Monday, December 7, 2009

Are Democrats Finally Getting A Clue?

Yes, and no. They realize they need to change how the primaries are conducted, yet don't see any real problems with how the last one went. I have written about the rampant Caucus fraud ad nauseum, but apparently, the DNC missed it. Even though the Clinton Campaign told them about it. Oh, whatever - you can't make the blind see, especially when they don't want to see.

Of course, my favorite (cough, choke) representative, Jim Clyburn, who is MY representative (cough, choke) is the voice for this article, "Democrats Consider New Presidential Nominating Process." Honestly, the whole thing would be laughable if it weren't so delusional:
National Democrats are considering changing the presidential nominating process, by establishing a new primary calendar and deemphasizing the influence lawmakers and political insiders have on choosing the party nominee.

The battle for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination was marred by controversy as the Democratic National Committee argued with some state parties over when they could hold their primaries and caucuses and candidates were forced to take sides in this important internal party dispute.

House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-South Carolina, said that the 2008 nomination contest "yielded a great candidate," but readily acknowledged the problems that arose.

"We need to improve a little bit in spite of the fact that we got a great candidate out of the process," Clyburn said Saturday at a meeting of a DNC working group tasked with drafting a new plan. "It was not very comfortable at various points along the way."

Oh, yes, Obama the unqualified was just the most outstanding candidate in the entire field, with all of his vast leadership experience. Yeah, right.

And that pesky little "controversy"? That's more often referred to as CHEATING, and people getting pissed off about it. But don't let me rain on the Democrats' Delusion Train.

How many of us complained about the way in which the Primaries were conducted, particularly the caucuses, and how states were penalized? How convenient for them to consider changes now that the damage has been done:
Democrats see an opening to change the system now, because this is "a rare cycle of no apparent Democratic presidential nomination challenge" in 2012 as President Obama is expected to seek a second term, according to the "Draft Report of the Democratic Change Commission," discussed at the meeting.

Commission members, who range from lawmakers and grassroots activists to President Obama's campaign manager, are charged with putting forth recommendations to help expand the Democratic base and increase more ethnic and regional diversity in choosing the party's presidential nominee in 2016 and beyond, assuming Obama seeks a second term.

A commission suggestion would be to allow the first four states that held nominating contests in the January 2008 maintain their early, privileged calendar positions. But these states - Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina - would be directed to delay holding their caucuses and primaries before February 1. All other states would be forbidden from holding their nominating contests until at least the first Tuesday in March.

Another recommendation in the report suggested grouping states by "region or sub-region."

"This would not be a mandatory obligation upon the state parties," the commission stated. "The commission recommends that these clusters be staggered throughout the window to allow for a deliberative process that benefits all voters and caucus-goers through the country."

States parties that abided by the DNC's calendar would be rewarded by getting special perks at the national nominating convention.

"Special Perks"? Oh, wowie zowie - like their own Rainbow Pony?

Here is where it gets good:
The commission also discussed how to reduce the influence of unpledged delegates – lawmakers and party insiders also know as superdelegates – who played a big role in the 2008 nomination contest.

"Unpledged delegates constituted 19% of the total convention and the presidential candidates were compelled to spend a substantial amount of candidate time and other resources to seek the support of these automatic delegates," the commission stated. "We learned that in a closely contested presidential race, the nomination could be decided by this category of delegates."

No formal solution dealing with superdelegates was arrived at Saturday and the commission will draft a plan to reduce their numbers in the coming weeks.

"The DNC must address the perception that there are too many unpledged delegates and those delegates could potentially overturn the will of the people, as determined by the state contests," the commission stated.

"COULD potentially overturn the will of the people"? How about it DID overturn the will of the people! Between the Superdelegates and the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee, which decided not to follow its rules and by-laws, it most definitely DID overturn the will of the people. The PEOPLE picked Hillary Rodham Clinton. The DNC and its minions made damn sure of that (make sure you read the Comments at the end of the article - other people get the influence the caucses and ACORN played). What a crock. See why I said these people are delusional?

The commission is expected to vote on its final recommendations before December 18. The recommendations will then be sent to the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee for further debate and discussion.

Mark Brewer, chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party, said he had no problem with reducing the number of superdelegates as long as state party chairs and vice chairs maintained their status and party leaders continued to play a role at the conventions.

But Brewer took exception to the idea of allowing four states to be granted a special exemption to hold their primaries before other states.

"From the perspective of Michigan and other states, it is unfair that any state have a permanent place at the top of the process," said Brewer, who attended the meeting but is not a commission member. "It is unfair to give any states or state a monopoly."

The Republican National Committee is also looking at how its party chooses its presidential nominee, and the DNC expressed interest Saturday in working with its political rival on a nomination calendar.

As a resident of SC, you may recall we were allowed to get away with having our primary TOO early, with absolutely no penalties whatsoever, because they knew the state would go to Obama. Especially since they, including Jim Clyburn, were working HARD on painting the Clintons - both of them - as racists.

Pathetic. Truly pathetic. These people will simply refuse to admit there was ever any wrong-doing whatsoever by Obama's minions with caucuses or the DNC in stealing the nomination from Hillary Clinton, thus from US.

Personally, I don't support liars, cheaters, and thieves. I guess I can add "Delusional" to the beginning of that list, too. Problems in how candidates are chosen cannot truly be addressed until past wrongdoings are acknowledged and rectified. The DNC seems far, far away from ever being able to do that.

And this is exactly why, after being a lifelong Democrat, my response to them is to fuck off. Changes now aren't going to make up for the machinations of this past campaign season, and the arrogant, petty, neophyte with whom they stuck us. When they admit they should have a do-over, perhaps I won't be so harsh on them. I'm not holding my breath for that ever happening, thus the sentiment is justified.

Bottom line, too little, too late, and with no remorse on the part of those who manipulated the outcome. In other words, no, the DNC hasn't gotten enough of a clue. Will they ever?


SFIndie said...

Why is it I have a nagging feeling deep down inside that there's a hidden agenda to this sudden realization that the primary process needs to be "improved a little bit"?

I do have to agree with Clyburn, though. The 2008 nomination contest did indeed yield a great candidate; the Dems, unfortunately, threw her under the bus and chose the illusion.

There's gotta be something else going on, some way in which they think they can lock it up for The One for a second term, ensuring that "rare cycle of no apparent Democratic presidential nomination challenge"...keeping Hillary out...

I've just got that feeling... something's not kosher....

Logistics Monster said...


if they keep putting it out there - then maybe it will become the truth at some point. I have come to the conclusion that every single person that disagrees with the dems needs to register as a republican and vote all the rinos out - even if it is just for a few election cycles. 31% republican and 40% indie is alot more than 37% dem. We wouldn't be in this position if we had balance in the branches.

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

SF, you are spot on - yes, it DID yield a great candidate! I still feel that we missed out on possibly having the greatest president this country has seen in a long, long time, but the DNC decided on Obama...

Good observation, too, SF. Hmmm - yes, you're right - something is amiss.

Or maybe they realize they need to get Obama out of there since his poll ratings continue to decline (to 47% - lowest for a prez at this point EVER)...

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

LM - good point. I have to say, one major frustration for me is that SC doesn't care what your political party is, so i didn't even get the satisfaction of changing my affiliation to Independent! Dangit.

But you are right - the ones who are in now need to be voted out...

Mary Ellen said...

They can make recommendations until the cows come home, the process will always be flawed and corrupt, IMO, because the laws are written by flawed and corrupt politicians.

I do have to agree with Clyburn, though. The 2008 nomination contest did indeed yield a great candidate; the Dems, unfortunately, threw her under the bus and chose the illusion.

Ha! That's exactly what I said to myself when I was reading this post! We're on the same page, SFIndie!

SFIndie said...

...maybe they realize they need to get Obama out of there since his poll ratings continue to decline...

Oh, Rev, you've just provided me with my newest fantasy:

The Democratic Powers That Be have realized, in less than a year, that they have made the biggest mistake ever (not that it will stop them from passing The One's monstrosity of a health insurance giveaway). The One has already been told that come 2011, he's to announce that he is not seeking a second term as he wants to spend more quality time with his family. The DPTB grovel at the feet of the only person who has a prayer of putting the country back on track, begging her to please please please forgive them their sins and be their one true leader. She agrees, 2012 goes down in history as the Year of Hillary (I think the Mayans predicted it...that's what 2012 is all about, you see) and she sweeps into the White House on the wings of victory and on Day 1, gets down to the hard work of putting the pieces of this country back together again. Of course, she succeeds...and in her 8 years in the White House we see a renewal of prosperity and abundance for all.

I LOVE that fantasy!

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

SF and Mary Ellen, you ARE on the same page!!

LOL abt the Mayan prophecy - wouldn't that be freakin' AWESOME?? Oh, I LOVE that idea!

Mary Ellen, you certainly have a point abt the flawed policies by which they are operating. Then again, isn't it that they DIDN'T operate by their own policies that got us Obama? That whole Rules and Bylaw Committee crapola??

In any event, let's hope SF has it right! :-D