what the Obama Party hopes we don't be able to do anything about

Rules Is Rules!
Except when the Will Of The Voters shall be the determining standard!

update: do not speak of "superdelegates". The Democratic Party is not saying "superdelegates" decided this nomination. They are saying Obama "won". As in, won the votes.

It isn't true. But one could see the fragility of the "superdelegates" argument (esp. given what Donna Brazile said about quitting the party because the will of the voters is sooooo important to her).

Back to our regularly scheduled post: Rules is Rules! Except when....not!

In other words, when the rules benefit Obama, we insist that rules are rules and must be rules. Where are we without rules?

But rules stop being absolute when Hillary claims them. The ugly fact is, Obama can't win if we give Hillary the same privilege of being able to count a merely "technical" victory as somehow being victory. So when the rules might be applied to Obama in a way that benefits the Evil One, we must suddenly overthrow rules in favor of mushy talk about the will of the voters and how people "would have" voted.

So -

A merely "technical" victory is still a victory - when Obama is the one who benefits.

A merely "technical" victory is not a victory at all. It must be corrected to reflect "the will of the voters" - when Obama is not the one who benefits.

And without that (stolen votes and cherry picked rules!) Obama has lost.

This election, we really are voting on whether or not rule of law will be the law of this land.

Rules Is Rules!

Donna Brazile says so. Her momma taught her that rules are rules (or so she claims).

And what's "fair" has got nothing to do with it. There ain't no fair. There's just what the rules say. And rules are necessary to prevent wrongdoing. You know - like defying the DNC*.

The rules say that Obama gets ZERO votes in Michigan. You cannot get - and do not deserve - votes if you take your name off the ballot. It might be true that it is not "fair", but - you know, rules are rules.

He doesn't get Uncommitted.

He doesn't get Hillary's.

If you check the rule-book, I think you'll find that tampering with certified election results is** not in the rules.

And, of course, there are the issue of rules (cherry picked rules!) not being enforced - like other states that did what FL and MI did, and like how Obama campaigned in Florida.

The Will Of The Voters!

Oh, but rules are not rules when it's not fair (to Obama). That is why sometimes the rules must be tossed aside to support the Democratic ideal of (stolen votes!) the will of the voters.

So by that standard, Nancy Pelosi must support Hillary Clinton.

So by that standard, Bill Richardson must support Hillary Clinton.

So by that standard, Ted Kennedy and John Kerry must support Hillary Clinton.

Of course, that won't happen, because there is nothing in the rules that say superdelegates must vote the way the voters in their states have voted! Rules are rules, after all.

"Will of the voters" means only when crooked election-riggers need cherry-picked rules and stolen votes.
_________________________________________
* Or taking your name off a ballot so that you can delegitimize an entire election and throw a state that isn't going to vote for you completely out of the primary selection process.

** may also be:

a.) cheating?
b.) responsible for the fall of democracy?
c.) the stuff that normally sends people to jail?
d.) the definition of corruption?
e.) what used to separate us from nations we were proud to be better than?