Barack Obama Elected President!

[Roman]

From ABC News.com:

Clinton Campaign Chair Threatened to Strip Michigan of Delegates in 2004

April 26, 2008 5:33 PM

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., has staked her path to the Democratic nomination on the officially illegitimate contests held in Michigan and Florida somehow being recognized, in opposition to Democratic National Committee rules.

What's so remarkable about this is that two of the Clinton campaign's most important strategists have in the past taken the stand that these states should abide by the DNC's instructions -- even if that meant stripping them of their delegates.

In direct contrast to the positions they hold now.

Senior strategist Harold Ickes as a DNC Rules Committee member in 2007 voted -- along with the other 11 Clinton supporters on the 30-member committee -- to strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates as punishment for disobeying the DNC primary calendar schedule.

Ickes now is a leader of the "count Michigan and Florida" rhetoric coming from the Clinton campaign, despite his previous position.

Now comes this curious find, on Daily Kos.

It turns out that irrepressible Clinton campaign chairman Terry McAuliffe once -- when he was DNC chairman -- threatened to strip Michigan of delegates if that state's Democrats carried out their long-time goal of disobeying the DNC calendar.

In his lively book, "What A Party!: My Life Among Democrats: Presidents, Candidates, Donors, Activists, Alligators and Other Wild Animals," McAuliffe tells the tale. If you're an Amazon.com member, you can read the passage for yourself on pages 324 and 325.

McAuliffe at the time had been pushing for early contests for South Carolina and a Western state with a large Latino population, perhaps Arizona or New Mexico.

"Our plan became very controversial," McAuliffe writes. "Some people thought any change was bad. Others thought we were not shaking things up enough. Leading the charge for more radical alterations in the primary calendar was Michigan Senator Carl Levin, who thought Iowa and New Hampshire should not have exclusive rights on voting first and that it was time for other states to have a turn. He had pushed unsuccessfully for change before the 2000 elections and was back in full force this election cycle. He made it very clear on the telephone that if I allowed Iowa and New Hampshire to go first, then Michigan was going to act on its own and put its primary first."

McAuliffe invited Levin to make his argument before the full DNC meeting on Jan. 19, 2002. Levin did, and his motion was defeated by a unanimous vote.

"After the vote, the issue was settled in my mind -- however, not in Carl's," McAuliffe writes.

On Feb. 1, 2003, Levin, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., and Dingell's wife Debbie (a DNC member and power broker unto herself) called McAuliffe.

"They told me they were going to hold the Michigan primary before New Hampshire's," McAuliffe writes, "which would have led to complete chaos since New Hampshire has a law stating that it must hold the first primary and the DNC had already voted on this issue and settled it.

"'If you do that, I will take away 50 percent of your delegates,' I told him.

"They thought I was bluffing. But it was my responsibility as chairman to take action for the good of the party, and taking away half their delegates was well within my authority...The whole primary calendar was in danger of spinning out of control. The candidates kept calling me and asking what was happening with the schedule, and I made it clear that I was not going to let Michigan throw the entire process out of whack. Finally I'd had enough and scheduled a meeting in Carl's Senate office for April 2 to settle this once and for all...

"Soon Carl and I were going at it.

"'I'm going outside the primary window,' he 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."

Clinton herself said, in October 2007, "It's clear, this election they're having is not going to count for anything." She said she was keeping her name on the ballot (unlike her competitors) just so when it came time for the general election she could argue she had not ignored the state.

It wasn't until Clinton lost the Iowa caucuses in January that she acted as if the Florida and Michigan contests had any meaning at all. As Tallahassee political journalist S.V. Dáte recently wrote in Slate, "Last summer and fall, when the DNC made these decisions, she had a lot more clout. She exercised none of it."

As for Ickes and McAuliffe -- they have exercised a great deal of clout. But it has been in the name of preserving order, even if that meant stripping recalcitrant state Democrats of their delegates.

As McAuliffe said then -- "the rules are the rules."

Why? "For the good of the party," he wrote (then).

- jpt

[DevotedToAMC]

I have heard of Terry McAuliffe before but I have to read up more on him

[Roman]

Is it true that, (1) Hillary surrogate, Congresswoman Shiela Jackson Lee, is also a devotee of Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright; that he's been preaching at her home church, where she is actively involved, annually for the past 15 years and has an open invitation to return, and, that she sat in the pews for his visits and did not bat an eye?

Is it true that (2) Hillary surrogate, Rev. Marcia Dyson was not only a longtime member of Trinity United Church of Christ but also still considers Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright her pastor? That Rev. Marcia Dyson's seminary education, in part, was sponsored by Trinity UCC and encouraged by Rev. Wright? And was it not at Trinity were she first met her husband, Rev. Dr. Michael Dyson, who's been very vocal in his defense of Rev. Wright.?

And, lastly of Hillary Clinton, that if Rev. Wright would not have been her Pastor, then why did she and Bill when going through Impeachment, turn to Rev. Wright for Prayer and Support and invite him to the White House? These things should be asked and answered.

I knew about the last point, but would love to know about the first two points.

[DevotedToAMC]

I don't think Bill/Hillary knew about Reverend Wright's controversial statements when he went to The White House since they were not reported

[David_Vickers]

I'm sick of all the infighting. You Obama and Hillary fanatics must be thanked by the McCain campaign.

[Adam]

My thoughts exactly...... I am all for standing behind what you believe in, but there is a line where that aspect is taken to far, and that is with everything from soaps to politics.

[DevotedToAMC]

I think both camps will come together when the ticket is either Obama/Hillary or Hillary/Obama

[Roman]

And you do make an excellent point.

But, it will not be all sunshine and roses as some would believe. There are some hard feelings right now, and it seems that many have their heads stuck in the damn sand.

I'm sick of it too. That's why I wish it would be over with, so Obama ca choose his running mate and we can get on with it.

[Roman]

And my point is is that she has no problem bringing up this man's name......completely forgetting the fact that she and her husband called on him as wel in their hour of need.

[DevotedToAMC]

I understand but that was at a time they did not know about his controversial nature....now that she realizes what he is capable of doing, which is stirring the pot, she is speaking out. There have been times in my life where I spoke out against someone I considered a friend

[Roman]

Dude......you can'ts ee she is doing this to bury that man?

NOW she realizes?

You know what? Mulder is right.........I'm so sick of this garbage I don't know what to do. No matter what she does, there is always some excuse.

I'm done..........and the Democratic Party is about to get exactly what it deserves.

[DevotedToAMC]

I don't see her trying to bury him because it appears as if both candidates have moved on from that story.

The same can be said of Obama and how there is some excuse for him

[Roman]

What she should have said was she wasn't going to make one more comment about that garbage.

What she DID say was this:

From ABC News:

April 28, 2008 12:59 PM

ABC News' Eloise Harper Reports: Senator Hillary Clinton knocked Republican presidential contender John McCain and the Republican party for politicizing the issue of Senator Barack Obama's pastor, Rev. Wright, but tip-toed around her reaction to her Democratic opponent's handling of the matter.

“I have said that that that was a personal decision of his I answered one question about it that made it clear I would not have stayed in that church under those circumstances," Clinton told reporters in Graham, NC. "But, I regret the efforts by the Republicans to politicize this matter and I believe that if Senator McCain were serious he would do more than just send a letter he is the putative nominee I think he could very clearly tell the North Carolina party tell the Mississippi party that he would not tolerate those kinds of advertisements and I’m waiting to see if he does that.”

When asked if Wright’s comments were a reflection upon Obama, Clinton quickly and matter of factly said, “You will have to ask him that.”

Clinton refused to respond to whether she agrees with Gov. Dean’s proposed time-line - that one of the Democratic nominees must drop out after the June primaries - and instead said, “I think this has been good for the Democratic party.” She added, “We are going to go through these next contests and see where we end up and well take stock of where we are when we finish but I also believe we’ve got to resolve Michigan and Florida.”

The former first lady was also asked if the divisiveness from the 1990’s should be a concern to voters to which the Senator responded that she was proud of the fighting she and her husband did on behalf of Americans.

“I guess I’ve read enough history and know enough about American politics to realize that if you are going to stand for change big change,” Clinton said. “ I don't think anybody should be surprised that they are going to fight back and they are going to fight back by coming after the people who are standing there fighting for the American middle class. So, I frankly wear that as a badge of courage.”

Clinton was also asked if her campaign is in discussions with the DNC to help begin fundraising for other Democratic candidates running in November. Clinton acknowledged that her campaign was speaking to the DNC, but when the reporter followed up about the status of those discussions, Clinton said, “you will have to ask the campaign.”

Clinton was asked if she thought Obama’s new appeal to blue collar voters will resonate – Clinton said “That will be up to the voters to decide. What voters know about me is that I have a long record of fighting for the interests.”

But, of course, she didn't mean anything by any of it......

Which is why, if she does get the nom, she will get her ass kicked this November.

[DevotedToAMC]

I am glad she, at least, knocked the GOP and McCain for continuing to publicize the Wright thing as if it is the worst thing to happen. Time to move on from it

[Roman]

Then that's what she should do.