Category Archives: Party Unity

by

What Cinie said

All of it, but most especially THIS:

Buy a clue, people.  The man sold out his own pastor for political expediency, for crying out loud!   As just about any PUMA hearted voter could have told you from Day One, the man has no motivating principles and beliefs other than self aggrandizement.  He is the equivalent of a picture of a hologram, a shape shifter, a charlatan, a fraud, and now, Spokesmodel-In-Chief.  He equivocates, pontificates and backtracks on things he said just minutes ago, because he doesn’t have a clue about what he’s supposed to say until he’s briefed immediately before the latest taped TelePrompTer reading.

Contrary to popular belief, many self-identified current and former PUMAs came to support Clinton not only out of a fervent belief that  she was the far better Democratic candidate, but by an equally unassailable conviction that Barack Obama was such an incredibly awful, unvetted one.  For those voters, me included, it was never a “six of one, half dozen of the other” proposition.  And, the fact that he prevailed without doing one single thing to prove himself better that her, or anybody else, or even independently worthy, for that matter, only adds insult to injury.

And if this makes me “bitter,” well then, so be it.

by

Let the excuses begin

Now that Al Franken has been declared the winner in Minnesota (and Coleman has seen the writing on the wall conceded), the Dems now have their 60 votes, right? Big Things are gonna happen now, right? I ain’t holding my breath. And lo and behold, not 24 hours later I read this in the WaPo:

What Franken’s Win Does and Doesn’t Mean

First, it definitely does not mean that Democrats have a filibuster-proof ticket to passing whatever they want. Though technically Democrats have now reached the magic number of 60 senators, it’s worth remembering that for practical purposes, the majority may have just 58.

Whatever.

Second, even if Democrats do have 60 votes, there’s no guarantee of unanimity,

Ya think?

 

by

Hey DNC, you want unity?

How’s about following your own precedent then? From POC P.U.M.A. Blog

Hillary Clinton’s Name Must Be Put In Nomination…

Democratic Party convention history noted below suggests that it is wrong and undemocratic to keep Hillary Clinton’s name from being placed in nomination at the Democratic Party’s convention this year.  Not doing so, would be an “Obamanation” of the democratic process!

1968:
Teddy Kennedy - 12 votes on first ballot
Kennedy had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

1972:
Ted Kennedy - 12 votes on first ballot
Kennedy had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

1976:
Ted Kennedy - 1 vote on first ballot
Kennedy had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

1980:
Jimmy Carter – 1981 delegates
Ted Kennedy – 1225 delegates
Uncommitted – 122
Kennedy had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

1984:
Jesse Jackson - 465 votes
Jackson had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

1988:
Jesse Jackson – 1218 votes
Jackson had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

2004:
John Kerry: 2192.5 Pledged delegates 
Howard Dean: 114.5 Pledged delegates 
Dean had already dropped out, with no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

2008:
Barack Obama: 1766.5 Pledged delegates 
Hillary Clinton: 1639.5 Pledged delegates 
Clinton has a chance of winning, so the DNC leaders and the Obama campaign don’t want her name placed in nomination.  What’s wrong with Clinton having a chance of winning?  Yeah!  Bring on democracy at the Democratic Party’s convention!

by

Purging delegates?

This is how Obama will get his Unity™ – replacing Hillary’s duly elected delegates with his own.

Obama exercised his right to review his slate of 67 delegates – focusing on the 26 at-large seats and party leaders or elected officials supporting him. Since Obama clinched the nomination early this month, the party has been trying to sooth lingering dissension in the ranks of its most active partisans.

[...]

Democratic National Committeeman Jon Ausman of Tallahassee, a super delegate supporting Clinton, had warned that party unity would suffer in November if Obama purged too many of the at-large and party officer delegates. Tallahassee City Commissioner Allan Katz and Kirk Wager, a Miami attorney who is Obama’s national finance chairman, said there were longtime Obama supporters who deserved to be delegates but did not make the list chosen by the state party in post-primary caucuses.

On Edit: If the PLEO delegates had been awarded as the Florida primary went, Hillary would have been entitled to about half of the PLEOs.  Even though Obama has the right to select the PLEOs who support his candidacy, it seems to me that by denying old-time party leaders and elected officials who happened to support Hillary in the primary an opportunity to participate in the national convention just so he can be sure to have the delegatge deck heavily stacked in his favor doesn’t say much for his abilities to unify the party.

By not including them Obama is not winning any points with the very people he needs on his side. But then again, it doesn’t appear that he even cares about honestly recruiting them. Rather its all about “fallling in line” and “moving on.”  My way or the highway. 

Oh well, at this point, I’m just about done. The Democratic Party appears to on the verge of nominating a dishonorable man. To me, he is as dishonorable as George W. Bush was in 2000 in his primary fight with John McCain.  I cannot support a dishonorable man. I’ll take the highway.

by

What matters

I received an email yesterday from Senator Clinton asking me to let her know what really mattered to me. My answer:

Dear Senator Clinton,

One of the proudest moments of my life was when I stood next to you in Fernley, Nevada in front of a room so packed to the rafters I’m surprised the fire department didn’t shut us down.

As one of the 18,000,000 Americans that voted for you, what matters to me most are the things that always have: Health care for all, the right to privacy, a sane energy policy, for every American to play on an even playing field, that everyone is valued, and that work given is work that is rewarded equitably.

But today? What matters to me most today is that the person I supported, and still support, be the President of the United States of America, at the very least that person be recognized and allowed to fully participate at the Democratic National Convention in August by having her name put into nomination and having the convention proceed with a full, open, and transparent floor vote.

What matters to me most is that the Democratic Party actually stand for what its Charter says it does; for what it has historically stood for. Otherwise, it is a party in name only.

What matters to me most today is seeing you nominated publicly at the convention and your historic achievement recognized, and that the national delegates get to cast a vote that truly reflects their preference and their conscience.

With all my love and respect,

Carissa Snedeker
Precinct Captain and Hillraiser
Silver Springs, Nevada

by

Free speech, party unity and dissent

This post is in reply to Amanda’s comment about my reponse to Marc on the About page.

Amanda said, in part:

I finally looked at all of the comments left, and I am surprise at what I read. I thought this was a room where you can speak and not be judged. I see you called the man a troll. You also never explained your position on why you are not voting for Obama when he talked about why Obama should get your support. You then say you are putting him on moderation. I don’t know Marc or really care to know him, but you are not supporting the 1st ammendmant, freedom of speech. I would love to hear somebody’s viewpoint, but I decided it won’t be on this site. I am a proud woman who is proud of her country, and to see somebody who felt strong about Obama get shut down and called names and he never called anybody names…….I just don’t know what to say.
I hope everybody have a good day and I pray that this can be a room where people can debate and not be blocked because their comments are not what one paticular person want to hear.

My answer:

Amanda,

First of all, I encourage all kinds of voices here, including solid Obama supporters, and a perusal of the comments on the main page would have let you know that. Mike J is just one example of a strong Obama supporter who comments often and is willing to engage, not just with me, but with other visitors to this site.

Second, there are numerous posts on this site about Barack Obama which are clearly labeled, so a quick perusal of my blog would have answered Marc’s questions without me having to write it again.

Much more on the flip side. Continue reading →