No right is more precious in a free country than that of having a voice in the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live. Other rights, even the most basic, are illusory if the right to vote is undermined.
- US Supreme Court

Friday, August 29, 2008

my favorite reaction so far....

From The Denver Group:
Now that the Democratic party has "installed" a nominee using a sham roll call vote in a rigged nominating procedure that had more in common with the government of Iran or China than anything American the question is what to do next.

The leadership of the Democratic Party, along with those who have chosen to go along with it, has subverted and undermined every democratic and Democratic principle to an extent most people would not have thought possible and they did it under the noses of an inept and biased news media who did not seem to notice.

What matters now is that the Democratic Party not be rewarded for their efforts. And that it's time for Democrats in November to put principle before party.
It's time for people to start making decisions. Whether to choose loyalty to your party, or loyalty to your principles - that's a tough choice. However, the party chose to force us into this choice. To me, that suggests that the party is not worthy - that when they forced such an awful choice, they lost any right to demand loyalty.
We are Democrats and we believe in the things the Democratic Party has stood for. But all those principles were corrupted this time. If it takes a Democratic Party defeat for President to rid the party of the elements that so corrupted the process and everything the Democratic Party has stood for, so be it.
I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment.

4 comments:

Unknown said...

This is a continuation of the discussion in "Spoils of War," now that I've had time to think about it.

What I've been reading -- rumours so far, but I expect the facts to come out -- is that enough delegates and superdelegates were so anxious about Obama that Hillary could have come away with the nomination, and Pelosi had to stop it fast. I think Hillary went along with it because, due to the incessant demonization by those in her own party, the story would have been "Hillary stole the nomination from the black man," and she would have been savaged by those in her own party in the general election. She would have been fighting the Democratic machine as well as the Republican machine.

We were right to keep faith in her, as she kept faith in us. And it's not over yet. I want to see her as Senate Majority Leader in the McCain administration.

McCain just announced his VP pick, Sarah Palin. Brilliant move. He at least pretends to respect women, and will be chivalry in action in exposing the Obots, who are already turning their misoygnistic glee against Palin. She's young, countering his age and Obama's youth advantage. She's got at least as much experience as Obama. She will be attractive to a lot of the independents and Republicans who were looking forward to voting for Hillary. They respect her, where her own party fears her.

I think the Republicans wanted to lose this election and let Obama and the Dems get blamed four the next four years. (I think the Dems wanted to lose, too, so long as they picked up down-ticket seats. They didn't count on how embarrassing the ordeal would be, with their machinations exposed and their corrupt, inadequate candidate soon to be exposed. Bill O'Reilly is working on a 25-part (!) series on Obama to run in September.) I want McCain to win -- let the Republicans take the blame for the whole mess they've left us with, and spare us the prospect of President Jeb. It's going to be awful, but not as awful as the Obama legacy would be. And we get to clean out the viperous Kennedy/Kerry/Reid/Pelosi/Clyburn et al. crowd.

Hillary's and Bill's speeches reminded us of what Democrats are supposed to be about. I'm not counting them out yet.

I also think the party leadership is in the pocket of a faction of the "superclass" (see the very interesting comment at http://anglachelg.blogspot.com/2008/06/media-whores-online.html), and that this accounts for the strange inaction of Congress over the past two years. They should have been pushing bill after bill, demanding Administration compliance on documents and witnesses (rather than just issuing sternly worded letters), refusing to rubber-stamp Bush appointments and legislation, and generally making a record to campaign on of what they stood ready to do with a majority and a Democratic president. Now it all makes sense.

It's a strange election -- both parties wanted to lose.

I'm looking to support down-ticket Dems who supported Hillary. No more Blue Dogs!

Unknown said...

P.S. I sent McCain an email yesterday begging him not to pick Romney, because McCain is kind to animals and Romney put his dog on the roof for a twelve-hour drive. Maybe he listened to me!

jacilyn said...

I also think the party leadership is in the pocket of a faction of the "superclass" (see the very interesting comment at http://anglachelg.blogspot.com/2008/06/media-whores-online.html), and that this accounts for the strange inaction of Congress over the past two years.

I absolutely agree with you.

Also with your other points.

I don't know what Hillary is doing but I am hoping quite intensely that she is going to keep working hard to get representation for our principles.

I do agree that Sarah Palin is a brilliant pick. I think McCain may have just won the election. I'm wondering how far in advance the Republicans planned our election outcomes - but what can be done, when our party collaborates? The Dems didn't have to let this all happen.

And I am REALLY GLAD that Romney isn't the pick.

Not just because of his poor traumatized dog, either.

Unknown said...

No, of course not just because of his dog, but the dog was emblematic for me -- just as the freezing tenants in Rezko's buildings were of Obama. And I thought that since McCain's fondness for animals was the only good thing I know about him, I could be sincere in my appeal. (I wrote, "Senator McCain, the best thing I know about you" instead of "the only good thing I know about you.")

Anyway, somebody (whose sources I don't know, but she's pretty well informed) told me that McCain was going to pick Romney but last night a constant stream of Republicans called him up and said the conservatives wouldn't go for him, and the other available women weren't antiabortion, so Palin it was. I would prefer to think that he picked Palin as a thumb in the eye to the Dems, but it seems more a matter of securing the religious bloc.

"I'm wondering how far in advance the Republicans planned our election outcomes" -- well, Donna Brazile was taking advice from Karl Rove.