By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

If, like me, you favor a revote in Florida, or if like Jeralyn, you oppose a revote in Florida, and you are a Florida Dem, here is your chance to tell the Florida Democratic Party what you think:

Please read the memo from Chairwoman Thurman about a suggested solution, and submit your input by Friday, 3/14/08, at 6:00 PM EST. No decision will be made until we hear from Florida Democrats. Thank you.

You can download the memo here: PDF Link

You can read the press release here: Link

Let's make this an Open Thread.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

What is the status of the revote processes in Florida and Michigan? In Florida, because of recalcitrant and foolish Democrats in that state, coupled with a lack of fight from the Clinton campaign, the FL revote plan is near dead on arrival:

The Democratic Party's unprecedented plan to conduct a do-over presidential primary by mail sustained several potentially fatal blows Thursday, leaving state party leaders with few remaining options. The entire Democratic House delegation opposed the plan, Barack Obama and representatives of Hillary Clinton expressed concerns, and state officials said Florida law would prohibit them from authenticating voters' signatures.

(Emphasis supplied.) The "can't do" spirit did not infect all Dems. Some looked for solutions to the problems raised:

On January 15, 2008, 594,398 Democrats went to their polling places and voted in their state's primary. The official Michigan election results are here.

328,309 Democrats in Michigan voted for Hillary Clinton. She won all but two counties, Washtenaw and Emmet. 238,168 voted uncommitted. 21,715 voted for Dennis Kucinich. 3,845 voted for Chris Dodd. 2,361 voted for Mike Gravel.

Hillary got 55% of the vote. The uncommitted, who either were truly uncommitted or for Obama, Edwards or Biden, all three of whom voluntarily withdrew their names from the ballot, got 40%. Kucinich, Dodd and Gravel won 5% of the vote.

Barack Obama now proposes he get 50% of the state's delegates. That would be vote-stealing. It would be disenfranchising 5% of Hillary's voters. It would be assuming that every uncommitted voter and every voter for Kucinich, Dodd and Gravel now want their vote to go to Obama.

That's called stealing an election.

Obama prevails in this crazy theory at his peril. There will be hundreds of thousands of Democrats across the country who will refuse to vote for him in November, thinking better a Republican than a cheat. [More...]

As TalkLeft noted here, the Justice Department's IG issued a report today on the FBI's use and abuse of national security letters. Also noteworthy is this:

The department’s inspector general, Glenn A. Fine, said his office’s interviews with F.B.I. Director Robert S. Mueller III and his top aides had shown a commitment in “energy, time and resources” to fixing deficiencies, and that “significant progress” had been shown since the abuses were first disclosed a year ago.

However, Mr. Fine’s report cautioned, “we believe it is too early to definitively state whether the new systems and controls developed by the F.B.I. and the department will fully eliminate the problems” uncovered in 2007.

In simple English for the legalese impaired: the nation's top law enforcement agency is doing a better job of obeying the law now that it has been caught taking shortcuts, but will probably continue to disobey it this year, just less often.

There will be yet another presidential debate between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton -- in Pennsylvania before the primary.

There may even be one more, in North Carolina. Obama has agreed and Hillary has not yet responded.

Update: The AP says Obama has not responded to repeated requests to release his earmark legislation for six of his eightyears in the Illinois Senate. Yet, he's criticizing Hillary on this score:

While silent about Obama's spending in Illinois, his campaign has criticized Democratic presidential rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton for withholding similar information about her years in the U.S. Senate.

Obama communications director Robert Gibbs said Thursday that her position should prompt voters to "ask why she doesn't believe they have the right to know she wants to spend their tax dollars."

***

Sen. Barack Obama released his list of 2006 legislation with earmarks today. He has the list on his website here.

Among them, an $8 million request for the "High Explosive Air Burst Technology Program." Ultimately, $1.3 million in funding was awarded for the program. [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

So Michigan getting it done, but Florida Dems say no to their own plan?

Michigan Democrats are close to an agreement with presidential candidates Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama to hold a do-over primary. Party officials and the campaigns negotiated on Thursday, and state Democratic leaders were hopeful that an agreement could be reached on Friday, said Democratic officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks.

The Inspector General's report on the FBI's use and abuse of National Security Letters has been released. It's called "A Review of the FBI’s Use of National Security Letters: Assessment of Corrective Actions and Examination of NSL Usage in 2006, March 2008" and is available here (pdf).

Also out today, "A Review of the FBI’s Use of Section 215 Orders for Business Records in 2006, March 2008" available here (pdf.)

The ACLU's reaction to the report is here. [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

(Speaking for me only)

Steve Benen notes Ed Rendell saying this:

On a conference call with reporters moments ago, Rendell said: "Let's assume that Senator Clinton goes ahead in the popular vote count." He then asked, "which is more democratic" -- choosing the winner of the popular vote or the winner of the pledged delegate count.

"The way we select delegates is not all that democratic," Rendell continued, in a reference to caucus voting. "The rules were going in that super-delegates were there to exercise their judgment...as a super-delegate I want to make sure we win in the fall, and I'm gonna take the candidate who can do that."

Steve acknowledges the power of that argument while doubting Clinton can win the popular vote. Frankly, speculation from any of us is rather pointless. Let's count the votes when they come in. But therein lies the problem with the Clinton campaign's refusal to fight for revotes in Florida and Michigan. To be perceived as the popular vote winner, Clinton needs revote wins in Florida and Michigan. I do not understand the Clinton campaign strategy at all on Florida and Michigan.

The Canadian press is doing a good job of covering the pre-trial hearings underway this week at Guantanamo. As I wrote Sunday, one pertains to Canadian Omar Khadr, now 21, who was captured at age 15 and has been held ever since. The defense is targeting Omar's interrogations and scored a partial victory today in getting the judge to order that correspondence between the U.S. and Canada about Omar be turned over.

The other hearing is that of Afghan Mohammed Jawad. Jawad was 16 when he was captured. His hearing yesterday did not go smoothly.

The military's 90 page document outlining charges against all charged detainees is here(pdf).

The ACLU is monitoring the hearings. In related news, (no link yet, received by e-mail) the ACLU is filing a lawsuit today "to force the government to release un-redacted transcripts in which 14 prisoners now held at Guantánamo Bay describe abuse and torture they suffered in CIA custody."

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

Mark Halperin reports this absurdity:

-Michigan’s 156 delegates would be split 50-50 between Clinton and Obama.

–Florida’s existing delegates would be seated at the Denver convention—but with half a vote each. That would give Clinton a net gain of about 19 elected delegates.

– The two states’ superdelegates would then be able to vote in Denver, likely netting Clinton a few more delegates.

Does anyone think this will salve the wounds? Would Clinton be stupid enough to accept this? This is Howard Dean's plan? How clueless is the Democratic Party?

NOTE - Comments are closed

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

While I earlier criticized the Clinton campaign's work on revoting Michigan and Florida, let me reserve my most serious criticism for the work of the DNC on this, particularly Howard Dean. What I find hilarious is the notion that Howard Dean will somehow step in and "end the campaign," when he can not even step in and lead on this, where there is an obvious need for Party leadership. Instead, Dean says things like this:

[T]oday on CNN Howard Dean said the DNC wouldn't back any plan that isn't favored by both campaigns: "We’d like to do it in a way that’s fair, that both sides believe is fair. Fair to the voters but also fair to the campaigns."

So Dean will do nothing, lead nothing, help with nothing. What a disaster the DNC is.