The Three Co-Chairs of the DNC Delegate Credentials Committee All Served in Clinton Administration

MI and FL should count. Those were fair elections. The superdelegates can support anyone they want, that's what the rules say. You are all just afraid of a powerful and courageous womyn! Hillary, Yes we will!

Hillary . . . because she is honest!

this is a women who worked tirelessly on the Barry Goldwater campaign against Lyndon Johnson. This is a women who worked tirelessly to stop civil rights legislation. This is a women who worked tirelessly to promote segragationist policies. This is a women who now speaks of her lifelong support of civil rights. I could list issue after issue after issue where she is just so damn phoney. It's enough to make you puke. Come on man we are smarter than this. We deserve better than this. I can understand changing your policies as you grow and mature, however dont be a complete phoney and pretend. Thats what is so sickening. She just lies constantly. Have some integrity. Why did then president clinton lock all of her writing from this era from public view? ummm could it be that it would be less than flattering? people you must see through this shyster. dont fall for this nonsense. at least obama offers a genuineness that we havent seen in so long. he inspires ordinary people. that is what a leader is suppose to do. thats what lincoln did, thats what rooselvelt did. thats what kennedy did. shit, thats what reagan did. clinton doesnt cut it. i hope that we dont miss this opportunity. open your eyes and be honest about this.

Any Democratic party apparatchik who's not a member of Generation O (or whatever they're called now) worked in the Clinton Administration. Look at a list of Obama's senior advisors on just about any issue, and they've got Clinton on their resumes. I don't think this says anything about the secret loyalties of these three officials.

I've being reading Buzzflash for many years and I have always believed this blog to be fair in all matters Democratic, but the bias against Hillary in many of the articles presented here has been unbelievable.

Frankly I don't understand how the DNC can avoid seating the Florida delegates since all of the candidates names were on the ballot. The FL voters were definetly exposed to same MSM's version of the process that the rest of us were and since the people of FL turned out in record numbers how could they not be seated?
You act as if the Florida voters are nitwits, uncapable of choosing a candidate without the candidates TV commercials.

As for Michigan neither BO or JE was on the ballot so that will be a more difficult issue to resolve, but this much is apparent the voters of MI could have voted for OTHER instead of Hillary, BUT THEY DIDN'T.

Yesterday CNN's Bill Schneider presented polling numbers that suggest that there is a real bias against Hillary in this process and that bias is GENDER. Men overwhelming favor a male candidate over a female.

IS THAT WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE AT BUZZFLASH?
I hate to say it but it sure feels that way

As a Florida voter, I am indignant that the DNC is saying that our primary votes will not be counted. The date of the primary was moved by our Republican legislature and Republican govenor. Yet, the Democrats had no say in the move and our Democratic Representatives in Congress assured us that our delegates would be counted so 1.7 MILLION of us turned out to vote. Are you suggesting that 1.7 million voters be disenfranchised? I saw some states that only attracted less than 10,000 voters, yet they are relevant. As far as not campaigning here. We saw Obama TV commercials aired on our local channels before the vote. How is that not campaigning?

Any "Liberal" who would vote for Hillary, the Iraq war voting - NAFTA Creating - triangulate until my ass falls off, Clinton over Obama needs to turn in their Liberal Card immedeately. Bill is fucking liar with no will of his own who just wants to be loved by all and Hillary can't win without cheating. Stalin would have won the Michigan Primary if his name was the only one on the ballot. And to Florida, or more accurately "The country's wang", "Please drop dead". Your state has caused more trouble than I care to mention. To all of the retired jew geezers and the Cuban Uncle Toemases, "Shut the fuck up". You and your beloved governor Jeb are responsible for W's crimes and the fact that you support Hillary is more than enough to convince anyone with a brain to vote for Obama.

I was talking about the accusation that Hillary "rigged" the results in 2008. She won the Florida primary, but there's some dispute over whether delegates should be seated. That's all well and good. It's not fraud, or rigging an election, unless you're talking about Obama nullifying the results of the large Florida vote. In 2008.

For the second day in a row Buzzflash presents yet another deceptive, thinly veiled attempt to denigrate the democratic process and tilt the outcome of the Democratic nomination toward their favored candidate.

Mr. Karlin if you’re excited about the passion of this primary season then it should also be your passion to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida. In those two states 2.2 million Democrats clearly demonstrated their passion by going out and voting to show their preference in this race.

Much of your editorial is troubling:

“we'll throw some more wood on the fire with this follow-up to our alert yesterday on the likely role of the DNC Credentials Committee in deciding what to do about the unsanctioned Michigan and Florida "primaries." (In our view, they weren't primaries because there was no real campaigning in the states -- and in Michigan only Hillary Clinton's name was on the ballot.)”

Throw wood on the fire indeed. It would seem by your own admission that you wish to discredit any sensible attempt to resolve this issue by time honored recognized procedure and by so doing encouraging a split in the party at least among the rank and file.

When you say that they weren’t primaries because there was no campaigning I have to marvel at your desperation to clutch at anything to destroy the expressed will of 2.2 million people. Apparently you believe that without campaign ads, robo calls and canned stump speeches the people will be lost and adrift, incapable of forming an opinion. Mr. Karlin, primary voters are people who pay something more than casual attention to politics. Your characterization is an insult to the intelligence of everyone who cast a vote in the Michigan and Florida primaries.

Insofar as Hillary Clinton's name appearing on the Michigan ballot you should tell the whole story beginning with the fact that Hillary Clinton's name was not the only name on the ballot. Dodd, Gravel and Kucinich were also on the ballot. Tell them also that both Edwards (Disclosure I'm an Edwards supporter and voted Uncommitted in the primary) and Obama withdrew their names one day before the deadline. Their move was strategic. In proper context it should be remembered that in December 2007 Hillary Clinton had a large lead in most polls. The Edwards/Obama decision was intended to minimize both a sure loss and a Clinton win. It bought them time to establish themselves in the smaller states and avoid using resources in a much larger state following quickly on the heals of possible victories that could have broken any momentum. The Edwards and Obama campaigns thought they'd pulled a fast one on the Clinton camp.

Your charge that the co-chairs served in the Clinton administration betrays your advocacy in this matter. What you’re not saying is that it’s routine that people serving in high level positions would have served in past Democratic administrations. Since we’ve had only one Democratic administration in the past quarter century it’s a good bet that they would have served in some capacity in the Clinton administration. That fact DOES NOT mean that their leanings on any question would automatically favor Clinton. As you well know but are attempting to disguise is that people who serve in Democratic administrations are party loyalists first and foremost and are not necessarily beholden to a particular politician.

The caucus suggestion is ridiculous and wasteful. You suggest that the candidates spend additional money on campaigns, money that could be used in the general election against Republicans. Neither state government will fund these caucuses. Michigan can’t and won’t. Florida’s legislature is controlled by Republicans, fat chance of getting them to fund a caucus to ease the financial burden on Democrats. That leaves funding solely on the Party. Every penny spent on a caucus is one less penny available for Democrats running for public office in those states.

Requiring a do over only makes the party look foolish and the Democratic Party can’t afford to look foolish in an election this important. The beneficiary is the DNC leadership whose terrible error put us in this situation. Zeroing out the delegations was beyond the pale and now that ludicrous decision has come back to haunt. Even the Republicans were smart enough to avoid the death penalty.

The Credentials Committee has an opportunity to erase a truly foolish error.

It appears that you’re only concerned with a party split if a decision favors Clinton. By implication, if the decision favors Obama you appear to be unconcerned about any split that may occur because you’ve advocated ignoring the will of the people in the 4th and 8th largest states in the nation.

By advocating that the votes of 2.2 million people be ignored YOU are encouraging a split. The very tone of your editorial with its implication of impropriety only encourages rejection of any decision made by the Credentials Committee, the only body that can clean up this self imposed mess with minimal damage.

So many of the posts here are typical of the fanaticism among Obama's supporters. Dare to disagree with them and you're sleazy, unpatriotic, and immoral. Rather reminds me of Nader's Nitwits, or Limbaugh's Dittoheads! How dare Hillary challenge our precious, saintly hero? If she wins the nomination, we're gonna take our marbles and go home and not be your friends anymore, so there! "Anywho" may qualify as the most childish: "Clinton supporters are UGLY!!!" Do we smell bad, too?

Both groups spout the same tiresome cliches: "Bill Clinton, the best Republican president ever", "Billary", "the corporate candidates", and how evil the DLC is! Hey, folks, expand your repertoire, get some new lines!

Some just stagger into the realm of the ridiculous: "The DLC -- Nazi enablers, professional losers", John McCain is "the more liberal of the candidates", and "Senator Clinton, with her name recognition, IS the incumbent"! (Incumbent what?) The ones who foam-at-the-mouth with these absurdities also fancy themselves historians, political strategists, and psychologists -- for example, the one who lectures the Florida resident on Florida politics ("Don't you get it ...?").

In response to the Mondale analogy: Yes, we're in for another 1984 result ... if Ol' Obama is the nominee!

It's funny, when St Barack wins a state, it's the will of good people. When Hillary wins, there's some shady dealings afoot. (Let's double-check Missouri, by the way!) She won Michigan and Florida fair and square, and fully deserves their delegates.

Please don't presume to judge "Swift2", "Midwest Progressive", or me, simply because we choose not to swoon and sway over Obama! Personally, I'll look forward to the Convention, when the PA system has an announcement: "Barack has left the building!"

I have been increasingly pleased with the candidates from the Democratic Party- ALL OF THEM. For awhile, I was worried about Hillary Clinton on Iraq and Iran. If I had my druthers I'd prefer Edwards. He knows that the corporations' obscene power is out of control and heading us for disaster. But here we have two very strong, talented, brilliant knowledgable candidates and idiots claiming to be party members make sounds like Rush Limbaugh. I suspect they may be plants by the Republican Party determined to sow discourse at every turn. Certainly, some Democrats apparently haven't recovered from the Republican campaigns filled with lies about Hillary Clinton. Whoever you support and vote for, remember that both are a heckuva lot better to rescue our nation than anybody, including Libertarian Ron Paul, as honorable as he is, and John McCain, as heroic as he was. With a much stronger progressive base in Congress (please, God) in 2009, either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama will be able to advance an agenda to begin the long process of repair and healing our nation must have. Our futures are on the line here. So bug the DNC about restoring the voting rights to Michigan and Florida. Remember that the RNC is being put in the driver's seat with these schemes and ploys. Don't fall for it. Peace.
Pat Williams

The DNC has been stuffing us like geese with the Clintons for years now. The whole system is rotten and twisted to amuse the gallery while the Washington insiders and their enablers decide.

If Hillary is the candidate I'll either vote for a third party or stay home.

Good catch, Buzz. Another reason why the Clintons are not in a good position to call for 'party unity'.

They went for a 'win' in Michigan when that state 1) broke the party rule and 2) congested the already-damaged primary calendar. Then they did the same in Florida.

Then they acted as though a non-competitive race in MI and FL were the same as a real win. Now they are demanding nearly a monopoly of delegates from MI and FL, as a reward for having flouted the rules when the other Democratic candidates followed the rules.

Clinton supporters are UGLY!!! I knew there was a reason I voted for Obama. WOW! Nasty people.

This is disgusting. Where the hell do you think the DNC officials would come from? The Obama administration? If he wins, of course that's where it would come from. You foul the name of a Roosevelt because he played a role in the Clinton administration? He still reminds people of a president that Obama isn't worthy of mentioning. Where should officials come from? The Carter Administration? Kennedy or Johnson? They're very old now, or dead. From the Reagan-Bush decade? We lost elections back then. When Clinton won, it was difficult fillling offices because the Dems hadn't run Washington in a generation.
And what exactly leads you to believe that these officials -- who served in the Clinton administration -- would be anything but fair? They'll be fairer than the people from the Mondale and Dukakis administrations, because-- oh, there wasn't either one.

I've supported Buzzflash for a long time, ever since it came into being out of the 2000 election fiasco. But this is as low and divisive as you can make politics. Thanks for "bringing us together." If this is a sample of what you have in mind -- being Obama's Drudge Report -- you can forget about my support.

Ok, here are the facts again. According to Mark Brewer, head of the Michigan Dems, no Democratic candidate pledged to remove their name from the Michigan ballot. They only pledged not to CAMPAIGN (they could also fundraise). All the Democratic candidates' names were initially submitted to be on the ballot, and only on the very last day before any more names could be added or deleted, did Obama, Biden, and Edwards make a tactical decision to take their names off the ballot so as not to upset the voters in Iowa or New Hampshire. (Again, all this was after the state of Michigan has asked the DNC several times over the last 7 years to change the primary process so NH and IA aren't always first, to which they were summarily ignored).

So, you can argue the merits of counting the delegates or not, but please do not continue spewing the half-truths and lies that St. Obama is better because he didn't break the rules by having his name on the ballot. Not true.

Clinton will be the nominee no matter what the rank and file want. Get over it. The corporate masters of the Democratic Party have spoken and she's the only acceptable candidate for them. I shudder to think that I could agree with Ann Coulter's view of the candidates but if Clinton is the nominee, I would prefer to vote for the more liberal of the candidates...John McCain.

Buzz,

How f-ing dare you take sides in this party issue. You can now count on losing financial support, mine included.

Sorry that Dean and the DNC were so short-sighted as to risk two large, critical states in this election. Got outsmarted by the RNC, who gave Michigan an energizing primary with a more pragmatic reaction.

And since Sen. Obama didn't want to offend Iowa and New Hampshire by including his name on the Michigan primary ballot, maybe I shouldn't offend him by voting for him in November. My vote isn't all that important, is it Sen. Obama?

So the DNC Credentials Committee are to decide what to do about the unsanctioned Michigan and Florida "primaries."
Sorry this does not make sense. It smacks of retroactive legislation - which is almost always a disaster.
When the DNC committee made the decision to unsanction Michigan and Florida they knew exactly what it would mean. They have no further need to meet in relation to this matter.
Michigan can tell their voters exactly what was meant. Florida can tell their voters exactly what was meant.
If this clarity is not apparent then the DNC Credentials Committee have made an enormous mistake in their ability to pick words and are disqualified in my mind from picking presidential candidates.

The DLC is not about winning, or at best only secondarily about winning. The DLC's number one job is to keep their corporate masters satisfied so the corporate money keeps rolling in. Don't believe it? Why do you think Neocon Nancy's top priority is protecting Darth Cheney from impeachment. When she's not busy at that she spends every free moment pretending to be a progressive and then preemptively surrendering to the white house nazis. Or look at Weak Reid in the senate. He allows corporate Repugs to stop a bill with a nod and a wink but progressive Democrats are told that they will have to filibuster day and night or else he'll give the store away. The DLC - nazi enablers - professional losers.

It seems to me that a candidate can be attacked for improprieties, if strategies or circumstance line up in their favor, or, viewed as victimized if it doesn't.

We should have enough to worry about in very real corrupt and criminal activities relating to the voting machinery and disenfranchisment of voters.

Same dynamics. Party insider with the money gets the nod against surprisingly strong popular opposition resulting in glorious loss for the history books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_1984#Convention

I wish Democrats would get serious and quit thinking you could run roadkill against the Republican and win. Hillary is way too much of a lightening rod to both the right and liberals. And at the _very_least_ how many blacks are going to vote when party insiders pick the crony who was always ordained to the crown? How much pull will the DLC, or the Democratic Party for that matter, have then when selecting within their flock pulls the party down?

I live in Florida and I knew who I wanted to vote for from debates news coverage of the campaigns and newspaper articles about both candidates. To imply that simply because the candidates did not appear in person in our state that we cannot trust the outcome of the primary, and yes in our mind it was a primary why else would we have had such a large turnout, the person that won was Hillary Clinton. She did not have an advantage over Barak Obama in Florida. She did not campaign in Florida either but she won the popular vote and the delegates should be counted as they were in every other state. Howard Dean's ridiculous exclusion of our delegates for violating party rules based on the moving up of our primary by a Republican controlled legislature that knew they were making mischief created this problem. Frankly I don't think Obama should be complaining since he continuously stated our votes did not matter and called our primary a beauty contest. He won't be getting my vote in the fall if he is the nominee and I am not alone in that feeling because he was so quick to dismiss us before the primary and again after he lost the primary. Maybe his attitude toward our vote may have suppressed the turnout of his supporters but that is the consequence of fluffing off such an important state and one that will be very important in the fall. Maybe he is not as brilliant as everyone assumes he is since he shot himself in the foot. Oh well that is the cost of playing politics and using spin to try to counter a loss.