experience and wisdom of Hillary Clinton and distrust and disbelief in the cult of Obama.

White women as a whole now prefer John McCain over Obama, by 49 percent to 41 percent. Last month, Obama was ahead of McCain among white women, 49 percent to 46 percent. The head-to-head matchup between McCain and Obama has not significantly shifted among white men.

“There is no question that white women were — especially older women, not young women — Hillary’s Clinton’s base in the primary, and there is going to be some repair work that has to be done,” Democratic analyst Anna Greenberg said. “There is no reason to believe that these Democratic white women are not pursuable.

“The priority is going to be to bring back these voters,” Greenberg added.

Kellyanne Conway, a Republican pollster who has worked with Lake on surveys of women, said that “the steady shift of white women away from Barack Obama” could prove “enduring heading into November.”

“These women have two issues at the top of their agenda that require experience and reasonableness—war and economy,” Conway said. “For many of these women, when they hear Barack Obama talk about change they hear revolution, not incrementalism.

Obama is not only unqualified to be president, Obama is also unelectable. Obama cannot win sufficient women, latinos nor white working class and rural voters to come close to winning.

Democrats have come closest to capturing the White House by winning minorities by large margins and nearly splitting white women, as they did in 2000. Republicans have generally relied on their dominance with white men to put them in the White House, while winning at least half the vote among white women.

Obama, and the new monstrous Democratic? Party (weathy white educated eggheads, students and African-Americans; no to latinos, white working class, women) he wants to inflict on us, is unelectable.

Obama, his allies, and his ugly vision for the Democratic Party must be fought and defeated – only then will there be an opportunity for “healing” – however long it takes – however many election cycles are required.

Women will lead the way to a return to the Party of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Women will give birth to the new Democratic Party.

Barack Obama’s Church

The Katherine Harris of this election cycle – Nancy Pelosi -is making threats.

Hillary Clinton has hinted that she is prepared to take her fight to fully seat Florida and Michigan all the way to the party’s convention in late August, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says that’s not going to happen.

In an interview with her hometown newspaper, the San Francisco Chronicle, the California Democrat said she is prepared to “step in” if the presidential race does not resolve itself by the end of next month.

“I will step in,” Pelosi told the paper. “Because we cannot take this fight to the convention…It must be over before then.”

Pelosi, who will serve as chair of the convention, has largely stayed on the sidelines during her party’s prolonged primary race. But the House Speaker has said Democratic superdelegates should not overturn the pledged delegate winner, and has warned of irreparable harm if they do so. Barack Obama officially won the majority of pledged delegates in last Tuesday’s primary contests, though it’s been clear for several weeks Clinton could not overtake him in that category.

Pelosi also indicated she opposes the Clinton campaign’s desire that both Florida and Michigan’s delegations be fully seated at the convention. The party stripped both states of their entire delegations last year after they moved their presidential primaries ahead in the nominating calendar.

Pelosi said she agreed the two states should be seated in some way, but said only “in a way that is not destructive to any sense of order in the party.”

If you have no order and no discipline in terms of party rules, people will be having their primary in the year before the presidential election,” she said. “So there has to be some penalty.”

The Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee meets Saturday in Washington to consider exactly how to seat both states. It’s likely the committee will vote to meet the rule-breaking states halfway — a move that will help Clinton close the delegate gap with Obama but not overtake him.

Nancy Pelosi increasingly sounds like the drag-queen director of “The Producers” stomping his foot calling for “order, we must have order” while rehearsing the big musical number “Springtime For Hitler”. The drag-queen director, like Nancy Pelosi, completely unaware of the irony of what he is saying.

Little wonder that we have called for Pelosi to resign as a co-chair of the Democratic Convention because she has proven over and over again she is not a fair and neutral minister in this Democratic nomination race.

Instead of stomping her heels, Nancy should consult Ted Kennedy and ask him why he fought all the way to the convention against an incumbent Democratic president in 1980.

Nancy also needs to worry more about Republicans and what they will do to Obama.

At any moment, Republicans in the U.S. Senate could ask for an ethics investigation into the purchase of Obama’s house. Contrary to what Obama supporters say, the questions about the Rezko/Obama house have never been investigated. Obama helped Rezko entities acquire funding from taxpayers in the tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars. Rezko “assisted” Obama in the purchase of the big mansion Michelle had her eyes on. Republicans will not, unlike Democrats, avert their eyes to these ethical questions.

Republican hypocrites, who prevented the votes of Florida from being counted in 2000, are now calling out Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi on the hypocrisy of the Democratic? Party and the Obama protection racket.

The Democrats begrudge the 2000 Bush-Gore Florida recount. They blithely complain when Republicans seek valid measures preventing voter fraud. Why then, are the Democrats suddenly blind, deaf, and dumb when Senator Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee openly avow to disenfranchise voters 1,749,920 in Florida and 594,398 in Michigan? Not only are Obama and the DNC perpetrating a “hi-tech” lynching, but it is blatantly unconstitutional and may even be criminal.

The Democrats allege Florida and Michigan violated the DNC Rule 11.A prohibiting a caucus or primary before Iowa, Nevada and New Hampshire. DNC Rule 20.C.1 specifies the punitive measures that both states lose 50% of their vote: Florida 210 delegates, Michigan 156 delegates. The DNC Rules Committee will be meeting this coming Saturday, May 31 to hear Obama’s utterly bizarre plan allowing only the superdelegates (ironically the votes he desperately needs to capture the nomination) to be seated, while delegates elected by popular suffrage are repudiated by being half-counted, oddly reminiscent of a colonial enumeration of freed “Black Men and Indians.”

By why is there even a debate? Constitutional law is unequivocal. Every vote cast must be counted. This constitutional principle, pronounced by the United States Supreme Court since Ex parte Yarborough (1884) and reiterated as recently as Gray v. Sanders (1963), is simply beyond reproach. This rock-bottom constitutional demand applies to primaries as well as general elections. United States v. Classic (1941). Deliberately refusing to count votes cast may, under certain fact scenarios, constitute a Federal crime, United States v. Classic, citing now Section 241 of the Federal Crimes Code. Reiterating black letter law stated in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966), the high court reasserted in Bush v. Gore (2000) that “once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.”

Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi have turned against the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), now the Senate Judiciary’s ranking minority member, asserted to us in an exclusive interview, that although as a learned attorney he remains obliged to see “how it plays out,” that “it may well be worthwhile” to hold Congressional hearings on the Democrats’ refusal to seat Florida and Michigan at the Democratic National Convention. “It’s certainly something I want to consider,” said Specter, ruefully hinting things might be different if he was still the Judiciary Chairman. “The essence of democracy is the right to vote,” asserted Specter, the Democrat’s contemplation of not seating Florida and Michigan may constitute a fundamental violation of democratic principles. He believes that the Congress must act “very promptly.”

Specter emphasized while Republicans are striking bold initiatives such as GOP onDemand™ to promote full voter inclusiveness, the Democrats’ direction in the opposite direction is more than paradoxical, it is “hypocrisy.” “They are preaching one thing and practicing another” angrily complained the former prosecutor, who long fought the legendary Philadelphia Democratic machine’s ghost voting and other voter frauds. [snip]

Specter reminds Obama that it is fully within the Congress’ prerogative to investigate the Democrats’ machinations; the presumption that political parties as private entities are immune from oversight or court intervention has long been judicially discredited. Specter also suggested that Florida’s Governor Charlie Crist or Attorney General Bill McCollum and Michigan’s Attorney General Michael Cox or Secretary of State Terri Land Lynn contemplate what would be required to be prepared on June 2 to go into Federal court paren patriae to see emergency injunctive relief under “Section 1983,” the legal parlance for the Civil Rights “Anti-Ku Klux Klan” Act of 1871, if the DNC May 31 hearings fail to adhere to the fundamental one-man, one-vote constitutional rule.

The Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi wing of the Democratic? Party have surrendered the high moral ground to Republican hypocrites. Republicans lecturing Democrats on voting rights is an outrage. But so low have Dean/Obama/Brazille/Pelosi bought the Democratic? Party that Democrats are now morally defenseless on what used to be core Democratic principles.

Can it possibly be that Republicans at their convention will fully enfranchise the voters of Florida and Michigan while the Democratic? Party will disenfranchise millions of voters?

And while the GOP concedes Florida’s early calendaring of the Presidential primary caused consternation, at least the “Republicans counted Florida, in stark contrast to the Democrats who didn’t count Florida,” according to RNC’s Alex Conant. Highly reliable sources inform me that Senator John McCain is absolute in insisting on fully seating both Florida and Michigan delegations without any penalties, and as one source put it “what the nominee wants, he likely gets.”

Michigan State Republican Chairman Saul Anuzi, one of the most conscientious and public-spirited leaders in either party, reiterated the bipartisan efforts throughout Michigan to seat fellow Wolverines at the Democratic convention, as it is beyond reproach that “every vote deserves to be counted.” Anuzi, remains as baffled as everyone as to the Obama’s “apologists” spin-doctoring Michigan’s ostracization, warning voter anger from Obama’s boycott of Michigan is not “going away” by a “perfunctory photo-op.”

Florida’ National Republican Committeeman Paul Senft pointed to the hypocrisy of Obama “using Florida as an ATM” while agreeing in writing, to refuse to “talk to voters.” Senft’s courtly manner couldn’t disguise his own frustration of the irony of liberals resurrecting the “ghosts of 2000″ in the recent HBO movie while openly disenfranchising the very same Floridian voters.

Democrats with any intellectual honesty know the Republicans have a point – a hypocritical point, but a point never-the-less.

Several prominent civil rights attorneys, obviously speaking off the record being mindful they’re outsiders, nonetheless told us that the without question, Democrats must fully seat the Florida and Michigan delegations. (Their response was as if we were asking a “no-brainer” akin to whether kids be eating their vegetables). The universal consensus that the possibility of embroiling the Democratic presidential nominee in criminal proceedings in the midst of a campaign unquestionably should not be a risk worth entertaining.

They also routinely disbelieve Obama’s contention Florida and Michigan must be punished for violating party rules, which although viscerally appealing, is utterly fallacious as a matter of law. If Obama was purportedly “upset” at Florida and Michigan primary dates, he was required by law to act before the primary vote, not afterwards. It is fundamental law that Equity hears not the Sloth coming into court.

Democratic response to Specter is deafening by their utterly stolid silence. DNC press secretary Stacy Paxton did not respond to our phone calls to her office and cell.

Liberal entities such as the Center for American Progress failed to respond. MoveOn (which we, the Trustees of the Republican Leadership Trust are the newly established GOP counterpart) avoids direct press contact by hiding behind a digital wall that requires the Fourth Estate to be vetted through an Orwellian email screening process.

Obama’s response is his website promoting a “National Voter Protection Center” urging us that “in this year’s election we have a historic opportunity to bring more people than ever back to the political process and an essential part of that is ensuring every vote counts.”

Obama reputes that he was a prominent civil rights attorney, litigating hundreds of voting rights cases. In his September 28, 2007 Howard University speech, Obama implores: “The [students] who left their homes to march in the streets of Birmingham and Montgomery; the mothers who walked instead of taking the bus after a long day of doing somebody else’s laundry — they didn’t brave fire hoses and Billy clubs so that their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren would still wonder at the beginning of the 21st century whether their vote would be counted . . .” Come again?

Even the ACLU, the “stalwart” Constitutional guardian, prolifically “promising” to get back, failed to produce a single person to justify Obama. And this is despite pleading, as I was once, an ACLU board member for several years, albeit a lone conservative Republican in a sea of liberal, Democratic activists.

If this is so black and white, so basic Constitutional jurisprudence, why isn’t the press demanding someone’s head on a platter? Why are the liberal activists, who defend Mumia Adu-Jamal without blinking an eye, suddenly blind as two million Americans lose their right to vote? Is the Pelosi-Reid Political Correct Doublespeak so powerful as to usurp the very essence of our democracy? No matter where one hails on the political spectrum, as my fellow co-Trustee, Fred Hess, who also serves as an advisor to the son of the legendary Frank Rizzo, observed “there is never an excuse, under any circumstances, to defy the right to vote.

Go to www.GOPonDemand.com right now to learn how you can help stop the Obama/ Democrat/ MoveOn doublespeak and require the Democrats obey the 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection under law. In America, absolutely no one deserves his ballot ripped up by the liberal Democrats. The students and mothers who marched in the streets of Birmingham deserve better, Mr. Obama, and it isn’t you.

Can any Democrat say, after 2000, that we could ever imagine a day when the Democratic? Party could be so humiliated, so defenseless, so morally bankrupt, in comparison to the Republican rhetoric? Deeds, not words, should be the Democratic compass. Hillary is fighting for voting rights, Obama is fighting against voting rights.

The now invisible on Big Media broadcasts, Craig Crawford calls out Obama on his hypocrisy and lies too.

Among the myths surrounding the Democratic fight over seating delegates from Florida and Michigan, one that stands out is a persistent inference that Barack Obama was somehow involuntarily kept off the Michigan primary ballot.

Obama chose to have his name erased from the Michigan ballot — a decision that now presents one of the thorniest issues for the Democratic National Committee’s rules panel meeting on Saturday to hear arguments in this dispute.

How can delegates be awarded to someone who was not even on the ballot? In sports, that would be like giving points to a team that forfeits the game.

The Obama camp signaled on Wednesday that the Democratic frontrunner is willing to concede some Florida and Michigan delegates to Hillary Rodham Clinton, but questions such as what to do about Obama’s Michigan forfeit still hang.

It was the Illinois senator’s written and personally signed request to the Michigan Secretary of State’s office on Oct. 8, 2007, that prompted his exclusion. Obama’s choice to stay off the ballot was a conscious political maneuver designed to please Iowa Democrats angered by Michigan’s early primary date.

Clinton, to her detriment in Iowa, chose to stay on Michigan’s ballot. As strange as some of Clinton’s demands might seem to be in this matter, it would be truly bizarre to give any Michigan delegates to a candidate who voluntarily took his name off the ballot.

More invisible man Crawford:

Myths abound in the latest Florida vote-count fight. For starters, this is not the fault of state Democratic leaders. The Republican-controlled state legislature, directed by its GOP governor Charlie Crist, created this situation.

Sure, Florida Democrats did not vigorously oppose the Republican plan to move up Florida’s primary on the calendar, defying the rules in both parties. Instead, they negotiated a deal to ensure a paper trail in all future balloting.

And for their efforts in leveraging a position of weakness to gain something helpful for future elections, Florida Democrats get hammered by a Democratic National Committee intent on diminishing the state’s influence in naming a presidential nominee.

Why did national Democrats fear Florida so much? It is, after all, the nation’s largest swing state.

Um, Craig, we all know the answer to your Florida fear question. Obama could not win Florida and Michigan so an excuse was created to disenfranchise their votes. The votes of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina – states which violated the same “rule” as Florida and Michigan – were counted because Obama expected to win there.

* * *

Hillary is fighting for the voting rights of Florida and Michigan voters. Hillary is also campaigning in Puerto Rico. Ricky Martin endorsed Hillary yesterday. The few polls from Puerto Rico look good. Here is a first hand report on Hillary and Bill in Puerto Rico:

I want to share with all of you my glorious day yesterday with Hillary, Bill and Chelsea, here in Puerto Rico. That is how I will always think of it. My friend, a staunch Hillary supporter, who is a biochemist with a Ph.D. (mentioned for those who would assume we are all racist high-school drop-outs) and I went to the Memorial Day Ceremony in Old San Juan, in which Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton would be speaking. We parked the car a good distance away to avoid the traffic and hiked into Old San Juan — a cliff dropping down from our right to the ocean. My friend was wearing her Hillary t-shirt and carrying a sign that said “Puertorriqueños con Hillary”, and I was waving a Hillary flag that said “Hillary para Presidenta”.

The Ceremony was held in front of a memorial monument with the names of all the Puerto Rican soldiers who have been killed in all the wars since World War 1 that America has fought in. My friend and I waited on a little hill under a date palm for the VIPs to arrive. The sunlight was in that golden stage and a slight breeze was blowing. Though not overly-conspicuous, the Secret Service were all around. I could imagine their eyes darting left and right behind their dark shades.

When the photographers started running, we knew we would soon see the Clinton family appear. A cheer went up when we spotted them. Hillary was in her yellow jacket and was dazzlingly beautiful. Handsome Bill looked rather red — I hope he got red from having had a chance to lie by a pool in the sunshine! Chelsea looked radiant. They crossed an area between two fountains to the outdoor stage, and my friend and I had a perfect view of them on stage where they went to sit.

There was a hush when Senator Clinton finally began to speak, after the rituals of the anthems, the military flag presentations, and the preliminary speeches. It was not a political event, but a somber and dignified Memorial Day ceremony. Her words were moving and inspiring. One couldn’t help but picture her as President of the United States.

Afterwards, my friend and I went to the campaign headquarters, where the Clintons would be. There was a crush of people, and at first the Secret Service wouldn’t let anyone else go in, but we finally managed to get inside. First, Chelsea came out to greet people. She is such a lovely young woman. Then Bill came out. It was hard to get close, but my friend pulled me by the hand and wormed us through the crowd.

I was holding a college yearbook that i was hoping I could get Bill to sign. My friend, who is more daring than me, said we should hold up the open book and yell, “Georgetown! Georgetown!”, which we did. You see, Bill Clinton and I were undergraduate students at Georgetown at the same time. We were both on the East Campus — he in Foreign Service and I in Linguistics. The page with his picture as class president finally caught his eye, and he autographed it for me, right above his name on the page where you see his signature as “William J. Clinton”. This time he signed “Bill Clinton”. Times have changed!

My friend and I will have cherished memories of “our day with the Clintons”. It will be something to tell my future grandchildren about when I show them the college yearbook with the signature of the 42nd President of the United States.

Democrats For A Day

The “Democrats for a Day” also known as “Democrats for a Messiah” a.k.a. “The Suicide Cult” are coming to Washington. Like the Bush operatives in 2000 these “Democrats” are coming to Washington to prevent Florida votes from counting. And to prevent Michigan votes from counting.

Hillary supporters, fighting FOR the voting rights of Florida and Michigan will be in Washington too.

The Democratic National Committee is bracing itself for protests outside its Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting on Saturday in Washington, where the fates of the Florida and Michigan primaries could finally be decided.

Supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton are organizing to march and then gather on the street outside the panel’s meeting, scheduled for Saturday morning at a hotel in Northwest Washington.

“They’re coming up on buses, they’re taking the train, they’re Metro-ing, they’re coming up with friends,” said Allida Black, a professor at George Washington University and an event organizer. “We’re trying to flood it.”
[snip]

Ms. Black is behind the newly formed political action committee, WomenCount, which has been running full-page ads in newspapers for the last two weeks in support of Mrs. Clinton. She said the rally will be staged on a grassy area outside the Marriot – Wardman Park Hotel in the Woodley Park neighborhood in Washington, and that the group has been granted permission to assemble several blocks to the north near the National Zoo for a 10-minute march to the hotel. Jehmu Greene, a former president of Rock the Vote, will address the crowd at the rally.

Public tickets to observe the meeting have already been snapped up, said Stacie Paxton, a spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee. On Tuesday morning, the Democratic National Committee opened online pre-registration for public seating, and the several hundred tickets disappeared within minutes.

“There’s been overwhelming public interest,” Ms. Paxton said. (C-Span is also expected to broadcast the meeting.)

The members of the public who managed to reserve seats will be able to listen to the proceedings, but not participate. The committee will begin the meeting at 9:30 a.m., listen to oral arguments, and then debate amongst themselves after a lunch break.

On its Web site, the Democratic National Committee has advised the public that “in order to maintain the decorum of the meeting, banners, posters, signs, handouts, and noisemakers of any kind are strictly prohibited.”

If they cannot come to a decision this weekend, the committee refers all outstanding business to the party’s credentials committee.

Hillary Hater Roger Simon, writing propaganda for the Obama campaign’s views on the voting rights of Florida and Michigan, is wrong once again – the Democratic meltdown is NOT coming – the meltdown is here.

Those people who believe all problems have solutions may be unfamiliar with the inner workings of the Democratic Party.

On Saturday, the party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee will try to solve a big problem, in order to avoid a huge problem in order to prevent a train wreck. [snip]

The rules committee will try to work out a compromise Saturday to try to seat those states in some form or fashion. It will be difficult, and the 30 members of the committee, who come from all over the nation, have been warned to keep their hotel rooms Saturday night, because the meeting may go into Sunday.

The huge problem is what happens if one side or another does not like the rules committee’s compromise. In that case, the controversy would go to the 186-member Credentials Committee, which will convene in July or August.

And if that happens, the party will be presented with a possible train wreck: Whatever the Credentials Committee decides will have to be voted on by the Convention in late August as its first order of business. And this could create what the media might love but the party dreads: a floor fight in Denver.

The growing revulsion with the Democratic? National Committee and its disenfranchisement of Florida and Michigan voters is growing. The woman hating sexism of the Obama campaign aided and abetted by big name Democrats and Big Media is leading to a ‘Democrats on Strike’ November. Even the usually placid Joan Walsh is waking up.

The fix is in Joan.

At the earlier Rules Committee meeting where the disenfranchisement of Florida and Michigan took place, Florida Democratis presented a strong case. Florida Democrats argued that the Republican legislature selected the date of the primary and with the overwhelming control of the legislature by Republicans – Democrats were blameless in the selection of the primary date. The Rules Committee broke its own rules and stripped Florida of 100% of its delegates.

Today the Rules Committee has already decided that they will NOT seat Florida and Michigan at full strength.

A Democratic Party rules committee has the authority to restore delegates from Michigan and Florida but not fully seat the two states at the convention as Hillary Rodham Clinton wants, according to a party analysis.

Party rules require that the two states lose at least half of their convention delegates for holding elections too early, Democratic National Committee lawyers wrote in a 38-page memo.

The memo was sent late Tuesday to the 30 members of the party’s Rules and Bylaws Committee, which plans to meet Saturday to consider the fate of convention delegates from the two states. The party is considering plans to restore at least some of the delegates to make sure the two important general election battlegrounds will be included at the nominating convention in August.

So the fix is in. The Democratic? National Committee’s Rules Committee will vote Saturday for a convention floor fight.

Senator Carl Levin of Michigan has already said:

U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, one of the architects of Michigan’s early primary, said he would support a convention-floor fight if Michigan’s full delegation isn’t seated – though Levin signaled he was less concerned about how many delegates are awarded to Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama. [snip]

Levin said he supports taking the issue to the floor if Michigan isn’t fully seated. “If we’re punished in any way by the rules committee, I would be in favor of going to the floor,” he said. Levin said he might accept a delegate mix other than what Michigan has proposed, but vowed to fight any attempt to cut the total delegate count or reduce their voting power. He said he would fight regardless of whether Clinton has conceded the nomination — meaning Michigan could sit at the center of a divisive battle over the party’s nominee.

Hillary Clinton too has made clear her intentions:

In an interview with The Associated Press, Clinton said she is willing to take her fight to seat Florida and Michigan delegates to the convention if the two states want to go that far.

Asked whether she would support the states if they appeal an unfavorable rules committee decision to the convention floor, the former first lady replied:

Yes I will. I will, because I feel very strongly about this.”

“I will consult with Floridians and the voters in Michigan because it’s really their voices that are being ignored and their votes that are being discounted, and I’ll support whatever the elected officials and the voters in those two states want to do.”

Clinton Supporters Count Too will be in Washington, as will be many other groups and individuals.

Representative Corrine Brown (D-Florida) speaks for us.

Introducing Hillary in Boca Raton, Representative Brown said: “You are going to count us now, or don’t count on us later.”

We agree.

You are going to count us now, or don’t count on us later.”

Hillary Clinton Wins – Barack Obama Is Unelectable

Update: The Rules Committee registration process is closed. Apparently they chose too small a room for Democrats to attend. [We added a video below.] If you are one of the many excluded by the Rules Committee’s too small venue join us outside the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel – Let the Rules Committee hear our voices from outside.
——————————————–

Today is the first day to register for the May 31, 2008 Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting of the Democratic? National Committee.

REGISTER (LINK HERE)

The Rules Committee meeting will be at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel. The meeting is open to the public. The Committee insists you pre-register if you want to attend.

The arguments, pro and con voting rights for Florida and Michigan will take place in the morning session.

REGISTRATION started on-line today. You may also call 202-479-5137 to register.

Hillary Clinton supporters will be at the Rules Committee meeting to uphold the voting rights of Florida and Michigan voters. Obama supporters will argue the Bush 2000 position that Florida (and Michigan) voters don’t count.

* * *

 

Help Hillary – Make phonecalls to Montana and South Dakota.

* * *

Florida and Michigan and Hillary and Hillary supporters will not be silenced by the Democratic? National Committee and assorted self-interested politicians and misogynists.

Former President Bill Clinton said that Democrats were more likely to lose in November if Hillary Clinton is not the nominee, and suggested some were trying to “push and pressure and bully” superdelegates to make up their minds prematurely.

“I can’t believe it. It is just frantic the way they are trying to push and pressure and bully all these superdelegates to come out,” Clinton said at a South Dakota campaign stop Sunday, in remarks first reported by ABC News.

Clinton also suggested some were trying to “cover up” Sen. Clinton’s chances of winning in key states that Democrats will have to win in the general election.

” ‘Oh, this is so terrible: The people they want her. Oh, this is so terrible: She is winning the general election, and he is not. Oh my goodness, we have to cover this up.’ “

Bill Clinton is right. Democrats want Hillary. Obama is unelectable.

The former president added that his wife had not been given the respect she deserved as a legitimate presidential candidate.

She is winning the general election today and he is not, according to all the evidence,” Clinton said. “And I have never seen anything like it. I have never seen a candidate treated so disrespectfully just for running.” [snip]

“If you notice, there hasn’t been a lot of publicity on these polls I just told you about,” he said. “It is the first time you’ve heard it? Why do you think that is? Why do you think? Don’t you think if the polls were the reverse and he was winning the Electoral College against Senator McCain and Hillary was losing it, it would be blasted on every television station?”

He added, “You would know it wouldn’t you? It wouldn’t be a little secret. And there is another Electoral College poll that I saw yesterday had her over 300 electoral votes. … She will win the general election if you nominate her. They’re just trying to make sure you don’t.”

Bill Clinton ain’t ta foolin’. Obama is unelectable.

Blue And Grey On Memorial Day

The blue uniforms of the Grand Army of the Republic and the grey uniforms of the Confederacy, buried deep in the nation’s soil, gave birth to Memorial Day.

Memorial Day was officially proclaimed on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan, national commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, in his General Order No. 11, and was first observed on 30 May 1868, when flowers were placed on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers at Arlington National Cemetery. The first state to officially recognize the holiday was New York in 1873. By 1890 it was recognized by all of the northern states. The South refused to acknowledge the day, honoring their dead on separate days until after World War I (when the holiday changed from honoring just those who died fighting in the Civil War to honoring Americans who died fighting in any war). It is now celebrated in almost every State on the last Monday in May . . . .

The Democratic Party is now engaged in the opening battles of a Civil War. As in the 1860s this war cannot be avoided. Fort Sumter has been fired upon.

At Big Pink, we carry the Union flag. 50 States – some red, some blue – but 50 States form the Union. Men and Women from all 50 states for the Union.

Thus far, the Democratic? Party Civil War has been contained to the presidential level. At some point however those Democratic? officials and office holders who endorsed Obama will be held to account. As Kristen Breitweiser wrote

Those who are responsible for putting Democrats in the broken place we are in right now with regard to Barack Obama had better own it to the end. Leave those bumper stickers on and wear those campaign pins until the bitter end folks because YOU OWN IT. And people are going to want to know whose [sic] to blame.

And as for the superdelegates, just an FYI, we have the list with your names, you will be held accountable on Election Day and beyond, too. This time around, everybody’s going to be looking for accountability.

The Democratic? Party Civil War has begun. It will spread.

As Professor Sean Wilentz makes clear in his latest description of the Democratic nomination fight, Barack Obama is engaged in the destruction of the Democratic Party. Obama campaign officials and not-so-covert Obama supporters have an ugly vision for the Democratic Party which must be fought:

Donna Brazile: A new Democratic coalition is younger. It is more urban, as well as suburban, and we don’t have to just rely on white blue-collar voters and Hispanics.

David Axelrod: The white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, going back even to the Clinton years. This is not new that Democratic candidates don’t rely solely on those votes.

Barack Obama is destroying the Democratic Party and Dean/Brazile/Pelosi are aiding Obama in the destruction of the Democratic Party. Obama has engaged in a campaign of race-baiting (calling Hillary supporters racists, presumably Hillary African-American supporters are racist too) anonymous memoranda attacking Bill and Hillary Clinton, covertly pushing ugly untrue stories to Big Media allies which distort what Hillary and Hillary supporters say and do (the RFK Obama pushed assasination story is only the latest example), and engaged in misogyny and gay-bashing tours.

There is a Democratic Civil War. It is already underway.

Obama is also trying to get the Democratic Party nomination by NOT counting votes. Obama thinks Democrats will forget his election theft by November. We have not forgotten 2000 and that was eight years ago. Democrats will not forget:

Obama dismissed suggestions that bitterness over the matter might unravel the likelihood of Democratic voters uniting behind a single presidential contender in November.

Once delegates are seated “this is going to be a story nobody is thinking about in August,” Obama said.

Democrats will remember in November – the question is whether the Civil War spreads down ticket from the Presidential level this election cycle or the next.

Obama’s delusions about amnesiac Democrats shows how little Obama knows about Democrats.

The Democratic Civil War, much like the great split that occurred when the courageous Lyndon Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, will be about Civil Rights and Respect – this time for Women.

Yet the excoriation of Hillary – under the cover of Clinton-bashing – raises the question of whether America could elect any woman at all. A country self-flagellating about its racial fissure has basked in its own misogyny. Racism is a proper injustice after all, sexism a Vaudevillian amusement. And so the “Bros not Hos” T-shirts depicting Obama (the black brother) and Hillary (the whore) are simply a blast. The Hillary Clinton novelty nutcrackers, on sale in American airports, are just frat-boy joshing, while a crude racial novelty item – perhaps a mammoth Obama pepper grinder to indicate the stereotypical size of the black male organ – is unlikely to have a patent pending.

Those who heckled Hillary with “iron my shirts” would be indicted or lynched if they barracked Obama with “bus my table” or “shine my shoes”. And it may be his slip of the tongue, “a bad habit”, as he says, to call a female reporter “sweetie” – although what might it be if Hillary called a black writer “boy”? – but did the journalist herself deserve to be branded a “bitch” or a “fat slob” merely for taking umbrage?

Clearly, American women should lighten up at these bottom-patting diminutions. Maybe it’s a sign of progress that Hillary hasn’t received as many death threats as the vice-presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro in 1984 when the Secret Service insisted she campaign in a bulletproof vest. Perhaps we should indulge male political commentators whose brains combust when looking upon a potential female head of state, so they are blinded by visions of their grasping ex-wife, a bunny-boiling mistress, their third grade teacher, a shrew, a nag, their mother… All that old, old stuff, even now?

The Obama Chicago thugs aided and abetted by Big Media and Big Blogs (DailyKooks, Arriana Huff n’ Puff, and Talking Pimps Memo) have insulted and degraded all women:

Gloating, unshackled sexism of the ugliest kind has been shamelessly peddled by the US media, which – sooner rather than later, I fear – will have to account for their sins. [snip]

I am no particular fan of Clinton. Nor, I think, would friends and colleagues accuse me of being racist. But it is quite inconceivable that any leading male presidential candidate would be treated with such hatred and scorn as Clinton has been. What other senator and serious White House contender would be likened by National Public Radio’s political editor, Ken Rudin, to the demoniac, knife-wielding stalker played by Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction? Or described as “a fucking whore” by Randi Rhodes, one of the foremost personalities of the supposedly liberal Air America? Would Carl Bernstein (of Woodward and Bernstein fame) ever publicly declare his disgust about a male candidate’s “thick ankles”? Could anybody have envisaged that a website set up specifically to oppose any other candidate would be called Citizens United Not Timid? (We do not need an acronym for that.) [snip]

To compensate meantime, I suspect, sexism has been allowed to take its place as a form of discrimination that is now openly acceptable. “How do we beat the bitch?” a woman asked Senator John McCain, this year’s Republican presidential nominee, at a Republican rally last November. To his shame, McCain did not rebuke the questioner but joined in the laughter. Had his supporter asked “How do we beat the nigger?” and McCain reacted in the same way, however, his presidential hopes would deservedly have gone up in smoke. “Iron my shirt,” is considered amusing heckling of Clinton. “Shine my shoes,” rightly, would be hideously unacceptable if yelled at Obama.

We will remember in November.

Here we come to the crunch. Hillary Clinton (along with her husband) is being universally depicted as a loathsome racist and negative campaigner, not so much because of anything she has said or done, but because the overwhelmingly pro-Obama media – consciously or unconsciously – are following the agenda of Senator Barack Obama and his chief strategist, David Axelrod, to tear to pieces the first serious female US presidential candidate in history.

Big Media tool Barack Obama and Big Media have fired the shot at Fort Sumter. It is long past time we returned fire.

“Gloating, unshackled sexism of the ugliest kind has been shamelessly peddled by the US media, which – sooner rather than later, I fear – will have to account for their sins.”

The Civil War has begun.

Hillary Clinton – Count Me In; Barack Obama – Count Me Out

Three important stories for Superdelegates this Sunday before Memorial Day. Obama is unelectable; Hillary will win.

The first is Republicans licking their chops:

It sounds crazy at first. Amid dire reports about the toxic political environment for Republican candidates and the challenges facing John McCain, many top GOP strategists believe he can defeat Barack Obama — and by a margin exceeding President Bush’s Electoral College victory in 2004. [snip]

But the contours of the electoral map, combined with McCain’s unique strengths and the nature of Obama’s possible vulnerabilities, have led to a cautious and muted optimism that McCain could actually surpass Bush’s 35-electoral-vote victory in 2004. Though they expect he would finish far closer to Obama in the popular vote, the thinking is that he could win by as many 50 electoral votes. [snip]

“A win by 40 or 50 electoral votes would be an astonishing upset, just a watershed event with all the issues that were stacked against him from the very beginning,” said David Woodard, a Republican pollster and Clemson University political science professor. “But it could happen. I know this seems like wishful thinking by Republicans. I’m thinking that Republicans could win by 40 electoral votes. But I dare not say it,” he added. “Certainly what is possible could come to pass.”

A top strategist with the Republican National Committee, who asked that his name be withheld to speak candidly, explained that by his own examination, “we’re actually sitting pretty well in most states.”

“There are a lot of scenarios that look good for McCain, and I almost would go so far to say that there are a lot more scenarios [than for Obama],” the strategist added. “I don’t think anybody over here wants to let themselves get too excited about it. It is an eternity between now and November. But McCain looks a lot stronger than our prospects as a party.” [snip]

“That would certainly run against the grain of history, if he pulled that off,” Ayers added. “But it’s also clearly plausible and a manageable outcome partly because of John McCain’s strength among independents and partly because of Obama’s weakness in culture, ideology and association.

Hillary supporters care about the issues. We are not smoking Hopium in internet dens. We know the Republicans must be routed this Fall and only Hillary can do the job. Anyone who cares about the issues must vote for Hillary. Obama is unelectable.

Why McCain Will Beat Obama:

The case they make for a comfortable McCain win is not beyond reason. Begin with the 2004 electoral map. Add Iowa and Colorado to Obama’s side, since both are considered states Obama could pick off. Then count McCain victories in New Hampshire and Michigan, two states where McCain is competitive. In this scenario, McCain wins the Electoral College 291-246, a larger margin than Bush four years ago.

If Obama managed only to win Iowa from Republicans and McCain managed only to win Pennsylvania, McCain would still win by a much greater margin than Bush — 300-237.

“McCain is in a remarkably strong position for how poor the political environment is right now,” said Brian Nienaber, a GOP pollster. “McCain could win Pennsylvania, Ohio, Colorado and Nevada with a high Hispanic population. It really does scramble the map of where Obama does find those electoral votes.” [snip]

“We have to hold Michigan and Pennsylvania. McCain wins one of those states, we are in trouble. They have to hold Florida and Ohio or they are trouble,” Democratic pollster Paul Maslin said. “The truth about this race [is], this is the year that we shouldn’t lose, and we could lose.”

Hillary should go to Michigan and let the voters know she is fighting for them. Obama is fighting against Michigan.

Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Florida – Hillary wins – Obama loses.

Even the potentially dramatic rise in turnout of African-Americans may only gain Obama 1 percentage point in many swing states, according to Maslin. Yet Obama’s weaknesses may end up neutralizing some of those relatively modest gains.

Since 1968, Democrats have had a deficit with whites, particularly men. Some Republicans believe that Obama may exacerbate those Democratic challenges, especially in key rural regions like Appalachia, struggle to win back Hispanics or some women, and dash Democratic prospects during their most favorable landscape in at least three decades.

Readers of Big Pink will not be surprised by any of this. [Read Barack Obama’s Situation Comedy HERE and Barack Obama’s Situation Comedy Part II HERE Sean Wilentz makes our argument with fresh, vivid language and greater historical context:

Under those pressures, the Barack Obama campaign and its sympathizers have begun to articulate much more clearly what they mean by their vague slogan of “change” – nothing less than usurping the historic Democratic Party, dating back to the age of Andrew Jackson, by rejecting its historic electoral core: white workers and rural dwellers in the Middle Atlantic and border states.

Without a majority of those voters, the Democrats have, since the party’s inception in the 1820s, been incapable of winning the presidency. The Obama advocates declare, though, that we have entered an entirely new political era. It is not only possible but also desirable, they say, for Democrats to win by turning away from those whom “progressive” pundits and bloggers disdain variously as “Nascar man,” “uneducated,” “low information” whites, “rubes, fools, and hate-mongers” who live in the nation’s “shitholes.”

Having attempted, with the aid of a complicit news media, to brand Hillary Clinton as a racist — by flinging charges that, as the historian Michael Lind has shown, belong “in black helicopter/grassy knoll territory,” Obama’s supporters now fiercely claim that Clinton’s white working class following is also essentially racist. Favoring the buzzword language of the academic left, tinged by persistent, discredited New Left and black nationalist theories about working-class “white skin privilege,” a vote against Obama has become, according to his fervent followers, “a vote for whiteness.”

We have written how white working class voters can discern condescension with the same acuity as African-Americans can detect bigotry, no matter how well disguised. The eggheads of the Democratic? Party are in full insult mode. Professor Wilentz also quotes Donna Brazile and David Axelrod, with the same contempt we have for them.

In fact, all of the evidence demonstrates that white racism has not been a principal or even secondary motivation in any of this year’s Democratic primaries. Every poll shows that economics, health care, and national security are the leading issues for white working class voters – and for Latino working class voters as well. These constituencies have cast positive ballots for Hillary Clinton not because she is white, but because they regard her as better on these issues. Obama’s campaign and its passionate supporters refuse to acknowledge that these voters consider him weaker — and that Clinton’s positions, different from his, as well as her experience actually attract support. Instead they impute racism to working class Democrats who, the polls also show, happen to be liberal on every leading issue. The effort to taint anyone who does not support Obama as motivated by racism has now become a major factor in alienating core Democrats from Obama’s campaign. Out with the Democratic Party of Jefferson, Jackson, F.D.R., Truman, Kennedy and Johnson, and in with the bright, shiny party of Obama – or what the formally “undeclared” Donna Brazile, a member of the Democratic National Committee and of the party’s rules committee, has hailed as a “new Democratic coalition” swelled by affluent white leftists and liberals, college students, and African-Americans.

Professor Wilentz traces the arc of the Democratic Party. His conclusions lead to what we have been saying: Obama is unelectable.

Over the 180 years since then, only one Democrat has gained the presidency without winning either Ohio or Pennsylvania, with their large white working-class vote. [snip] Beginning in 1964, when the Democratic solid South dissolved, every successful Democratic presidential candidate has had to carry both Ohio and Pennsylvania, even when Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton picked up southern states. [snip]

As the caricature of “Reagan Democrats” as racist militarists hardened among “new politics” advocates, they strove to make up the difference by creating an expanded base among African-Americans, college-age, and college educated voters. The result was yet another humiliating defeat for the Democrats in 1988.

Professor Wilentz understands that white working class voters are an important part of the Democratic Big Tent and we lose them at our peril. Bill Clinton spoke and governed to issues that white working class voters AND African-Americans, Latinos and women knew respected them and their concerns. This is something the eggheads and Obama do not understand.

Bill Clinton’s shift to a centrist liberalism stressing lunch-pail issues–“Putting People First“–won back a large number of Reagan Democrats in 1992, enough so that, by the time Clinton won his second term in 1996, Democrats could claim parity with Republicans by winning a slim plurality among non-college educated working class white voters. But the perceived elitists Al Gore and John Kerry lost what Clinton had gained, as George W. Bush carried the white working-class vote by a margin of 17 percent in 2000 and a whopping 23 percent in 2004.

This year’s primary results show no sign that Obama will reverse this trend should he win the nomination. In West Virginia and Kentucky, as well as Ohio and Pennsylvania, blue collar white voters sent him down to defeat by overwhelming margins. A recent Gallup poll report has argued that claims about Obama’s weaknesses among white voters and blue collar voters have been exaggerated – yet its indisputable figures showed Obama running four percentage points below Kerry’s anemic support among whites four years ago.

Given that Obama’s vote in the primaries, apart from African-Americans, has generally come from affluent white suburbs and university towns, the Gallup figures presage a Democratic disaster among working-class white voters in November should Obama be the nominee.

The true and complete ugliness and bigotry of the Obama campaign:

Yet Obama’s handlers profess indifference – and, at times, even pride — about these trends. Asked about the white working-class vote following Obama’s ten-point loss in Pennsylvania, chief campaign strategist David Axelrod confidently told an National Public Radio interviewer that, after all, “the white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections going back even to the Clinton years” and that Obama’s winning strength lay in his ability to offset that trend and “attract independent voters… younger voters” and “expand the Democratic base.”

Apart from its basic inaccuracy about Clinton’s blue-collar support in 1992 and 1996, Axelrod’s statement was a virtual reprise of the Democratic doomed strategy from the 1972 McGovern campaign that the party revamped in 1988. The main difference between now and then is the openness of the condescension with which many of Obama’s supporters – and, apparently, the candidate himself – hold the crude “low information” types whom they believe dominate the white working class. The sympathetic media coverage of Obama’s efforts to explain away his remarks in San Francisco about “bitter,” economically-strapped voters who, clinging to their guns, religion, and racism, misdirect their rage and do not see the light, only reinforced his campaign’s dismissive attitude. Obama’s efforts at rectification were reluctant and half-hearted at best – and he undercut them completely a few days later when he referred derisively, on the stump in Indiana, to a sudden “political flare-up because I said something that everybody knows is true.”

The clouds of Hopium smoke waft from the destroyed Democratic Party:

Culturally as well as politically, Obama’s dismissal of white working people represents a sea-change in the Democrats’ basic identity as the workingman’s party – one that has been coming since the late 1960s, when large portions of the Left began regarding white workers as hopeless and hateful reactionaries. Faced with the revolt of the “Reagan Democrats” – whose politics they interpreted in the narrowest of racial terms – “new politics” Democrats dreamed of a coalition built around an alliance of right-thinking affluent liberals and downtrodden minorities, especially African-Americans. It all came to nothing. But after Bill Clinton failed to consolidate a new version of the old Democratic coalition in the 1990s, the dreaming began again – first, with disastrous results, in the schismatic Ralph Nader campaign of 2000 and now (with the support of vehement ex-Naderites including Barbara Ehrenreich and Cornel West) in the Obama campaign.

Obama must assume that the demographics of American politics have changed dramatically in recent years so that the electorate as a whole is little more than a larger version of the combined Democratic primary constituencies of Oregon and South Carolina. While recent studies purport to show that the white working class has, indeed, shrunk over the past fifty years, as a political matter its significance remains salient, especially in the battleground and swing states–states like Ohio and West Virginia where Obama currently trails Senator John McCain in the polls. One of the studies that affirms the diminishing proportion of blue collar whites in the electorate, written for the Brookings Institution by Ruy Teixeira and Alan Abamowitz, concludes [pdf], nevertheless, that “the voting proclivities of the white working class will make a huge difference and could well determine who the next president will be.”

Teixeira and Abramowitz estimate that the Democratic candidate will need to cut Kerry’s deficit of 23 percent in 2004 to around 10 percent if he or she is “to achieve a solid popular vote victory.” By those lights, Obama, if nominated, is almost certainly destined to lose unless he can suddenly reverse the trend that his own dismissive language and his supporters’ contemptuous tone has accelerated during the primaries.

In every presidential election they have won, the Democrats have solidified their historic link to white workers, not dismissed them. Obama and the champions of a new party coalition appear to think that everything has suddenly changed, simply because of the force of their own desires. In any event, Obama had shown no ability thus far to attract the one constituency that has always spelled the difference between victory and defeat for the Democratic Party. The party must now decide whether to go along with Obama and renounce its own heritage — and tempt the political fates.

We end with the courageous Bartcop which features a Gene Lyons article – Party may suffer from an Obama candidacy Lyons loathes Big Media:

If Hillary Clinton had no other reason to keep running for the nomination, it would be to demonstrate that Tim Russert, Keith Olbermann, Maureen Dowd, David Broder and the Beltway media gas bags don’t decide American elections. Last week, Obama, the supposedly inevitable Democratic nominee, lost the West Virginia primary by 41 points. Democrats haven’t taken the presidency without winning the Mountain State since 1916.

To use a geographically appropriate metaphor, if there has ever been a canary in-a-coal-mine primary, that was it. [snip]

If nominated, Obama can’t possibly defeat Sen. John McCain without bringing Clinton voters to him. Recently, however, I’ve been hearing from many passionate Democrats who say they can’t and won’t vote for him in November, so I asked a few to explain why.

Here is Lyons’ anecdotal survey. The answers sound much like what the comments at Big Pink say:

Most think Obama a sure loser in the McGovern, Dukakis tradition. They believe he’s totally unqualified.

“I’ve voted for every Democrat from president to dog-catcher since 1952. That will end with Obama,” insists H. in Maine. “He won’t get 150 electoral votes, more than he deserves. The Democratic Party’s been teetering on the edge of extinction. Obama’s arrogance will kill it….

“ Just four years out of the state Senate. If he were white or female, his candidacy would be a joke. Imagine if he’d opted to run for vice president with Hillary. Mc-Cain would lose, Democrats would come close to 60 Senate seats and pick up 35 in the House. The Democratic left’s need to swoon after eight years of a moron, coupled with unbridled Clinton hatred, will produce a disaster for the party and country.” It’s the Obama campaign’s cynical use of race beginning in South Carolina that’s the deal-breaker for others.

“He is making his way to Denver by dividing our party over race, which is maybe the most idiotic campaign tactic ever,” writes C. in Kansas. “This time the witch hunt is coming from our side. It’s heartbreaking. Obama supporters want you to think Bill and Hillary Clinton are lifelong members of the KKK. The audacity of hope campaign has had the audacity to go there…. This fall, they’ll try to make nice and talk unity, but the people they alienated in the most hateful way won’t be there. They deserve to lose for being so callous and childish.”

J. in Florida agrees: “Obama and his supporters’ use of the ‘race card’ against the Clintons (with the help of the in-the-tank media ) is sickening. Now we have vile, racist, crazed-for-power Hillary. Obama means to avoid the ‘divisiveness’ of the Clinton years by blaming it on them. That’s a despicable lie, and he knows it. The only way of avoiding divisiveness is to cave to the Republican agenda, which I believe he’s more than eager to do.” “He and his supporters, “ J. adds, “ have systematically sacrificed the central constituency of the Democratic Party —the poor and working class—on the altar of constituencies who look to politics for reaffirmation of their identity: college students and childish Sixties neo-libs. (The African American constituency makes sense, so no gripes there. )” By abandoning the principle of universality in health insurance, most think Obama has guaranteed that meaningful reform cannot be achieved. Z. in Georgia adds that Obama’s vagueness on economic issues foretells disaster. “He has no perceptible position on the economy other than ‘We can do better. Yes, we can. Say it with me.’

I foresee broken campaign promises followed by belt-tightening austerity measures in a one-term presidency. In short, Jimmy Carter in a better-tailored sweater.” “ I view the Obama candidacy as a narcissistic endeavor by a mediocre politician dividing Democrats along social vs. economic progressive lines, ” J. insists. “He’s forcing a choice between winning in 2008 and possibly saving Roe vs. Wade and promoting gay marriage vs. fighting for the poor and working class. “ I’ve decided I won’t help Obama and his personality cult transform the Democratic Party into an organization that represents only the interests of rich, social liberals.” What do I think? I suspect most will grudgingly return by November, but that non-African American working-class voters won’t.

Representative Corrine Brown (D-Florida) introducing Hillary in Boca Raton: “You are going to count us now, or don’t count on us later.”

“You are going to count us now, or don’t count on us later.”

Latinos and Women: Boycott NBC and MSNBC and Obama

Update: Obama was forced to campaign in Puerto Rico today – so much for “it’s over”. Meanwhile a new Quinnipiac Poll:

Plagued by a defection of Clinton supporters and white working class voters, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, the leading Democratic presidential contender, trails Arizona Sen. John McCain, the likely Republican candidate, in Florida and Ohio, according to simultaneous Quinnipiac University Swing State polls released today. Sen. Obama is six points ahead in Pennsylvania. New York Sen. Clinton wins handily in all three states. No one has been elected President since 1960 without taking two of these three largest swing states in the Electoral College.

and

In the McCain-Obama matchups, 26 to 36 percent of Clinton supporters in each state say that if Obama is the nominee they would switch to the Republican in November. Only 10 to 18 percent of Obama supporters say they would defect to McCain if Clinton is the nominee.

The numbers for Florida and Ohio are good news for Sen. John McCain and should be worrisome for Sen. Barack Obama. That is especially true about Ohio, which decided the 2004 election. Ohio’s economy is worse than the rest of the country and the Republican brand there is in disrepute. McCain’s Buckeye lead may be a sign that nationally this may not be the easy Democratic walk to the White House that many expected,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

——————————————–

The boys at NBC and MSNBC must be BOYcotted.

The misogyny at NBC and MSNBC is rampant. Now the added target is latinos – particularly those in Puerto Rico.

It’s won’t take much of a boycott effort. Already, without a boycott, not many people watch the 24 hour a day infomercials for Obama broadcast by NBC/MSNBC.

The Obama Party line repeated at NBC/MSNBC was starkly made by Donna Brazile: A new Democratic coalition is younger. It is more urban, as well as suburban, and we don’t have to just rely on white blue-collar voters and Hispanics.

We should also consider a general boycott of General Electric’s appliance division which GE is trying to sell.

* * *

Hillary Supporters Count Too provides contact information for advertisers on NBC/MSNBC.

Obama, aided and abetted by the ill disguised infomercials on NBC/MSNBC is adding Puerto Rico to the 46 state strategy – joining Florida, Michigan, West Virginia and Kentucky – as voters that don’t count. Obama is busy insulting Puerto Rico by not campaigning there.

On NBC and MSNBC the Obama Party line is that Puerto Rico ‘does not count’. Obama hates the latino vote because latinos have consistently voted against him.

The fear from Obama and NBC/MSNBC is that millions of Puerto Ricans will come out to vote – For Hillary.

PUERTO RICO, an afterthought trophy for the United States 110 years ago at the end of the Spanish-American War and an island in limbo since, has become an improbable player in the contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Its primary on June 1 could bolster Mrs. Clinton’s claim to a majority of the popular vote — the combined tally for all the Democratic primaries and caucuses held across the country over the past six months.

Puerto Rico’s formal role in the process is indeed weighty. Its 63 voting delegates — 55 elected ones and eight superdelegates — at the Democratic National Convention in Denver this summer will outnumber delegations from more than half the states (including Kentucky and Oregon) and the District of Columbia. Yet Puerto Rico does not have a vote in the Electoral College, nor will its 2.5 million registered voters cast ballots for president in November.

Kevin Spacey, who stars in the movie Recount, about the 2000 battle for voting rights in Florida (Bush v. Gore) stated yesterday I do not see how you can pretend two million people did not vote.

Puerto Rico’s millions are destined by Obama and NBC/MSNBC to be removed from the history books.

* * *

Stalinism is alive.

Because Obama is running for president we are not to recognize historical facts. Millions voted in Florida and Michigan, but they are to be wiped off the pages of history. Robert Kennedy was slaughtered on a June day. That historical fact too will be wiped off the pages of history. The Bush v. Gore battles and the stolen election of 2000 – never accepted by Big Media, will be wiped off the pages of history too. The importance of West Virginia and Kentucy will be wiped off the historical record too. Puerto Rico is to be wiped off the historical record as well.

DailyKooks and Arriana Huff n’ Puff and Talking Pimps Memo will all assist in the Stalinist “cleansing” of history.

Hillary, like Robert Kennedy, is the senator from New York – a thought that occurs to no one in Big Media or Big Blogs.

Robert Kennedy Jr. is not a Stalinist:

“It is clear from the context that Hillary was invoking a familiar political circumstance in order to support her decision to stay in the race through June. I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband’s 1992 race, both of which were hard fought through June. I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense.”

The Argus Leader’s Executive Editor Randell Beck issued the following statement today:

“The context of the question and answer with Sen. Clinton was whether her continued candidacy jeopardized party unity this close to the Democratic convention. Her reference to Mr. Kennedy’s assassination appeared to focus on the timeline of his primary candidacy and not the assassination itself.”

Linfar is not a Stalinist.

* * *

This is another permutation of the race baiting that Obama has been engaged in this entire campaign season.

We know why the race baiting by Obama is occurring: Hillary beats McCain and Obama is unelectable.

Clinton’s white support [44%] is unusually high: at a comparable point in the 2004 election, Democratic nominee John Kerry received the support of 36 percent of white voters, compared to George W. Bush’s 48 percent, and in June of 2000, Bush led Al Gore 48 percent to 39 percent.

Hillary appeals to voters – the white working class – which eggheads in the Democratic? Party have disdained for years. Hillary can unite African-Americans and white working class voters in a powerful, true Democratic Party.

David Axelrod of the Obama campaign : The white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, going back even to the Clinton years. This is not new that Democratic candidates don’t rely solely on those votes.

Axelrod is wrong. Winning Democrats, like Bill and Hillary Clinton, win the white working class vote.

Representative Corrine Brown (D-Florida) introducing Hillary in Boca Raton: “You are going to count us now, or don’t count on us later.”

Boycott NBC, MSNBC and Obama.

“You are going to count us now, or don’t count on us later.”

Puerto Rico, Montana, South Dakota And Hillary Clinton

As we enter the Memorial Day weekend let’s celebrate with this wonderful video made by proud Puerto Rican, WILLIE COLÓN, as a tribute to Hillary Clinton.

The lyrics speak to Hillary’s long history (more than 34 years), not a recent politically convenient conversation, with latino voters. The chorus shouts “Hillary” as Willie asks question after question about “who” was there when needed. “Listen, my people, in whatever emergency, I go with Hillary for her conviction and eloquence. You hear this from Willie Colon. Listen my people, use your minds – vote for Hillary, Hillary.” The chorus cresendos “34 years of experience – Hillary, Hillary”. “Hillary for President, Hillary for President.”

Hillary has a lot of support in Puerto Rico. Obama is once again absent. The Puerto Rico primary is June 1.

Every time Hillary goes to Puerto Rico she should make a stop in Florida. Hillary should remind Florida voters she is fighting for their voting rights while Obama is suppressing their civil rights.

* * *

Montana is full steam ahead. Help Hillary – make calls to Montana.

South Dakota is full steam ahead. Make calls to South Dakota.

Hillary interview with South Dakota’s Argus Leader:

* * *

While the Obama campaign continues to lie about VP talks and such (deceive and distract are Obama’s favorite tactics) Hillary will take her case to the people. Hillary will be in Puerto Rico, not vacationing and enjoying the lovely island, but campaigning.

Yesterday, Hillary made clear her intentions:

In an interview with The Associated Press, Clinton said she is willing to take her fight to seat Florida and Michigan delegates to the convention if the two states want to go that far.

Asked whether she would support the states if they appeal an unfavorable rules committee decision to the convention floor, the former first lady replied:

Yes I will. I will, because I feel very strongly about this.”

“I will consult with Floridians and the voters in Michigan because it’s really their voices that are being ignored and their votes that are being discounted, and I’ll support whatever the elected officials and the voters in those two states want to do.”

Today, we have our answer:

Members of a Democratic rule-making committee appear unlikely to allow Michigan and Florida to fully participate in this summer’s national convention, raising the possibility of a divisive floor fight over the states’ disputed primaries at the start of the fall presidential campaign.

In Florida Wednesday, Sen. Hillary Clinton toughened her call for seating her delegates in Denver. She told supporters that discounting the votes “on technicalities” would violate the basic rules of democracy. And in an interview with The Associated Press, she threatened to take her fight all the way to the convention floor — a possibility from which her campaign had previously shied away.

U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, one of the architects of Michigan’s early primary, said he would support a convention-floor fight if Michigan’s full delegation isn’t seated — though Levin signaled he was less concerned about how many delegates are awarded to Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama. [snip]

Levin said he supports taking the issue to the floor if Michigan isn’t fully seated. “If we’re punished in any way by the rules committee, I would be in favor of going to the floor,” he said. Levin said he might accept a delegate mix other than what Michigan has proposed, but vowed to fight any attempt to cut the total delegate count or reduce their voting power. He said he would fight regardless of whether Clinton has conceded the nomination — meaning Michigan could sit at the center of a divisive battle over the party’s nominee.

On to Puerto Rico – and Denver!

Hillary Clinton Lifts The Proud, Bloody Flag Of Civil Rights

Barack Obama has never helped anyone but himself. Barack Obama has never been engaged in the great struggles. In fact, Barack Obama disdains the stuggles Democrats have fought, relegating those proud, fierce struggles to the past.

Barack Obama does not understand how fiercly and relentlessly we will fight for the voting rights of Florida and Michigan voters, because he has never fought a battle.

Obama went to iconic Selma to lie about the energy bill and the year he was conceived. Hillary Clinton went to Selma and evoked the Reverend James Cleveland – only to be mocked by Big Media.

Yesterday, Hillary picked up the proud and bloodied flag of civil rights and waved it for all to see.

We will fight for Florida and Michigan all the way to the convention and beyond. We still have not forgotten about 2000. Democrats know that in 2000 when the intent of Florida voters was not respected every Democrat in every state was diminished. Every Democrat, not just in Florida, suffered from the stolen election which took place in Florida.

On May 31, 2008, the Democratic? National Committee’s Rules Committee will meet to fix the election for Barack Obama. The audacious hope is to nominate Barack Obama at the Democratic? National Convention on or around Women’s Equality Day – August 26.

Rules Committee member and Obama shill, Donna Brazile, and the Chicago thugs must not be allowed to steal this election in a backroom deal. The voters and how they actually voted must be respected. The intent of Florida and Michigan voters must not be “reinterpreted” by Democratic? Party officials in “hanging chad” proceedings.

The Rules Committee meeting must be broadcast on-line and televised as well. Let all Americans see how the Democratic? National Committee is using rules to discriminate. No backroom deals. The previous Rules Committee meeting which changed its own rules in order to disenfranchise Michigan and Florida 100% (two states Obama could not win) was not seen by most Americans.

Let the Rules Committee feel the heat generated of national attention.

Major figures from the Hillary Clinton campaign should consider attending the May 31 meeting. Hillary will be campaigning in Puerto Rico. Perhaps Bill Clinton or Chelsea can attend the Rules Committee. Governor Ed Rendell should attend the meeting. Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs-Jones should attend the meeting.

Let’s force the Rules Committee and Obama/Dean/Brazile/Pelosi discriminate against Florida and Michigan in public. Let’s then appeal any and all discriminatory rulings in Denver before the Credentials Committee of the Democratic? National Convention. Force the Democratic? National Committee, in late August, a few months before the general election, to discriminate against Florida and Michigan for all the world to see.

The Puerto Rico primary will be held on June 1, the day after the Rules Committee decision. Let Hillary, in her Puerto Rico victory speech announce that the Civil Rights battle for the voting rights of Florida and Michigan citizens will take us all the way to Denver.

* * *

Kevin Spacey, who stars in the movie Recount, about the 2000 battle for voting rights in Florida (Bush v. Gore) stated yesterday I do not see how you can pretend two million people did not vote.

The movie Recount (The Future Of The Nation Was Hanging By A Chad) will premiere on HBO on Sunday, May 25, 2008 at 9:00 p.m. – six days before the Rules Committee meets.

* * *

The Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic? National Committee will meet on May 31, 2008 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel. The meeting is open to the public. The Committee is insisting those who want to attend pre-register.

Let’s all register and attend the Rules Committee meeting on May 31, 2008. But beware: Don’t let them tell you there is not enough space. Show up no matter what. It’s time once again to fight for Civil Rights – inside and outside.

The arguments, pro and con voting rights for Florida and Michigan will take place in the morning session. The Committee will “deliberate” after they lunch – presumably on vittles not the voting rights of the citizens of Florida and Michigan.

REGISTRATION starts on-line at 10:00 a.m. next Tuesday, May 27, 2008. You may also call 202-479-5137 to register.

The Committee forbids “banners, posters, signs, handouts, and noisemakers of any kind” for those attending the meeting. For those who wish to protest outside presumably free speech will still be the law of the land.

* * *

Hillary Clinton is prepared to go all the way to Denver to fight for the civil rights of Florida and Michigan voters. Hillary understand that often rules are made to discriminate.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Clinton said she is willing to take her fight to seat Florida and Michigan delegates to the convention if the two states want to go that far.

Asked whether she would support the states if they appeal an unfavorable rules committee decision to the convention floor, the former first lady replied:

“Yes I will. I will, because I feel very strongly about this.”

“I will consult with Floridians and the voters in Michigan because it’s really their voices that are being ignored and their votes that are being discounted, and I’ll support whatever the elected officials and the voters in those two states want to do.” [snip]

Asked if she now envisioned the race extending beyond June 3, Clinton replied: “It could, I hope it doesn’t. I hope it’s resolved to everyone’s satisfaction by that date, because that’s what people are expecting, but we’ll have to see what happens.” [snip]

Floridians “learned the hard way what happens when your votes aren’t counted and the candidate with fewer votes is declared the winner,” she told supporters. “The lesson of 2000 here in Florida is crystal clear: If any votes aren’t counted, the will of the people isn’t realized and our democracy is diminished.”

“The people who voted did nothing wrong and it would be wrong to punish you,” she added.

Read Hillary’s truly excellent speech in full. We have most of the speech below:

Now, this year’s presidential election is like none other in history. And we have had more people engaging and volunteering, casting their ballots, than ever before. Everywhere I go, people tell me, “I’ve never given money to a campaign in my life; this year is different. I’ve never followed an election before; this time I can’t stop watching.” And there’s a reason for that. With our economy in crisis, and with two wars and our children’s future in the balance, more people than ever before are taking politics seriously.

I happen to welcome that because this is a democracy, and we’ve all got to participate. In fact, we want more democracy, not less democracy. We want more people taking a part in the selection of their president.

Here in Florida, more than 1.7 million people cast their vote, the highest primary turnout in the history of Florida. And nearly 600,000 voters in Michigan did the same. And not a day goes by that I don’t meet someone who grabs my hand or holds up a sign, no matter where I am, in Kentucky or anywhere else, and says, “Please, make my vote count.”

I receive dozens and dozens of letters and emails and phone calls, every couple of hours it seems like, all making the same urgent request: please count my vote. We used to be worried about voter apathy, didn’t we? We worried why Americans didn’t participate. Now, people are worried that their participation won’t matter.

I believe the Democratic Party must count these votes. They should count them exactly as they were cast. Democracy demands no less.

I am here today because I believe that the decision our party faces is not just about the fate of these votes and the outcome of these primaries. It is about whether we will uphold our most fundamental values as Democrats and Americans. It is about whether we will move forward, united, to win this state and take back the White House this November. That has to be the prize that we keep in mind.

Because here in America, unlike in many other nations, we are bound together, not by a single shared religion or cultural heritage, but by a shared set of ideas and ideals, a shared civic faith, that we are entitled to speak and worship freely, that we deserve equal justice under the law, that we have certain core rights that no government can abridge and these rights are rooted in and sustained by the principle that our founders set forth in the Declaration of Independence. That a just government derives its power from the consent of the governed, that each of us should have an equal voice in determining the destiny of our nation. A generation of patriots risked and sacrificed lives on the battlefield for that ideal. [snip]

It took more than 70 years of struggle, setbacks, and grinding hard work and only one of those original suffragists lived to see women cast their ballots. There are women here today – as with my own mother – who were born before the Constitution granted us the right to vote. This is not something lost in the mists of memory and history; this is real. The generations here in this room have seen change. The men and women who knew their Constitutional right to vote meant little when poll taxes and literacy tests, violence, and intimidation made it impossible to exercise their right, so they marched and protested, faced dogs and tear gas, knelt down on that bridge in Selma to pray and were beaten within an inch of their lives.

Some gave their lives to the struggle for a more perfect union. There is a reason why so many have fought so hard and sacrificed so much. It is because they knew that to be a citizen of this country is to have the right and responsibility to help shape its future, not just to make your voice heard, but to have it count. People have fought hard because they knew their vote was at stake and so was their children’s future. Because of those who have come before, Senator Obama and I and so many of you have this precious right today. Because of all that has been done, we are in this historic presidential election. I believe that both Senator Obama and myself have an obligation as potential Democratic nominees – in fact, we all have an obligation as Democrats – to carry on this legacy and ensure that in our nominating process every voice is heard and every single vote is counted.

This work to extend the franchise to all of our citizens is a core mission of the modern Democratic Party, from signing the voting rights act and fighting racial discrimination at the ballot box, to lowering the voting age so those old enough to fight and die in war would have the right to choose their Commander-in-Chief, to fighting for multi-lingual ballots so you can make your voice heard no matter what language you speak. I am proud of our work today. We are fighting the redistricting initiatives that would dilute African American and Latino votes. We are fighting efforts to purge voters from the rolls here in Florida and elsewhere. We are fighting voter identification laws that could wrongly keep tens of thousands of voters from casting their ballots this November.

We carry on this cause for a simple reason, because we believe the outcome of our elections should be determined by the will of the people – nothing more, nothing less.

We believe the popular vote is the truest expression of your will. We believe it today, just as we believed it back in 2000 when right here in Florida, you learned the hard way what happens when your votes aren’t counted and the candidate with fewer votes is declared the winner. The lesson of 2000 here in Florida is crystal clear. If any votes aren’t counted, the will of the people is not realized and our democracy is diminished. That is what I have always believed.

My first job in politics was on the 1972 presidential campaign registering African-American and Hispanic voters in Texas. That work took me from home to home in neighborhood after neighborhood. I was determined to knock on every door and sign up every voter I could find. While we may not have won that election, I have never given up the fight. It is a fight I continue to this day.

Because I think it is appalling that in the 21st century, voters are still being wrongly turned away from the polls, ballots are still mysteriously lost in state after state, African-American and Hispanic voters still wait in line for hours while voters in the same state, even in the same county can wait just minutes to cast their votes. That’s why I’ve been working since 2004 with my dear friend Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones to pass the Count Every Vote Act; comprehensive voting rights legislation designed to end these deplorable violations. It will ensure that every eligible voter can vote, every vote is counted, and every vote can verify his or her vote before it is finally cast.

I will continue to fight for that same principle every day in this campaign. The fact is, the people of Florida voted back in January. You did your part. You showed up in record numbers and you made informed choices. But today, some months later, you still do not know if these votes will help determine our party’s nominee. You still don’t know if this great state will be represented at our convention in August. It is time you knew, because the more than 2.3 million people who voted in Florida and Michigan exercised their fundamental American right in good faith. You watched the news. You went to the candidates’ web sites, you talked to your friends and neighbors, you learned about our records and policies so you could make informed voting decisions. You didn’t break a single rule, and you should not be punished for matters beyond your control.

Now, I know that Senator Obama chose to remove his name from the ballot in Michigan, and that was his right. But his choice does not negate the votes of all those who turned out to cast their ballots, and we should not let our process rob them and all of you of your voices. To do so would undermine the very purpose of the nominating process. To ensure that as many Democrats as possible can cast their votes. To ensure that the party selects a nominee who truly represents the will of the voters and to ensure that the Democrats take back the White House to rebuild America.

Now, I’ve heard some say that counting Florida and Michigan would be changing the rules. I say that not counting Florida and Michigan is changing a central governing rule of this country – that whenever we can understand the clear intent of the voters, their votes should be counted. I remember very well back in 2000, there were those who argued that people’s votes should be discounted over technicalities. For the people of Florida who voted in this primary, the notion of discounting their votes sounds way too much of the same.

The votes of 1.7 million people should not be cast aside because of a technicality. The people who voted did nothing wrong, and it would be wrong to punish you. As the Florida Supreme Court said back in 2000, before the United States Supreme Court took the case away from them, as your Supreme Court said, it’s not about the technicalities or about the contestants. It’s about the will of the people. And whenever you can understand their intent, it should govern. It’s very clear what 1.7 million people intended here in Florida. Playing a role in the nominating process in a two-party system is just as important as having a vote in the presidential election on Election Day count.

We know it was wrong to penalize voters for the decisions of state officials back in the 2000 presidential election. It would be wrong to do so for decisions made in our nominating process. Democrats argued passionately. We are still arguing, aren’t we, for counting all the votes back in 2000, and we should be just as passionately arguing for that principle today, here in Florida and in Michigan. It is well within the Democratic Party rules to take this stand. The rules clearly state that we can count all of these votes and seat all of these delegates, pledged and unpledged, if we so choose. And the rules lay out a clear process for doing so.[snip]

I remember when President Lyndon Johnson addressed the Congress and the nation urging the passage of the Voting Rights Act. He declared, “I speak tonight for the dignity of man and the destiny of democracy.” It was urgent, elevated language, but it was not hyperbole. Now, as back then, those are the stakes. That’s why here in Florida, even when you were told your primary might not count, you voted anyway.

A Floridian I know from Tallahassee told me about his mother’s canasta club. It’s a group of women in their golden years who gather every week to play cards and visit. They talked about that Florida primary every week as they gathered around the card table. They followed the news closely. They discussed the candidates and their positions on the issues. They knew about the dispute over the primary schedule and the question of seating delegates. And when it came time to vote, like so many other good citizens of this state, the ladies of the canasta club dutifully cast their ballots for the candidates of their choice. They made informed choices. They did nothing wrong, and they should not be punished for doing their civic duty.

You knew then what Americans know, that this political process of ours is about more than the candidates running, the pundits commenting or the ads blaring. It’s about the path we choose as a nation. If anyone ever doubted whether it mattered who our president was, the last seven years with George Bush should have removed every single doubt from anyone’s mind.

That’s why you voted, and that’s why I’m running. And that’s why you’ve been organizing and raising your voices, hoping to have your votes count. You refused to stay home then, and you refuse to stay silent now. Because you want to change America’s future and you have faith that your party, the Democratic Party, will give you that chance. I’m here today because I believe we should keep that faith, listen to your voices and count every single one of your votes. If we fail to do so, I worry that we will pay not only a moral cost, but a political cost as well.

We know the road to a Democratic White House runs right through Florida and Michigan. And if we care about winning those states in November, we need to count your votes now. If Democrats send the message that we don’t fully value your votes, we know Senator McCain and the Republicans will be more than happy to have them. The Republicans will make a simple and compelling argument. Why should Florida and Michigan voters trust the Democratic Party to look out for you when they won’t even listen to you?

Now, if you agree with me, I urge you to go to my website, HillaryClinton.com, and join the more than 300,000 who have already signed our petition asking the Democratic National Committee to count your votes. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the territories will have a chance to play a role in this historic process. Now is not the time for our party to have a dialogue about which states and which votes should count. The people of Florida are all too familiar with where that discussion can lead. In the end, we cannot move forward as a united party if some members of our party are left out. Senator Obama and I are running to be president of all Americans and all 50 states. And I want to be sure that all 50 states are counted and your delegates are seated at our convention.

So will you join me in making sure your voices are raised and heard so that your votes can be counted? Because remember, it’s been the mission of the Democratic Party, guided always by the understanding that as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt once said, “the ultimate rulers of our democracy are not the president, the senators, the members of Congress and government officials, but the voters of this country.” In this Democratic Party, the voters rule. So let’s make sure your voices are heard and your votes are counted.

Thank you, and God bless you, and God bless America.

Barack – God Bless America, Not God Damn America.

Hillary, don’t give up the fight. All the way to Denver!