It's really obvious at this point that the people who want to seat Michigan and Florida as-is care more about Hillary winning than they care about doing the right thing. This just cements it even further.

Jeebus H Keee-rist, I cannot believe anyone would want to have HRC as a President. Look at the trash she has chosen to run her campaign. These are exactly the kind of duplicitous scumbags that will form her cabinet and help formulate policy.

MI and FL screwed themselves, and Hillary was on board with all the other Dems to let them suffer the consequences, and now this harpy and her cabal want to re-write the rules.

We're still in primary season and this witch is already breaking campaign promises.

Hillary is trying to kneecap Obama to help her chances in 2012.

Furthermore, Terry, Carville, et al are old arrogant assholes who'd most likely rather lose to the GOP machine then some young upstart campaign.

GOP beats Hillary: Everyone runs to McAuliffe and Co. wondering how they won in 92 and 96.

Obama beats Hillary: They are part of a failed system with an archaic view of how to run a campaign.

Hillary is the face of the campaign, but these guys want that shot in 2012 just as badly.

Why does stuff like this keep coming out Friday evening? I really hope the MSM latches on to this one and hits her with it next week.

I hope everyone who is going to vote in the next couple of weeks sees this first.

Out of all the bull, it's maybe most insulting that some honestly think we are oblivious of such pathetic antics.

If there was ever a time to call shenanaigans - we have arrived.

politics are not now, if they have ever been, about what is good for the people or the country. It's about winning.

Why are people even surprised anymore is what I find shocking.

I Said: Furthermore, Terry, Carville, et al are old arrogant assholes who'd most likely rather lose to the GOP machine then some young upstart "UPPITY" campaign.


FTFY

the ONLY thing Obama should be saying in regard to clinton's insistence on counting Florida and Michigan's primary votes is this:

"IF SENATOR CLINTON CANNOT EVEN FOLLOW THE RULES OF HER OWN PARTY, THEN HOW CAN SHE BE TRUSTED TO UPHOLD THE LAWS OF THE NATION?"

CravenMorehead: Why does stuff like this keep coming out Friday evening? I really hope the MSM latches on to this one and hits her with it next week

they're too busy crucifying Obama. They'll get to Hillary once they've done that.

I never thought I could loathe a group of people as much as I do the neoconservative Republican elite, but the neoliberal Democratic elite is catching up fast.

Skeptos: I never thought I could loathe a group of people as much as I do the neoconservative Republican elite, but the neoliberal Democratic elite is catching up fast.

Two sides of the same coin.

Howard Dean has been a disaster.

llegar: Howard Dean has been a disaster.

On the contrary - Terry McAuliffe was the disaster. You just didn't know it until he wasn't doing the job anymore.

Got to agree with icy_one.

McAuliffe was a farking disaster. I remember the guy making one bone-headed move after another during his tenure. I really think that he played a much bigger role in the defeat of Kerry than he was ever credited. The guy was constantly doing something stupid and costing Democrats support.

All of this adds up to McCain in the Whitehouse.

What a colossal implosion this is turning into.

\sigh

lawboy87

Got to agree with icy_one.

McAuliffe was a farking disaster. I remember the guy making one bone-headed move after another during his tenure. I really think that he played a much bigger role in the defeat of Kerry than he was ever credited. The guy was constantly doing something stupid and costing Democrats support.

For me, the moment when I realized that Terry McAuliffe was beyond incompetent and detached from anything resembling objective reality was right after the 2002 midterm election, when he was all over TV desperately trying to spin the ass-raping the Democrats took in that election as some kind of victory. McAuliffe is basically an empty suit with a donkey pin on the lapel.

By contrast, in his very first national campaign as DNC chairman, Howard Dean succeeded in winning back Congress for the Democrats for the first time in twelve years. Granted, a lot of that was because of the Republicans' accelerating descent into Colbertesque self-parody, but a lot was also due to Dean's insistence on building strong party organizations in "red" areas that had previously been written off as unwinnable. By any objective measure, Howard Dean has been the most effective Democratic chairman in a generation.

I think he's in a difficult situation right now. I have little doubt that he privately supports Obama, but given his position he has to remain completely neutral. Waiting for the primaries to be over before he eases Clinton out the door is, while annoying, the right thing to do.

lawboy87
I really think that he played a much bigger role in the defeat of Kerry than he was ever credited.

I doubt I'll get an honest answer to this, but... four years ago the righties on Fark said that Kerry was never intended to win, that it was a deliberate setup so that Hillary could run now, and EVERY single lefty on here said they were full of it and it could NEVER happen. Now I watch the left making comments all but admitting that the right was dead on in their estimation of the Clintons and their clique all along. Do you really think the Clintons changed? And has any lefty on here yet had the guts to admit that the conservatives were right about them all along?

Wraithbane: I doubt I'll get an honest answer to this, but... four years ago the righties on Fark said that Kerry was never intended to win, that it was a deliberate setup so that Hillary could run now, and EVERY single lefty on here said they were full of it and it could NEVER happen. Now I watch the left making comments all but admitting that the right was dead on in their estimation of the Clintons and their clique all along. Do you really think the Clintons changed? And has any lefty on here yet had the guts to admit that the conservatives were right about them all along?

Bill Clinton was at worst a mediocre president. He didn't torture people, he didn't wiretap people without a warrant, he didn't start wars of choice, he didn't run up the national debt. He actively attacked terrorists (namely OBL) and understood their threat (which was promptly ignored by Bush).

Bill Clinton the human being is probably a powerhungry piece of shiat of a human being (he gets it from his wife). Yea, you guys were right about him being a bad person... Want a cookie?

Good. You lie with dogs, you are bound to get fleas.

Mr. Anon
He actively attacked terrorists (namely OBL) and understood their threat (which was promptly ignored by Bush).

Um, bullshiat.

If Clinton didn't get the job done in the 8 years he had, you damn sure can't blame Bush for not doing it in 8 months. And if Clinton truly did understand the threat, then he was even more grossly incompetent in not taking OBL out. There were 70 ongoing investigations into OBL when 9/11 occured. So tell me, what exactly was it that Clinton did, that Bush STOPPED, that made the difference? The policies that were in place under Bush failed, the very policies that had been continued from the Clinton administration.

Neither Nillary nor Obama will be able to win against McCain.

If Obama wins the primary, McCain's campaign will focus on his inexperience and his connections to criminals in Chicago.

If Hillary wins, his campaign will focus on her pathological lying, plus all the Clinton dirt going back to Bill's campaign. And there is a lot of Hillary hate out there.

The Democrats farked up again.

/although I kinda like McCain, expect for his ideas about the war

Mr. Anon:
Bill Clinton the human being is probably a powerhungry piece of shiat of a human being (he gets it from his wife).

While I think most men become powerhungry pieces of shiat because our wives and girlfriends drive us that way like cattle, I think Hillary was attracted to Bill because she knew she wouldn't have much work to do.

/We just want sex, a fast car, and a big screen TV
//It's our girlfriends who aren't happy if we aren't bossing around people at work

Mr. Anon: Bill Clinton was at worst a mediocre president. He didn't torture people, he didn't wiretap people without a warrant, he didn't start wars of choice, he didn't run up the national debt. He actively attacked terrorists (namely OBL) and understood their threat (which was promptly ignored by Bush).

Bill Clinton the human being is probably a powerhungry piece of shiat of a human being (he gets it from his wife). Yea, you guys were right about him being a bad person... Want a cookie?

Oh sure, by comparison Clinton was a mediocre President. Unfortunately, the beginning of the Bush administration is largely to blame on the Clinton administration being too wrapped up in blowjobs from fat chicks to properly steer the ship.

But on topic, McAuliffe can be blamed for the presidential election loss in 2000, midterm losses in 02, and the presidential election in 2004. McAuliffe doesn't have a strategic bone in his body - only spin. And spin isn't a strategy, its a risk-mitigator. Look no further than the Clinton 08 campaign for evidence.

Dean has been brilliant. Know how the Dems have the majority in the Senate this year? Among other gains... Tester (Montana), McCaskill (Missouri), and Webb (Virginia). 50-state strategy. That's how.

If both candidates are unelectable (and I'm starting to fear it may be so), Obama's ground game, new-voter draw, and money will help gain congressional seats. Hillary Clinton? Seeing as how the party still hasn't recovered from 1994 (hell, the Dems lost seats in 1992, too), that seems pretty dubious.

Still, he's risking going down as the James Buchanan of his party... the guy who was totally impotent in the face of an incoming civil war.

rumpelstiltskin: //It's our girlfriends who aren't happy if we aren't bossing around people at work

I wish it were that simple, but my old boss had Napoleon Syndrome well beyond anything his wife was catalyzing. He was a small man, physically and intellectually, and loved nothing more than to crush his competitors while pushing around his employees to feel like a big man.

Didn't last long. The guy was assaulted out in front of his own home, and sifting through his long list of enemies was like figuring out who shot mr. burns. My point: It ain't always lady Macbeth behind Royal Murders.

icy_one: Oh sure, by comparison Clinton was a mediocre President. Unfortunately, the beginning of the Bush administration is largely to blame on the Clinton administration Republicans in congress being too wrapped up in blowjobs from fat chicks to properly steer the ship.

FTFY

Clinton was launching missles at OBL and republicans were screaming "WAG THE DOG!, WAG THE DOG!"

Wraithbane: Mr. Anon
He actively attacked terrorists (namely OBL) and understood their threat (which was promptly ignored by Bush).

Um, bullshiat.

If Clinton didn't get the job done in the 8 years he had, you damn sure can't blame Bush for not doing it in 8 months.

Um, I'm not really blaming him except he completely ignored all the warnings from the Clinton Admin about terrorism.

Mr. Anon: icy_one: Oh sure, by comparison Clinton was a mediocre President. Unfortunately, the beginning of the Bush administration is largely to blame on the Clinton administration Republicans in congress being too wrapped up in blowjobs from fat chicks to properly steer the ship.

FTFY

Clinton was launching missles at OBL and republicans were screaming "WAG THE DOG!, WAG THE DOG!"

That's all he was doing, launching missiles. I'm not defending Congress at the time, but let's face it - launching a few cruise missiles into Nowhere, Iraq is not getting shiat done. It gives you the appearance you're doing something without actually doing anything.

As for Lewinsky, the Clinton administration shifted from doing the work of the executive branch to damage control, and as a result we saw an incredibly weak 2000 economy. And clearly those cruise missiles as foreign policy really got the job done re: Bin Laden. There's enough blame for Bush and Clinton on the issue - Clinton left the issue behind for the next President because it wasn't politically wise to take action.

They lie with such ease and when you call them on it, they just shrug and move on. How much cognitive dissonance can Clinton supporters take before they have to face the truth?

icy_one: That's all he was doing, launching missiles. I'm not defending Congress at the time, but let's face it - launching a few cruise missiles into Nowhere, Iraq is not getting shiat done. It gives you the appearance you're doing something without actually doing anything.

He was shooting missiles into Afghanistan, not Iraq.

----------------------
Currently listening to the Replacements' All for Nothing/Nothing for All

Lionel Mandrake: the trash she has chosen to run her campaign

I Said: Terry, Carville, et al are old arrogant assholes

My favorite is Mark Penn, whose firm Penn, Schoen & Berland tried, illegally and unsuccessfully, to subvert a national election in Venezuela, by fabricating false exit poll and publicizing it hours before the polls closed.

He "resigned" a couple weeks ago when it came out that, while Sen. Clinton was publicly opposed to a free trade deal with Colombia, Penn was working with Colombian officials to lobby for the deal.

He continues as an adviser and pollster for the Clinton campaign.

Mentat: How much cognitive dissonance can Clinton supporters take before they have to face the truth?

The truth that the Clinton's aren't really liberals? That they sold out the progressive intellectuals in the early 90's? Using them like ATMs whenever they needed to run another campaign?

Why do you think Nader got so much traction? Sure there are some Dems who are still starry eyed about the Clintons but these Dems are about as liberal as Reagan.

The constant foaming at the mouth by the right-wing about how the Clintons are pushing their librul agenda down the throats of middle america is still absurd.

Hey Subby, thanks for letting me know the link was to a DailyKos page, thereby allowing me to not click the link and subsequently tarnish my computer.

quickdraw:
The constant foaming at the mouth by the right-wing about how the Clintons are pushing their librul agenda down the throats of middle america is still absurd.

Criticism of Bill Clinton reminded me a lot of the criticism of Reagan; Clinton wanted to create the People's Republic of America, and Reagan wanted to nuke the entire eastern hemisphere.
Both sides missed the point, and hatred of Reagan made the Dems lose their way, and hatred of Clinton made the Republicans lose their way.

Satosuke: Hey Subby, thanks for letting me know the link was to a DailyKos page, thereby allowing me to not click the link and subsequently tarnish my computer.

Because the Daily Kos falsified the quote, right?


Oh, and just to "tarnish" your computer (hey, can I have it?):

We already had top Clinton supporter Harold Ickes, who voted to sanction Michigan at the DNC, then now complains about the sanctions he himself approved.

Now we have Terry McAuliffe himself, as DNC chairman, enforcing the very rules he now thinks should be broken.

Mark Nickolas digs out the relevant passages from Terry McAuliffe's own book:

"I'm going outside the primary window," [Michigan Sen. Carl Levin] told me definitively.

"If I allow you to do that, the whole system collapses," I said. "We will have chaos. I let you make your case to the DNC, and we voted unanimously and you lost."

He kept insisting that they were going to move up Michigan on their own, even though if they did that, they would lose half their delegates. By that point Carl and I were leaning toward each other over a table in the middle of the room, shouting and dropping the occasional expletive.

"You won't deny us seats at the convention," he said.

"Carl, take it to the bank," I said. "They will not get a credential. The closest they'll get to Boston will be watching it on television. I will not let you break this entire nominating process for one state. The rules are the rules. If you want to call my bluff, Carl, you go ahead and do it."

We glared at each other some more, but there was nothing much left to say. I was holding all the cards and Levin knew it.

[Source: McAuliffe, Terry. What A Party!, p. 325.]

Now?

Terry McAuliffe: I'm saying they've already voted, let's count the votes. I'm saying that the state parties in those states need to work with the national party and figure out how we count the votes that have already been voted.

Hypocrite.

This sort of politics reminds me of the list of Republicans complaining about Clinton's war. Times change, and opinions must keep up with the times.

/News Flash: Terry McAuliffe has a different job, now.

TheCid: Hypocrite.

I'd say that's a huge understatement.

If only there was some sort of system for numbering states, perhaps by the date they joined the union, then we could use that to determine the order of the primaries...

I guess the Hillary campaign will get my attention when they say something that does NOT contradict what they said earlier.

This isn't even news anymore.

Sultan Of Herf: If only there was some sort of system for numbering states, perhaps by the date they joined the union, then we could use that to determine the order of the primaries...

Or...

Order the states based on the % of the population that voted for a Dem candidate in the previous congressional election. In this case, go back to 06 and see how each state voted. The end result puts the priority back to the states to round up support if they expect more say in the primaries. States who vote Dem get an earlier say, in addition to their already bigger say via delegate proportioning.

Or, easier - hold a lottery, drawing all the contests out of a hat and then holding them in that order. Pre-designate when each voting date will be and then fill the states in later.

RandomExcess: News Flash: Terry McAuliffe has a different job, now.

Not for long.

This is not Nam, this is bowling, Smokey. There are rules.

Two sides of the same coin.

Heads they win.
Tails you lose.

Farkin' trick coins!

TM: "Rules are rules"

Yup.

To give in at this point would be to set a dangerous precedant for the "I wanna to have my cake and eat it too" crowd.

If there's a silver lining in all of this, it's that we can begin to see now what kind of forces a good man actually has to go up against in our society.