ALERT! The 3 Co-Chairs of the DNC Delegate Credentials Comm All Served in Clinton Administration

[mod mom]

I JUST HEARD RANDI TALKING ABOUT THIS. THERE IS A MOVE TO ALLOW THE DNC DELEGATE CREDENTIALS COMMITTEE TO DECIDE HOW FL AND MI WILL PLACE DELEGATES:

The Three Co-Chairs of the DNC Delegate Credentials Committee All Served in Clinton Administration

BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG
Mark Karlin, Editor and Publisher, BuzzFlash.com
February 8, 2008

If I've learned one thing this primary season, it's that passion is back among the Democrats for their presidential candidates. Anybody who reads the BuzzFlash Mailbag can see that in an instant. That can be a good thing or a bad thing.

It is the most fundamental sign of health in a democracy to see people so energized and willing to voice their opinions. But if it leads to a split party after the nomination, it would mean four more years of Republican rule and that would not be good for our Constitution and our freedom.
With that in mind, we'll throw some more wood on the fire with this follow-up to our alert yesterday on the likely role of the DNC Credentials Committee in deciding what to do about the unsanctioned Michigan and Florida "primaries." (In our view, they weren't primaries because there was no real campaigning in the states -- and in Michigan only Hillary Clinton's name was on the ballot.)

In January, BuzzFlash proposed one possible solution; some people in the DNC are proposing another. The latter plan would include party caucuses in Michigan and Florida in the early summer. That would be a sensible idea, but the Clinton campaign opposes it. One can assume that they are not happy with Obama's strength in caucus states.

-SNIP

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/036

OUTRAGEOUS!

[TexasObserver]

1. That is why the Clintons need to be pulled out by the roots, like weeds.

From every position of power in the party. They are the evil they came to Washington to replace in 1993.

[mod mom]

2. We need to get vocal not to allow these 3 to decide MI & FL!

[TexasObserver]

11. I think there will be a revolt against the Clintons by convention

I expect a purge of their lackeys before this is over. We're fighting for the soul of the party and its future. Everyone in the party knows the Clintons will drag us down again. They held onto power because we fought their battles, and in return, they screwed the party repeatedly.

They've become the people they used to despise and fight against.

[mod mom]

14. We know BFEE controls elections, I'm afraid Clinton & McCain will be nominees because

neither would pursue their crimes or would issue pardons.

Think how Bill handled BCCI and how buddy-buddy he is with HW.

[TexasObserver]

17. it is beginning to look like the CFEE is a wholly owned sub of BFEE

Can our party be any more marginalized if this continues?

We have to have someone who doesn't say business as usual is fine, someone who will look at the crimes of the BFEE and do something about it. Hillary will never go after them.

[mod mom]

52. and the link that connected them was Bush/Clinton/BCCI/Walmart Financier Jackson Stephens:

Stephens Inc. was founded by Witt Stephens, a state legislator's son who parlayed a Depression-era belt-buckle, Bible, and municipal-bond business into an immense personal fortune. After his retirement in 1973, the company was run by his shy younger brother, Jackson (a classmate of Jimmy Carter's at the Naval Academy). Witt Stephens and Stephens Inc. did much to create the economic paradox that is modern Arkansas: a desperately poor state with a scant 2.3 million inhabitants that is nonetheless home to a number of wealthy companies. Without the financial assistance of the Stephens brothers, Sam Walton might have ended his days as the most innovative merchant in Bentonville. Stephens money was also important to the fortunes of enterprises as various as Tyson Foods and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason, the television producer and reigning First Friend. Stephens Inc. is an important client of the Rose law firm, whose chairman, C. Joseph Giroir, made Hillary Rodham Clinton a partner. And back in 1977, Stephens assisted BCCI's infiltration of the American banking system by brokering the latter's purchase of National Bank of Georgia stock held by Bert Lance, former President Jimmy Carter's friend and disgraced budget director.

Jackson Stephens (who turned over the reins to his son, Warren, in the late eighties) and his firm were both substantial contributors to the campaigns of Presidents Reagan and Bush (to the tune of at least $100,000 in 1980 and 1989), but they have been closer still to Bill Clinton (whom Witt Stephens had been known to call "that boy").

On two occasions, once when Clinton was running for reelection in Arkansas in 1990 and again in March 1992, when his battered presidential campaign was broke, the Stephens family saved Clinton's bacon with an infusion of money. Indeed, it may not be too much to say that their Worthen Bank's emergency $3.5 million line of credit saved the presidential campaign from extinction. --L.J.D.

-snip

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1993/11/davis.html

[TexasObserver]

64. the sad truth is their mining their political power for money is not new

But their mining it for so much money, in so little time, by getting into bed with so many disreputable people has been off the chart the past seven years.

They're SELL OUTS, pure and simple.

[Orangepeel]

3. I don't think it's a move. I heard Dean on TV saying the credentials committee would decide

I don't know if the composition of that committee is set or not, but it seems like a done deal that the committee will decide.

[mod mom]

6. Read the Buzz Flash in the OP all 3 served under Clinton-Randy was just talking about this.

[Orangepeel]

16. Okay.

Your OP says there is a "move" to let the credentials committee decide. I'm saying that according to what Dean said on television, the credentials committee will decide.

The good news is, the credentials committee will be made up of people elected by the state parties. I don't know the relative power the chairs will wield, but they won't have absolute power.

[still_one]

21. The only equitable way to do it is rerun MI and FL. Unfortunately

that screws Edwards, but since he dropped out it might be O.K.

[pampango]

29. And the Democratic Parties in both states, which support Hillary, are fighting any new

primaries or caucuses. They probably figure they can't do better than the percentages that she got in the sanctioned primaries, so they dig in their heels and complain about disenfranchisement.

I don't like it, but it seems like it might be a pretty effective strategy. :)

[still_one]

33. If she gets the nomination because of those votes as they stand

when the DNC told the candidates not to run in those states, she will lose the election

If the strategy is only good to win the nomination, and not the general election, what does it matter?

[EFerrari]

4. This is how they plan to win. Pulling favors, nothing to do with voters.

They are disgusting.

[TexasObserver]

24. you can bet they're trying to play Santa to superDs now

They understand the plums a president can hand out, and they have zero compunction about doing it.

Like Tony Soprano their edge is they don't mind cheating.

[NoBorders]

56. ding ding ding

[KittyWampus]

5. And THIS is why they wanted Howard Dean out as Chair of the DNC.

[MaineDem]

13. Considering Dean appointed the Credentials Chairs...

Goodness.

I don't think this is as big a deal as Randi and others are making.

A Democratic President was in office for 8 years. It's obvious that Democrats would serve in that Administration. It doesn't automatically follow that all those employees would owe undying fealty to the Clintons.

[DJ13]

7. So THATS why Hillary ran her stealth campaigns in Mi and Fl

Those three need to recuse themselves, or better yet, have Dean remove them and put somebody unaffiliated with either candidate in their positions.

[mod mom]

8. Randy was talking about holding a Caucus but said Clinton wouldn't like it.

[MonkeyFunk]

10. What stealth campaign?

That's a lie.

The only candidate to campaign in MI was Kucinich. The only candidate to run ads in Florida was Obama.

[DJ13]

12. "The only candidate to campaign in MI was Kucinich. "

The only well known candidate on the ballot was Clinton.

Stop making excuses and start seeing what your candidate is about.

[MonkeyFunk]

30. The other candidates chose to remove their names

there was no obligation or agreement to do so.

What stealth campaign did she run?

[Lucinda]

31. You don't think people have tv's in Michigan?

[Joe the Revelator]

59. Why campaign anywhere then?

The candidates will be happy to hear they don't need to travel anymore, they can just go to a DC stuido and campaign from there.

:eyes:

[mod mom]

15. She remained on the ballot didn't she?

[pampango]

23. Ahh, it depends on what your definition of "participate" is.

If you agree not to participate in a primary, does that mean you should take your name off the ballot? Or can you leave it on, since it is already there and just agree to ignore the results (unless they go in your favor)?

[mod mom]

27. ah parsing... the Clinton trademark.

[MonkeyFunk]

34. Show me

the pledge where they agreed to remove their names from the ballot.

Until you can do that (and you won't be able to) you're just talking out your ass.

[mod mom]

35. Let it be fair and let the voter Caucus.

[Pathwalker]

36. There will be NO caucus in Michigan. The Republicans won't allow it.

Geesh. You people don't know squat about our state!

[MonkeyFunk]

39. Why is that more fair

than having a primary?

[MonkeyFunk]

32. Yes, as did three other candidates.

There was no agreement or obligation to remove their names. How is it HER fault that some of the others tried to pander to Iowa and New Hampshire by doing so?

[pampango]

40. Didn't all the candidates agree not to campaign or participate in the Michigan

and Florida primaries? If they did, reasonable people could decide that removing your name from the ballot is a better way to "not participate" than leaving your name on the ballot.

[MonkeyFunk]

41. One could

but one only does if they want to make up a fake issue about Clinton.

She didn't campaign in MI, she had no office in MI. She didn't participate.

The ones who DID remove their names did so for two reasons: 1) to pander to Iowa and New Hampshire and 2) because they were polling far behind Clinton in MI, and it was better to remove their names altogether, so they could make these stupid arguments after the fact.

[pampango]

44. Didn't all the candidates pander to Iowa and New Hampshire? That's why

they all signed the agreement to begin with. Your reason #2 assumes you know their motivations. I think Obama has proven that he can make inroads in a state if he is allowed to campaign. You may be right that if he knew he couldn't campaign there, there would be no way he could be competitive, so he withdrew.

[MonkeyFunk]

53. Nonetheless, a few simple facts remain:

There was no pledge or agreement to remove their names from the MI ballot.

Nobody campaigned in the state except for Kucinich.

Four names were on the Dem ballot.

Clinton didn't run a "stealth campaign" by any definition.

[pampango]

57. Sounds like we agree on a lot of things, then.

Probably just not whether the delegates from Michigan and Florida should be seated. :) (Accentuate the positive as the song says.)

[bigtree]

9. great catch

thanks for the post

[still_one]

18. Unless they allow a redoing of the primary or caucuse, and they allow

MI and FL votes to count for Hillary as they stand, and they win the nomination because of that, they WILL LOSE THE GENERAL ELECTION

so they had better think long and hard

[Windy]

42. Absolutely. I WILL stay home. So will many others..... the country gets what it deserves

Or maybe there will be a third party run? If so, we'll see who it is.

[Nedsdag]

19. Yep!

The fix is in!

Big time!

[seafan]

20. Another reason we MUST have caucuses in Florida and Michigan:

The Three Co-Chairs of the DNC Delegate Credentials Committee All Served in Clinton Administration


If this DNC Delegate Credential Committee, headed by three people who worked in the Clinton administration, does not allow for caucuses in Florida and Michigan to obtain clean, legitimate delegates, there will be a tremendous backlash.

And if caucuses are allowed, if the superdelegates decide to go against the voters in their states, there will be a white hot outrage, the likes of which we've never seen.


Let THE PEOPLE decide, NOT the politicians!

[Pathwalker]

25. Yeah, go ahead and break Michigan law, that's the ticket.

Please - Come to Michigan and take on the Republican machine, who are vowing to fight against allowing either another primary, or caucus - it will be fun to watch! better donate to the DNC too, because they vow to not allow one penny of State money, or its election resources - voting equipment to be used for this effort.
I'm sure you'll all be quite successful in stopping the GOP in Michigan! :sarcasm:

[burythehatchet]

22. If those delegates end up going to Clinton, I'm done with this party

[mod mom]

26. we have to fight this-otherwise we'll end up with continuation of corporatist rule!

[Az_lefty]

28. me too, and I'm done with the people who blindly support this kind of crap

[UALRBSofL]

38. Either way the RNC is gonna run wih this scandal

Florida republicans run florida. They will run ads and articles in the newspaper how the democrats were bamboozled by the DNC. They will say Clinton won the florida primary but there votes were disallowed. Then, Obama and Clinton already have there attorneys in there camp ready to file a suit as soon as one of the two are picked the nominee.

[Windy]

43. I hope it gets some traction in the media. clinton's goose will be cooked for the remainder

of the primary.

[Pathwalker]

45. Republicans in this state are already cooking the DNC's goose.

Nightly on local TV. Making the ENTIRE Democratic party look like hypocrites and idiots. Don't let the facts here in Michigan spoil your fantasy, though.

[yardwork]

37. Where else would they have served? Would you prefer the Bush administration?

Bill Clinton was president for eight years. During that time a LOT of Democrats served in his administration. There hasn't been another Democratic administration since Jimmy Carter, who lost reelection in 1980.

Where else would Democratic operatives have served over the past 27 years? Pluto?

[mod mom]

46. Don't you think it's weighted a little heavy toward 1 of the two candidates running for Dem ticket?

[yardwork]

48. I repeat - where else would Democratic insiders have served in the past 27 years?

You may think it's an "unfair" advantage that one of the two candidates was part of the only two Democratic administrations in the past 27 years, but that's the fact.

If Barack Obama's wife had been the only Democratic president in the past 27 years, I'm sure that most Democratic operatives would have served in her administration at one time or another. There was no place else for Democrats to go.

[mod mom]

49. It should be the voters who decide!

[yardwork]

63. Of course the voters should decide. What does that have to do with what we're discussing?

I'm not defending the use of Super Delegates, if that's what you mean. I don't know who came up with that idea and I don't know why.

All I'm saying is that it's to be expected that most politically connected Democrats will have worked in the Clinton White House at one time or another, because there was no place else for Democrats to work, unless they wanted to pretend to be Republicans and work for Reagan, Bush I, or Bush II.

[MaineDem]

51. I totally...TOTALLY...agree with you.

Not everything is a conspiracy.

Imagine, Democrats working in a Democratic Administration.

[yardwork]

62. I understand that a lot of folks here are new to politics, but really.

[Altec]

47. Half Obama's advisors

are former Clinton officials!

[yardwork]

50. Of course they are! Bill Clinton was the only Democratic president since 1980!

Political insiders serve in their party's administration. The Democrats haven't had very many from which to choose.

Most Democrats who are politically connected have served with the Clinton administration at one time or another. If there had been an Obama presidency they would have served there.

If Al Gore had been sworn into office as he was elected to do, lots of folks with both campaigns would have served in his White House. That's how it works.

[bluestdogest]

54. OUTRAGEOUS...? Uh, I think it's called "winning".

[Stand and Fight]

55. Good, good! *Emperor Palpatine/Darth Sidious voice* n/t

[thoughtcrime1984]

58. Contact the DNC and tell them you won't tolerate shenanigans!

http://www.democrats.org/page/s/contactissues

[mod mom]

60. done!

[MaineDem]

61. What are you insinuating?

Almost everyone at the DNC is completely fair and honest and will do what is right for the Party...not what is right for one candidate.

I feel insulted by your insinuation that anything dirty will happen.

The Credentials Committee will be made up of people selected from each state based on the percentage each candidate got in that state. Honestly, people here spout off without knowing a damn thing.

[thoughtcrime1984]

65. Fearing that people may repay past Clinton loyalty

is based in reality. You can take "don't know a damn thing" and shove it. There are valid concerns that this issue should be handled fairly.

[MaineDem]

66. Three co-Chairs do not a Committee make

Like I said, the Credentials Committee will be made up of people from each state and territory. Actually it will have 147 members. All meetings are open to the public.