this is probably one of the best ever examples of how rules & sensibilities change when a Black comes into the picture. Its a truly disgusting sight to watch. No claim or demand by Hilary is too illegitimate, sexist, racist, indecent, ridiculous or hypocritical to be given less than full consideration, and re-framed accordingly.
and its likely Obama’s people (White & Black) are too disgusted to go on the Sunday talk shows where they will inevitably be used as props to legitimize this farce. And why would they want to participate in a contest to determine who can most effectively divide the party.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Jun 1 2008 15:22 utc | 3

The whole super delegate idea was non sense from the beginning. It should have been simply pledged delegates. Period. Of course, that would have still left Obama in the lead.
As for Dems losing in November, that would require either a devastatingly embarrassing revelation about Obama’s past (like the Wright “scandal” to the 10th power) or a last minute coup where Obama is tossed aside for Hillary.
And even then McCain’s chances are 50/50. The repubs are in trouble and they all know it.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 1 2008 15:40 utc | 5

mlhm5: Indeed. As, when all those superdelegates declared for Hillary at the beginning of the campaign. Indeed, by getting rid of them and by ruling out the whole of MI and FL, Obama’s lead would’ve been bigger all along, and the thing would be truly over by now.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Jun 1 2008 16:20 utc | 7

dos@6: there ARE other parties. Cynthia McKinney, a black woman, is the green party candidate. the reason we hear nothing about her is the media, media, media. as for stupid, stupid, stupid hillary destroying the dem chance, it’s not stupid, stupid, stupid if that is what hillary is trying to do. she’s got her orders, and if she can’t get the nomination, then she’ll bring down the house on the black man’s head…you know, “pull it” like WT7.
there is absolutely no difference between Hillary and John McPain. the same company Mark Penn worked for (who had to quit the campaign after his work on a Columbia trade deal came to light) is also involved with McCain, and don’t forget the ridiculous gas tax summer suspension, which Hillary picked up directly from McCain’s campaign.
I am somewhat intrigued by the media blitz of Hill’s minions…maybe the increasing desperation indicates there is some palpable fear that the Obomb is an unpredictable ordinance that might explode the corporate hold of the white house.

Posted by: Lizard | Jun 1 2008 16:26 utc | 9

mlhm5, the super delegates do not ‘decide’ the election. the state of mass is awarding more delegate votes to clinton as a reflection of the votes in that state. the job of superdelegates is to vote for the will of the people at the convention, all the people, not just the ones in their state (that is why they are super delegates, they represent the party, not the state).
the idea that clinton won more ‘votes’ is a farce considering she has to completely ignore the will of the people in all the caucus states who voted w/there presence at the caucuses. besides, back in the clinton had no problem relying on superdelegates.
Clinton advisers rejected the notion that the candidate — and the party — would be badly wounded in the general election if the nominee were essentially selected by a group of party insiders.

you sound like a whining loser, grow up.
b, Why this mess? Why not simply stick to the Rules?
because this is kiss and make up time. as i see it is better for the party if michigan and florida delegates can be seated at the convention, the problem is how to seat them in a way that doesn’t influence the outcome. clinton knows she is not going to win, therefore whatever position she can be in to best influence her supporters to unite behind obama is what’s best for the party. this will not go on til the convention imho.
it would be grossly unfair to all the voters in michigan and florida who DID NOT vote, believing their votes would not be counted, for the delegates to reflect the voter outcome of the neutered primary. the half vote is a way to present them with the appearance obama is being more than fair. the results of yesterday would not have come down in this way had it not already been a done deal.
i caught a little cspan yesterday. the vote on the proposition to give florida delegates 1/2 votes passed unanimously w/many cheers, it was a unifying image.

Posted by: annie | Jun 1 2008 16:45 utc | 11

Once again, Hillbilary owes a ton of money to herself, probably, likely, overstated, but definitely way in the red, and New York is not a community property state. unless she makes the first vote on the convention floor, and knowing the Clintons, it’s going to go far beyond a first vote, (i’ll even still take odds she’ll win), she won’t be able to con Congress into grifting her a campaign debt reprieve, bailout, whathaveyou, even though if she’d had a surplus of $Ms, campaign rules allow her to keep it, ala Gore, ala Kerry who made $10Ms.
If she didn’t make that first vote, then, in all likelihood, Billbilary will divorce her to contain and isolate her debt, leaving her a bankrupt, lame duck senator on an alimony dole, and Hillary is too arrogant and privileged to survive public disgrace.
So get ready to rumble, then get ready to bend over, while Congress doles out more of your hard-earned life savings to another in a long line of government elite grifters.
It’s all about the bailout! Follow the money!! These are vampire!!!
Meanwhile, HRH McCain is polishing his image, and will likely win in November. This is America, remember, land of the set-free homeless slaves. Hillary gets her bailout, Obama gets his comeuppance, (and walks away with $130M consolation prize) and we’ll get a 1984-in-Spades, the way it was meant to be when HRH Ronnie nuked our Woodstock after-party.
You don’t have to be a weatherman to know there’s a 1000-year Reich blowing.

Posted by: Pari Milit | Jun 1 2008 17:28 utc | 13

@Nell @10 – I’m frankly surprised to see this kind of post here.
Huh – why?
I have no vote in this game. What little I argue above is party unity, not taking sides, and my question jony_b_cool gave one possible answer for is one of campaign tactics.
You want my position? Here is my look from outside the U.S.
Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, (Jeb Bush?) would be something that would make genuine democracy even more a joke all over the world than it is already. No way I can support that.
I agree with Krugman – Clinton is better on health care and some other domestic/economic issues. But NOTHING would ever justify to “obliterate” 70 million Iranians!
I have critizised Obama’s pure neocon foreign policy speech in Chicago on this blog. He even had that disgusting “kill ’em all for humanitarian reasons” Slaughter professor on his team. I doubt that Clinton would be any better in that regard though. Domestically Obama’s history shows more progressiveness than Clintons, but his election programs do not show this.
So to me it’s a draw.
The first reason I gave above would have probably put me to vote for Obama – if I had a vote. But it has nothing to do with Clinton’s personality or politics.
Now things are different. Obama has won several month ago. What Clinton is doing now lowers the chances of a democratic win in the presidential elections. That is inexcuseable. There will not be many Foreign Policy difference between Dems and Repubs. But those gradual differences that are there are important to the people of the world.
If Clinton goes this all the way she’ll be unelectable for any public office.

Posted by: b | Jun 1 2008 18:37 utc | 15

dos: good points, and if there was time to modify mindsets so people could move past the whole “Nader put Bush in the White House” whining third party debates always raises, i would be all for it, but at this point i think i’m going to vote for McPain to hasten the domestic implosion amerika apparently needs in order to wake the fuck up.
it’s like what my friend said about his drug addiction: for years and years his drinking got gradually worse, and would have slowly killed him, but then one day he smoked crack, and within months his new crack addiction got so bad friends and family intervened and forced him in treatment. now, looking back, he’s glad he smoked crack because it made him hit bottom faster.
so, as a nation that mirrors the behavior of an addict, it won’t be until we hit bottom that mindsets will finally be open for the paradigm shift that IS coming.

Posted by: Lizard | Jun 1 2008 19:04 utc | 17

Well I watched the whole debacle yesterday. It was like watching a trainwreck in slow motion. The only fun was listening to Hillary’s flying monkeys screaming and yelling their cat calls in the gallery. I’d say we need a Democrat in 2008 and a real independent candidate (not a repackaged Hillary)in 2012 if Barak doesn’t fulfill his promises.
Now Lizard I remember way back when I was 15 or so I visited the philosophy department of the University of New Hampshire. Now that current batch of grad students were as long haired radicals as I am today but they were all wearing “George Wallace for President” buttons. When I asked why that told me “to bring on the revolution sooner!” So vote for McPain if you want to. But how do you differ from those hymn singing fundamentalists that pray everyday for the fire of hell and the apocalypse? As I frequently tell my dog, “find something constructive to do!”
But don’t take me too seriously. Three years ago I started the “Pirate Party.” You wore an eye patch, said “argh!” and had to memorize our campaign slogan: GRAB FOR ALL THE BOOTY YOU CAN! Initially, though our slogan sounded very Republican, we were very successful. The three waitresses in the Indian Restuarant that served us the 20 oz big ounce dark beers that inspired our venture joined immediately. This was quickly followed by the conversion of three other patrons, an off duty cop, and an unemployed beggar named Carl. But we didn’t get a single delegate!
Now I half heartedly advise the College Democrats in a small New England School. But the Pirate Party got a lot more done.
And now for my completely false quote of the day: John Hagee to John McCain: “100 years of war is worth a mass!”

Posted by: Diogenes | Jun 1 2008 21:20 utc | 19

Did someone say: Pirate Party?
Calling askod! You’ve new recruits.
Seriously, two parties sux.

Posted by: beq | Jun 2 2008 0:15 utc | 21

you got me, DoS, Uncle seeded that line of thinking here earlier, and when it comes down to marking that ballot, i doubt i’d be able to vote for a more speedy demise anyway. then, as i’m writing this, i get a phone call from an Obomb supporter telling me to vote. Is he going to bring home the troops? i ask her. You bet, she replies, the second he takes office. i asked her if she thought Israel would let him bring home the troops. He hasn’t taken one cent from special interests, she replied. then she told me to read THE AUDACITY OF HOPE. i said, have a nice night, then hung up the phone.

Posted by: Lizard | Jun 2 2008 1:05 utc | 23

Above about the Rhinoceros by me, Owl.

Posted by: Owl | Jun 2 2008 1:33 utc | 25

let’s try that one more time
[link corrected – b.]

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 2 2008 6:05 utc | 27

I saw the people screaming for “every vote to be counted” even on the boob tube here in the Happy Little Kingdom. My first thought was, where were these azzholes in 2000?.
My next thought was, what about all the people who didn’t vote because they knew the votes wouldn’t be counted? (a guess is — about a million…)
Finally, why was the Dem primary held early? They had no friggin’ choice! It was the Repugnants who are in charge of the state and they made the decision. The Dems could have moved their date, but they would have had to pay for it and they couldn’t foot the bill…
In accordance with common decency, both the Edwards and Obama campaigns neither campaigned or were on the ballot — count all the votes? Male bovine turds!!!

Posted by: Chuck Cliff | Jun 2 2008 9:53 utc | 29

thank you for the correction, b.

Posted by: Lizard | Jun 2 2008 20:50 utc | 31