home

The Rules Are the Rules, Except When They Are Not

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:31:46 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I am confident Josh Marshall will tremble in outrage at this blatant violation of the DNC rules. Via Corrente, Marcy Wheeler explains:

The Democratic Party's charter requires that the Party:

Establish standards and rules of procedure to afford all members of the Democratic Party full, timely and equal opportunities to participate in decisions concerning the selection of candidates, ... and further, to promote fair campaign practices and the fair adjudication of disputes. (Charter, Article I, Section 4)

More...

Yet both the Democratic National Committee and the Michigan Democratic Party appear to be violating that requirement in their selection of which challenges to the MI Clusterf[**]k to hear at the May 31 Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting.

At least one group of ordinary Michigan citizens submitted a complaint that appears to fulfill all legal requirements. Yet the MDP has failed to follow its own rules on how to assist with and respond to that complaint--and it also did not comply with the requirement that it publish the names of those selected in the April 19 district conventions (which triggers a deadline for the submission of complaints). And the DNC will only hear the two state party-led complaints at the May 31 Rules and Bylaw Committee, thereby violating the requirement that "all members" of the party be able "to participate in decisions concerning the selection of candidates."

Yet again, the rules are the rules, except when they are not. Josh Marshall must be crying over the vile state of the DNC and its "principles." Right?

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Obama Blog "Shocked" That Politics Is Being Practiced | Counting the Votes Is . . . >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    The Rules Are the Rules, Except When They Are Not | 22 comments (22 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Blessed are the fungible, (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by bslev22 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:36:01 PM EST
    not.

    This is a big problem . . . (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Same As It Ever Was on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:37:03 PM EST
    Courts are loathe to interfere in the party selection process, but they may not be unwilling to force the Party to follow its own rules.  Litigation is not what we need at thsi juncture.  The DNC needs to fix this and hear the complaint.

    I guess as a Clinton supporter (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by katiebird on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:37:28 PM EST
    my motives are suspect.  But, I'm starting to be embarrassed to be a Democrat.

    You are on a roll today... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by kredwyn on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:38:51 PM EST
    and I was right. My CPU went "Wheeeeeee!" as soon as I logged on.

    What's the BTD record (none / 0) (#16)
    by oldpro on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:45:17 PM EST
    for 'posts in one day?'

    Anybody?

    Parent

    People (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by sas on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:41:33 PM EST
    in power decide what rules to follow, and which votes to count....

    Makes you realize all the things about right and wrong,  truth and honesty, laws, fairness that you ever learned, well intended, believed at the time by your parents, teachers, churchesetc, were just a crock....

    dismal

    Have I reminded everyone lately (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by magisterludi on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:47:42 PM EST
    that I think this nomination is fixed?

    I would agree. (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by samanthasmom on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:59:49 PM EST
    August 28, 2008, Barack Obama will deliver his acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention. Behind him will be a huge screen displaying Martin Luther King, Jr.  delivering the "I Have a Dream" speech on August 28, 1963. Who could have ever guessed that this choice of date for the convention would give us a such a reason to have tingles down our legs?  But then I believe there was more than one gunman.

    Parent
    Aaargh! I despise those plot & scheme . . . (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by wurman on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:36:22 PM EST
    . . . interpretations of the way things appear to happen.  My spiteful attitude results from a generic recognition that the gang of operatives who are perceived to be the co-conspirators are totally incapable of organizing a 2-car funeral.

    It just seems utterly improbable that the DNC & the "incipient" Obama campaign could have joined forces so long ago to set up this debacle.'When pigs fly,' sez I.

    Sez you, 'There's a flock of 'em now right alongside Obama-borg-cube 1.'

    And the so-called Clinton contingent on the RBC sure did cave-in quickly & mistakenly.

    Parent

    Obama tingles (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:13:26 PM EST
    are sposed to go up legs, not down.  Just sayin'

    Parent
    Now this is the netroots I remember (5.00 / 3) (#10)
    by joanneleon on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:10:59 PM EST
    Thank you to Armando and Marcy for some sanity.

    'I will support the Democratic candidate, (none / 0) (#8)
    by magnetics on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:01:11 PM EST
    be he even a Yellow Dog, but! lower than that ye shall not drag me!'

    Jus' sayin'.
    (I quote from memory)

    Michigan Cluster**** (none / 0) (#9)
    by jsj20002 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:05:04 PM EST
    The Michigan Democratic Party Leadership is solely to blame for this entire fiasco -- Levin, Granholm, Brewer, Dingell et. al.  I had to vote "uncommitted" because I supported Edwards at the time. I could have written in the name of any natural born citizen of the U.S. except for Edwards, Obama, Biden or Richardson.  If I had written in my wife's name or even John McCain's name on the Democratic ballot, my vote would have been accepted; but if I voted for a candidate who had removed his name from the ballot, my vote would have been disqualified.  

    No blame to Obama for taking his name off (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by samanthasmom on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:12:32 PM EST
    and denying you the right to vote for him?

    Parent
    Read my post again. (none / 0) (#20)
    by jsj20002 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:13:27 PM EST
    I said I was prepared to vote for Edwards, not Obama.  It was not Obama's fault that I could not vote for Edwards.  It was, and still is, the fault of the incompetent leadership of the Michigan Democratic Party.  

    Parent
    Actually, Obama did influence Edwards (none / 0) (#21)
    by andrys on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:35:49 PM EST
    The Iowa Independent reported on Oct. 11, 2007:

    "Five individuals connected to five different campaigns have confirmed -- but only under condition of anonymity -- that the situation that developed in connection with the Michigan ballot is not at all as it appears on the surface. The campaign for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, arguably fearing a poor showing in Michigan, reached out to the others with a desire of leaving New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as the only candidate on the ballot. The hope was that such a move would provide one more political obstacle for the Clinton campaign to overcome in Iowa."

      The names of Kucinich, Gravel, and Dodd were the 3 other names that remained on the Michigan ballot.

    Parent

    Edwards, Obama, Biden and Richardson (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by TeresaInPa on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:20:00 PM EST
    are to blame too

    Parent
    That (none / 0) (#12)
    by sas on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:16:17 PM EST
    isn't fair...but who to blame?  

    Parent
    Who? (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by TheViking on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:11:59 PM EST
    Usually when someone wants their supporter to vote for them they put their name on the BALLOT!

    "I want your support! Please vote for me!"

    Opps! Sorry darling/sweetie/homie/brother, I just took my name off the ballot.

    BUT! You have to remember that I'm a Politician! And I must play games with the PoliticalSystem before I can begin to give you your solemn right to vote.

    Thanks a lot :)

    Parent

    Clusterf[**]k (none / 0) (#14)
    by Abdul Abulbul Amir on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:34:26 PM EST

    This is a family board.  At least how about a Charlie Foxtrot that all the mil can understand.  Or maybe "messed up as Hogan's goat" if you want to get the same point across.

    You really haven't met (none / 0) (#17)
    by oldpro on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:53:51 PM EST
    annoying people until you've been to a rules or by-laws meeting.  Prepare to be beyond exasperated.

    Blind as bats to anything resembling a 'bigger picture.'

    Unintended consequences?  Not their problem.

    Yes.  They'd "rather be right than president."

    Democrats DON'T Disenfranchise Voters (none / 0) (#22)
    by Alegre on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:48:06 PM EST
    Period.

    Hey BTD I love the point you raised in the presser today.  Why Obama's fighting against seating all of the delegates is beyond me.  If he seats them now it'd only help him in the GE if he's our nominee.

    After all... if he's really wrapped up the nomination then what's he got to lose?  Why's he so afraid of counting every vote?

    The Rules Are the Rules, Except When They Are Not | 22 comments (22 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment