Obama for president......Battle of Island Number Ten! ( Archived) (800)

A few years ago George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, a very attractive woman, and a rather unattractive woman were riding on a train.

Suddenly, the train entered a tunnel and everything went dark. A loud 'SLAP' was heard.

Just then, the train exited the tunnel and everyone was able to see again. Bill Clinton was rubbing a rather angry looking red spot on the side of his face.

The unattractive woman thought to herself "I guess Bill must've grabbed that attractive woman and she slapped him."

The attractive woman was thinking to herself "Ol' Bill must have reached for that unattractive woman thinking she was me, and she slapped him."

Bill Clinton was thinking to himself "George W. must have grabbed that attractive woman, and she thought it was me and she slapped me."

George W. Bush was thinking to himself "I hope we go through another tunnel so I can smack him again..."



Sorry, Dude. Just trying to interject a little levity into this thread before I go to work!

...The Kansan...

Fabulous one Kansan!

LOL....my thought is he must of hit him with a open hand and not a closed fist.

Quotes from the DNC to the Committee on Rules and Administration United States Senate on S.1905 Sept 18, 2007.

S.1905 was legislation to set the primary times and to correct the MI and FL issue.

Some on the DNC Fairness clause in its Rules of Order. It likely sound like this:

"Achieve the common goals of fairness, inclusion, diversity and maximum participation by all voters of each party in their party's nominating process."

The fairness clause normally supersceeds all the other provisions of rules of order. With a dispute they can come back to a fair ruling.

The 500 Democrat are debating whether Florida and Michigan deligates should be sat or other wised punished for the change in primary dates. See the words "maximum participation"? By giving the two states either a partial seating or a partial vote per deligate, they are breaching this basic concept of their own fairness clause. Assuming this Florida state law was unfairly made, all they had to do was come here.

So do they have the right to deny the two states this maximum participation? Yes. But the DNC rules tell how much penalty.

"The one exception was Florida, where the legislature passed, and the Governor signed, a law providing for a binding presidential preference primary to take place on January 29, 2008. The state party
submitted to the DNC a delegate selection plan providing for use that primary to allocate delegate to the Convention, in violation of the DNC rules."

'The punishment is a automatic reduction of 50% of the deligates.
The lost of the State's super deligates that are from Congress and a Democratic Governor of the state'

Watch:

"At it meeting on August 25, 2007, the DNC RBC found Florida's plan in non compliance with DNC rules, and vote to increase the sanction against Florida by reducing the state's deligation by 100%."

Really nice guys. First, the legal 50% of the deligates and then take away the remaining 50%. Where in the DNC laws says that they can do that? They had already assessed the punishment. Realized it was not getting enough media exposure, so they upped the punishment. Talk about not playing by the rules, Ras!

To keep others:

"To date, the DNC's effort to enforce the rules have been, except as to Florida, successful in preventing other states from scheduling events prior to the February 5 in violation of the rules."

At this point Congress is working on S.1905.

Again:

"The DNC does believe that the responsiblity for establishment of the rules for selection of the delegates to each national party's nominating
convention should remain with each national party."

Basically they don't want Congress to pass a law on primaries and resolve this issue of MI and FL.

And does Florida have a responsibility mandated to the selection of the of President?

A Surpreme court ruling.

"Cousin v. Wigoda 419 U.S. 477.487 (1975) "The State themselves have no constitutional mandated role in the great task of the selection of President and Vice President canidates"

A get of jail card.

The Conclusion:

"For the reason stated above, the DNC expresses its hope that the Congress would not, at this time, take any action on federal legislation addressing the scheduling of presidential primaries and caucus. We
respectfully urge the Senate Committee on Rules and Adminsitration not to report favorably on S. 1905 or any similar legislation on this matter."

Basically, the DNC blocked legislation to resolve the FL and MI deligate issue back in Sept 18, 2007 in a Democratic controlled Senate. DNC wanted this mess from the beginning as a both a payback to Florida on the 2004 Presidential Election recount AND for a self constructed political issue.

The 500 in the Rule Committee meeting did not have the moral courage to defend the FL and MI voters with the fairness clause of the DNC. The fairness clause is there for the voter, Ras..not the party or the canidate.

Lastly:

That a McCain Republican is explaining your own DNC fairness clause and the game that was played on the FL Dem Delegates....should speak volumes to you.