http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Jd9wwrEnsM

Marcy wrote:
Hillary doesn’t care as much about seating the elected delegates. She wants the supers, because she knows she’ll net about 20 delegates that way. That’s actually the Solomon part of this–it’s designed to elicit “ohno! You can’t disnfranchise the supers.” Which will show that this was never really about the disenfranchisement of DF voters.

This calls for a video standup commentary — posted to YouTube. The time has come. It’s time Mainstream America hears from you MW !

Then she started making the phony disingenuous vibes about the voting rights of Michigan and Florida four months later even after if they were counted, she still couldn’t catchup in the popular vote which by the way isn’t the way the rules work that Ickes made. I think it’s ironic that Ickes not only made the rules to begin with, but he pushed imposing sanctions for both states he now wants to overturn after the game is in the fourth quarter.

I just have to say the two worst things I’ve ever seen her do are her total support of McCain in this election, trying to tear apart her fellow candidate, and thinking I’m stupid and can believe her phony claim to the experience she refuses to define. That and the hiding the income tax for 2007 and the contributors to the Clinton foundation with phony excuses that only a moron would believe.

Clinton has the utmost contempt for people. It’s a chuckle as to how she is stiffing people including Penn when she is sitting on $109 million. How much money do some gluttons think they need?

To be clear: I’m quite aware that the ordinary citizens of Michigan and Florida had nothing to do with moving up the primaries. But if they did not complain, then they get what they got.

I have the way.

After Obama gets the nomination, and he can focus on McCain without the Clintons campaigning heavily for McCain (btw I wouldn’t push her for Senate Majority leader because she has done nothing significant during her seven years in the Senate except her stupid vote on Iraq and she continues to push “experience” like someone who has swept McDonald’s and wants to see patients in an ER after that job resume–I think her campaign performance merits she is out of the Senate as soon as possible and many of us are looking for someone to run against her in NY).

I have the solution.

Michigan becomes really engaged now. They get Dingell out of any leadership positions–the DNC has refuted Dingell in a very direct way and she’s on the DNC. They vote Levin the hell out. They vote Granholm the hell out.

They take their Michigan energy and they work to institute Rotating Regional Primaries and voting machines that are secure with paper trails in every state by 2012. That’s constructive. They vote for President Obama in November and work like hell to get him elected.

If they want to opt out, so be it.

We have moved on Marcy. Every day gets closer to Obama as the nominee. We respect the agreement Clinton signed.

I would remind EW and Bmaz that no one is campaigning harder for McCain than Hillary Rodham Clinton and no one deserves more to be her VP candidate. The people of Michigan will be free to vote for the McCain-Clinton ticket I want to happen should they desire and if they have registered to vote.

What’s strange to me about Bmaz’s comments is that he excoriates those of us who want Clinton held to the agreement she made, and I have not heard word one from a very perceptive, prescient Bmaz as to the fact that Clinton has been saying that McCain is qualified, that she is experienced but no one can quantify how or where she gained said “experience”, and that Clinton has said repeatedly except in one debate that Obama is not qualified, and Ickes and Hillary and Bill, and little Clinton have been perstering Super D’s with phone calls day and night and arguing this. I know that one local Super Delegate told Chelsea that her arguements and her mother’s were so vapid and disingenuous they made her vomit. I enjoyed hearing that.

This says it all and I quote from it:

Fair Weather Wolverine Hillary Rodham Disigenuous

I know Bmaz knows what a contract is in a profound way.

This is the contract that Yale law graduate Clinton signed on August 31, 2007:

Contract Signed by Hillary Clinton, Yale law graduate on 8/31/07

On Sept. 1, the Clinton campaign issued this ringing statement:

We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process. And we believe the DNC’s rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role. Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC approved nominating calendar.

When Clinton was a legend in her own mind and a forgone conclusion to being coronated as President Prom Queen in the dyansty back in September and October, these are her words (she pretends to selectively have Altzheimer’s as to them):

With much less at stake in the matter, she told a New Hampshire public-radio audience, “It’s clear, this election [Michigan is] having is not going to count for anything.” Clinton was unwilling to take her name off the Michigan primary ballot, as Obama and her other significant rivals did, but like them she agreed not to campaign in Michigan or in Florida before their primaries.

Of the committee’s 30 members, a near-majority of 12 were Clinton supporters. All of them—most notably strategist Harold Ickes—voted for Florida’s full disenfranchisement. (The only dissenting vote was cast by a Tallahassee, Fla., city commissioner who supported Obama.)

This is my response to quotes where Marcy only posted over at FDL (I presume to get more signatures on her petition) Marcy and Bmaz’s responses on Marcy’s FDL thread are below:

1) My position isn’t about me personally. Clinton signed a contract. I want her held to the contract, and I frankly don’t want a candidate who can’t abide by her word–this is symptomatic of that trait in Clinton.

2) It all depends Bmaz on what one means by fundamental fairness. When a woman whose parents paid for Yale law school who graduated Yale law school signed an agreement I damn well expect her to abide by the agreement instead of pretending it never existed in order to screw the other candidate who has won the popular vote, the delegate vote, and is entitled to be the nominee and hey hey will be the nominee. You can petition until you’re blue in the face. It won’t change the facts.

3) Clinton sure as hell is trying to break rules, Bmaz, the ones she signed and agreed to, that I linked, and Marcy’s petition is trying to help her break them.

I appreciate and respect Marcy gave Obama $100 based on the trash that came from McAuliffe’s mouth, and this is one of many reasons I’m the first to aplaud Marcy. I’d like to see her as Senate Majority Leader ASAP, but then we’d lose her here. Hell, President would be fine with me. That’s Marcy Wheeler as Senate Majority Leader or President, not Clinton who is going to be neither for good reason.

4) I have said to Bmaz more than once I profoundly regret any punishment for Michigan engaged voters. They are being punished by their selfish, stupid leaders who don’t deserve to be leaders. Levin has been jello spined as to Iraq and in many other areas, but that’s for another day. Fortunately Debbie Dingell is not in the House or Senate and never will be.

5) I respectfully disagree with Bmaz. Those of us who won’t allow Clinto to screw Obama are not “warped” nor are we “cynical.” She signed the agreement and that’s the end of it. Now Clinton wants to break those rules she said and signed that she’d abide with. No way in hell that’s going to change.

6) If Clinton rues the day she made that agreement as she continues to make a fool out of herself, so be it. I’m enjoying her pissed off misery that shows up when she isn’t fake smiling.

7) Bmaz asked: “Should we bother to have any other elections this year or are you going to decide all those in your infinite wisdom too?”

We are going to have an election in November, and I’m going to vote early in September for Obama. I don’t know about infinite wisdom, but my vote will be my legal right.

Marcy’s idea does not pimp the Michigan Super D’s out of anything. They are all Clinton supporters. Gutless Granholm, the union leader, Ditzy Dingell, and Levin are staunch Clinton supporters and they don’t give a damn how they steal the election. Consider them caught in the headlights and in the paddy wagon. They are not going to get out of the store whose window they tried to break.

9) EW is dead wrong about Obama and Biden taking their name off the ballot. That was done as part of the agreement that Clinton signed that all candidates made. In fact, Clinton stated that there was no reason to remove her name since Michigan was not going to count. She’s on the record with that statement.

“I personally did not think it made any difference,”

Her exact words can be viewed here Bmaz:

Forfeited Delegates May Get Second Look

The DNC showed Dingell who is a full member what they thought of her whacky dishonest reasoning–they rejected her to her face in spades. Good for them. Down with Dingell. To the degree Debbie Dingell is pissed off, I’m ecstatic.

Note well Bmaz: “Ickes and Clinton’s other supporters on the rules committee ignored Dingell’s plea and voted to strip Michigan of its delegates.”

10) Marcy wrote over at FDL that “nothing is fair at this point.” Nope Marcy. Wrong. What’s fair is not to count Michigan and Florida. That was the agreement that both current Democratic candidates inked. Both of them were over 21 and had the benefit of reasonably good law school educations, Harvard and Yale law schools. Neither of them is now alleging they had mental disability when they signed the agreement to the best of my knowledge.

11) Marcy goes on to write that we’re dangerously close to activating party activists badly enough that November is at risk.

12) The way Michigan heals is for the activists there to start working on a process for 2012 that will allow rotating regional primaries so the misfortune that your leaders have imposed upon you never repeats again. I don’t remembera big hue and cry during the foreplay to the clusterfuck by massive amounts of Democrats in Michigan in August-October 2007. Maybe Marcy can enlighten me there.

13) I don’t care what the topic of discussion is that embraces Hillary’s delusions. She has $109 million whose source she hides; she has 2007 tax returns she hides. That’s enough money to get psychiatric treatment for a few thousand people and then some. BTW–why don’t the stingy tight Clintons kick in their own money and start paying the tons of people they owe and are stiffing right now?

14) Marcy says she isn’t convinced Clinton can’t win this. She says a lot depends on Indiana and Peurto Rico. Check the polls in Indiana and Peurto Rico. Obama gains in them every day that passes. I don’t know what you think Clinton is garnering there. I’d love to hear.

15) Edwards never came close to winning, and my heart is with Elizabeth. I want to see her become a breast cancer cure. I would point out that those of us who try to get our patient’s care are now fighting a new move by insurance companies where they are charging our patients 30% or more of a co-pay for expensive life saving drugs like those for metastatic breast cancer, that they need desperately to have a chance to live. Specifically I mean we fight this now every day:

Co-Payments Soar for Drugs With High Prices

I haven’t heard a word about that issue from any candidate, nor have I heard a detailed word from Clinton or Obama on how they propose to pay for their health plans that would never get through Congress. I also have never heard a word about what Clinton’s plans were for health care in 1994. She refuses to say.

I don’t know if Marcy or Bmaz are listening to black radio or not. Turn it on. They have it in Michigan–Arizona I don’t know. Many black and white voters who back Obama will not vote for Clinton if she is somehow the nominee (not going to happen) and Obama has won the delegate vote period. Clinton has no way to win the popular vote either. And there are many more than the MSNBC talking heads represent (btw Buchanan and Scarborough and Tweety and Fineman claim to represent us and they don’t have a clue). I defy anyone to show me the math that allows her to win the popular vote. We are a couple weeks away from a massive Super Delegate migration to Obama and then Clinton will be the personification of the cartoons all over newspapers this weekend.

16) I don’t agree with Marcy’s younger brother analogy, because a younger child is one thing. The people of Michigan were awfully quiet when Debbie Dingell arrogantly screwed them. They aren’t “younger brothers.” They are adults. I don’t know why Marcy referred to them as children. They aren’t children.

17) Kwame is going to jail and so is his mistress. That has nothing to do with this. Their crime was not sexual. It was the people they disregarded and the egregious settlement they crafted.

18) Check your history. The Democrats in Florida passively let their clusterfuck happen.

This is from Bmaz over at the FDK and I want to respond, and I will in the only way I can. As usual per the Lake, there are several of the zed type comments that Bmaz accurately characterized the other day–comments that go “Right on!” etc. always praising whatever the blogger has said without bothering to read, or understand, or analyze the issue that has become the trademark not of the FDL bloggers but of many of their commenters.

I know that Marcy said she didn’t want comments on candidates, or the election, but if you read the FDL thread she sure as hell is getting them and tolerating them and one could argue that she invited them over at the FDL. It’s darned near impossible to pose some solution to Michigan without eliciting that any seating of any delegates does help Clinton who is not entitled to any of this type help. I do applaud Marcy’s idea to penalize the Supers who Marcy has honestly fingered, as I have, but after all, there were people like Marcy who watched this clusterfuck happen, and maybe they were powerless, and I don’t know about Marcy back in September of 2007, but her collegues were damn quiet when this happned.

Marcy chose to post this petition thread selectively at the Lake for whatever reason instead of posting here. And my disagreement with Marcy and Bmaz has nothing to do with my profound respect for both of them and the unsurpassed quality of the work they do and the ideas they contribute, and I know they know that.

Bmaz wrote over at the EW Lake only (why in the world did EW post at FDL only and not at both places as Bmaz said she would?) post on the Michigan petition:

From Bmaz with considerable passion from Bmaz:

I really don’t understand those that are for against this proposal, and resolving the Michigan/Florida problem in general, out of some animus over Clinton. Do you really believe that your personal political desires and likes supersede the fundamental fairness of insuring that two large and critical states actually get to participate in the election process? I fully agree that Clinton has been disingenuous on her portrayal of the votes in Michigan and Florida, but she broke no rules; so just exactly what is your basis for the fevered desire to “punish” her at the expense of the citizens and voters in Michigan and Florida? That is a remarkably cynical and warped thought process. Should we bother to have any other elections this year or are you going to decide all those in your infinite wisdom too?

But the”voters” were not, and are not, responsible for the problem in either Florida or Michigan. The deal in both states was almost solely the work of a small set of Dem. party bigwigs with a little intermeddling by Republican State legislators. That is why Marcy’s idea to pimp these party bigwigs by leaving them out of her solution, while letting the common voters be counted, is attractive. And EW is dead nuts right about the fact that Obama, Biden et al taking their names off the ballots was not only not required, it was done out of sheer political ambition and calculation, not to mention a whole lot of suckupery to whiny New Hampshire.

Oh, by the way, did you know that the almighty New Hampshire also broke the clear letter of the same rules Michigan and Florida broke, but there was not even any mention, much less action taken, of punishing New Hampshire. Why are two large and critical states being completely taken out of the game when nothing whatsoever has been done to a small state that violated the same rules?

From Marcy over at the Lake only on this subject:

First and foremost, it’s a matter for the rules committee–heavily influenced by Dean–(in May). I’m doing the petition to try to change the debate right now into real compromises that will stop the posturing.

Nothing is fair at this point. But on the ground, we’re very close to alienating the party activists badly enough that November is at risk. So, even though I’d rather my vote not count, I also think it’s time to find a solution that takes MI out of the news and allows us to heal from a very ugly process.

I could suggest it because doing anything else will ensure that the top object of discussion for the next two months will be how Hillary “won” MI. This is a compromise. NO one wins, but at least we get to move on.

And I’m not actually convinced Hillary CAN’T win this. A lot depends on IN and Puerto Rico, I think. But this solution doesn’t give her enough to really use it to swing the election. We become–as we were intended to be–a non-issue. But at least the people sent to Denver–83 of them, at least–will have been selected via a democratic process.

She’d actually get about 14-19 in the solution (including the PLEO net). And honestly, the PLEOs on the uncommitted side are not reliable Obama supporters–most would be Edwards supporters, if I had to guess.

It’s not cost that’s preventing it. It’s 1) legal issues, 2) the Republicans, 3) the fact our Clerks think it can’t work, 4) that no one could figure out how to allow Democrats who crossed over to vote in the GOP primary in January to vote.

Number 4, actually, is a sub-debate very similar to the one going on about MI in general. Hillary, because she knows anyone who supported her in January didn’t cross-over, wants to exclude them. Obama, who knows that hsi supporters–and Independents and REpublicans who might support him–may well have crossed over, insists they should count. And no one could come up with a good solution for how you count them but prevent Rush from his chaos.

Had everyone agreed to do a firehouse caucus in February (which is how we did our caucus in 2004), then it might have been feasible. But now it is simply not going to happen.

I sort of agree with you–no reason to punish Obama.

But in MI, there are a lot of people who ARE really mad that Obama pulled his name. So that language is in there to appeal to MI’s prejudices, rather than national perception of what went on.

Consider it this way: Obama pulled his name so as to not piss off NH. So in MI, he chose NH over MI.

Again, it’s a compromise. Least worst. It’s not perfect, but it’s good.

If I were a mother, I wouldn’t think it smart to punish my youngest children because their older brother forced them into doing something they didn’t want to do.

The older brother in this case is the supers. This solution advocates punishing the older brother, but not the younger children.

That’s true.

But I’m coming from a position where 1) MI has won the last two Presidentials solely through the turnout of CDs 13, 14, 15. Washtenaw and Detroit. Washtenaw kicked ass in 2004–but we did it with hundreds of volunteers–tons. Those volunteers are checking out right now–they ARE high information, and they’re checking out. Uncommitted won Washtenaw, but the folks here I’ve talked to would be satisfied with this.

Detroit (CD 13 and 14) is another issue. They’re more low-information (and distracted at the moment by Kwame’s personal Clusterfuck). But if they get pissed off, they will not turn out. None of Hillary’s solutions will work. But neither will letting it fester for two months.

I don’t think it can get much worse than Hilary counting MI’s pro-Hillary votes in her bogus popular vote totals, without counting uncommitted for Obama.

The people who would do such a thing in NY or CA are the superdelegates. If they know they, personally, would lose their vote (along with the money and the schmoozing that comes with it), they would have a big discincentive not to do it.

FL is NOT in the same boat. The problem with MI, that FL doesn’t have, is that Hillary is out there claiming she “won” a primary in which she was the only candidate on the ballot. That, plus the fact that MI’s Democratic supers were (as far as I understand the FL process) much much more active in pushing the early primary. The same supers are now trying to spin the election based on their affilliation with Hillary.

Obama will still hand McCain his ass in November, and I hope Hillary is his running mate.

Clinton signed a contract. Now she wants to break it, and apparantely the petition weilders do as well. The egomaniacs from Michigan who were their supposed leaders screwed the people of Michigan and that ship has sailed and is out to sea.

Hopefully that will give them incentive to work on rotating regional primaries so that this will never happen again.

At nearly age 70, in 2016, Cliton can try to resurrect her now failed campaign once again and maybe the people of Michigan will have taught their failed leaders not to disenfranchise them.

I can see from the comments on the thread over at Lakeland that the FDL puppies are their usual level of clueless.

Clinton signed an agreement in order to campaign in four states; now people want to help her break it. She was well over 21 when she signed it and had the benefit of a previously expensive Yale law school course in Contracts although she failed to pass the D.C. bar and hasn’t had the courage to take it ever again.

Michigan will be seated when Barack Obama has the nomination in hand and we can go after McCain with a viable candidate.

There is no Republican who draws breath who doesn’t want Clinton as their mark. Not one breath out of Scarborough or Buchanan’s mouth from now until Obama has the nomination is directed at anything other than trashing Obama.

Despite all the stupidity with Reverand Wright, the weatherman, and the prescient comment about bitter people, guns and religion, in a campaign that has been injected with religion when religion has no place whatsoever in how we pick the President of the U.S.

The most important factor is that you cannot tell Clinton and her campaign and her surrogates from pure bread Republicans. Thats what she is and that’s what they are.

I see her as a possible Veep Candidate for McCain in the fall. I hope so. I’d love for Obama to run against her as what she is–a Republican in the general.

That’s a real downside, since he was doing so to comply with the DNC rules. But if it’s a slight enough penalty, and he wins the nomination anyway, fine with me.