I know I’m supposed to just get over Hillary Clinton being out of the race. And I’m trying. But when I was elected as Clinton delegate to the convention, I thought that I would have at least one more chance to cast a ballot for my candidate. Apparently, that isn’t the case: Hillary will not be on the ceremonial first ballot.
I do not know where this will go from here but I do know that history and precedent favor placing Hillary’s name on the first ballot. If Dean and his puny 167.5 delegates got onto the ballot (in 2004), then the person with the most votes in Democratic primary history certainly deserves equal treatment. Anything less isn’t fair or right.
I know a lot of Clinton supporters are still seething over the hiring of Patti Solis Doyle, seen by many as a slap in the face. And I’m aware that a new group has sprung up from the ranks of Clinton supporters.
If this is what party unity looks like, I’d hate to see what the opposite would be.
h/t:HL
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Joe – when you make such a statement, it’s best to back it up with links. I’ve visited a number of the sites that are now a part of that group (prior to the group thing) and didn’t find anything that would make me think that they were Republicans. And you’ve not provided any references. Show me where that motto appears. Even if the motto is true, all you have pointed out is that they are racists – and the Dem Party has plenty of those, too.
Oddly enough, it seems to be backward: http://buttons.cafepress.com/vote-mac-not-black
“Tell me again, how is Obama more qualified than Richardson, Kucinich, Dodd, or Biden? Not even all of them, just pick ONE, the one you think is the least qualified, and tell me how Obama is MORE qualified than that one.”
’cause the voters said so, Mouse. And they will find McCain less qualified, too.
Saying something does not make it true, no matter how many people say it. Truth does not depend on belief, nor does belief depend on the truth.
2000 years ago, many people believed in Zeus. Did he exist?
Anon,
Please read your Daily Press today. It seems George is about to sign Senator Webb’s GI Bill – you know the one McCain voted against. If you really still need the number it is in the funding for the Iraqi war bill and was passed yesterday by the House on a vote of 268-155. So as you see it used to be a stand alone bill but was incorporated into the Iraqi funding bill. I really don’t however see the need for a bill number – just answer the simple question if our troops nowadays deserve the same GI Bill as those who have served in past years. Your patriotism is being tested.
P.S. Anon I was not speaking of McCain having a rich wife, more power to him for that. I was speaking of him commiting adultery with his first wife and seeing Cindy on the side. So goes any morality advantage over Obama.
Just went to The Daily Press. Did not see it there. Can you please provide a link to the article, or, as I asked before, the bill number?
My understanding is that this is NOT the same GI Bill. (If it were, why would they need a new bill?) Without the bill number, I cannot see exactly what amendments McCain voted for or against.
Ah! I have found the article. It seems the bills (there are two now) must go back to the Senate.
Now with Obama making his own great seal and selling everyone out on the FISA compromise, we know what’s coming and it’s spelled “t-o-t-a-l-i-t-a-r-i-a-n-i-s-m.”
Just for you Anon,
Exactly what planet have you been living on to not know about Webb’s Gi Bill and McCain’s oppposition to it. WOW, truly incredible.
I am pleased to announce that yesterday the 21st Century GI Bill that I introduced 17 months ago passed in the House of Representatives. The bill was included in the war supplemental spending bill. The Senate will likely vote on the spending bill next week. I am confident that President Bush will sign this bill into law in order to secure educational benefits for those who have served so faithfully and well since September 11th.
To read the Daily Press article, “House OKs Webb’s GI bill as part of 2-party deal,” please visit: http://webb.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=299503&
I have known about it. The question at hand was why McCain opposed it.
The stated concern from many Republicans is that it would cost too much. I doubt it wll. Many people are in the military because they are not college material, either educationally or tempermentally. Providing a benefit they will not use won’t cost anything.
The other concern is that it will make leaving the military more enticing. It may, but it may also attract more college-inclined people to consider spending three years in the military to pay for college, improving the enlisted ranks. Some might even return as officers after college. Some of the finest officers I have known were enlisted first.
Response to Post by “Joe” (10.27pm on 6/19/08 )
I stumbled across this post today which contains dishonest information about the Hillary Clinton Forum (www.hillaryclintonforum.net). “Joe”, in the above post, listed that the motto of the forum is “vote mac, not black”. This is a blatant LIE and an absurd claim. The forum has no such motto and I have never seen this quote posted on the forum which has over 200,000 postings. Making these kinds of slanderous claims is exactly what Obama supporters have been doing for months in an attempt to cast Hillary supporters as “racist”. It’s digusting and unacceptable. The suggestion that white people who do not support Barack Obama are automatically “racist” is illogical and ridiculous. The reduction of the Clinton/Obama battle to an issue about “race” was just one of many exceptionally divisive strategies employed by the Obama campaign to tear apart the support base of the Democratic Party.
Hillary Clinton Forum (www.hillaryclintonforum.net) does indeed oppose the candidacy of Barack Obama for many valid reasons. But it is a very civilized forum which maintains high standards of conduct which are often not adhered to at many other political forums and websites. Any posts or topics which do not meet the guidelines of appropriate conduct are removed. The forum is maintained by a group of volunteer moderators and is funded through donations from members. As such, it is a collective effort by supporters of Hillary Clinton. The forum was originally set up independently in February 2008 as a place for supporters to discuss Hillary’s candidacy and campaign. Since the DNC subsequently persisted on “installing” Barack Obama as the nominee, however, the forum has necessarily shifted focus.
Hillary Clinton Forum (www.hillaryclintonforum.net) is not affiliated with “Just Say No Deal” and had nothing to do with its establishment. This is another false claim by “Joe”. The forum’s address (www.hillaryclintonforum.net) is listed as being part of the coalition but HCF had nothing at all to do with the establishment of “Just Say No Deal” nor is it involved in its ongoing operations. The forum does, however, support the general purpose of the “Just Say No Deal” coalition which is to oppose the anti-democratic nature in which the 2008 presumptive nominee for the Democratic Nominee has been determined.
Murray Lipp – Administrator of HCF (www.hillaryclintonforum.net)
Interesting. “Joe” sounds like a paid Obama blogger–they’re easy to spot, as they spew UNTRUE “facts” about other people and sites, such as the UNEQUIVOCALLY INCORRECT “vote Mac, not black” nonsense about HillaryClintonForum.net–and I should know, as I’ve been a member at HCF since its earliest days.
For one thing, since any INTELLIGENT person knows that Barack Hussein Obama is not black, not half black, not a quarter black, but is actually 6.25% black, WHY would our “motto” include an anti-black statement?
For another, there are many…MANY…reasons not to support Obama, but the 6.25% part of him that’s black isn’t one of them. His utter lack of experience and accomplishments? Yes. His association with anti-Americans like Jeremiah Wright? Yes. His history of drug use and money laundering? Yes. His terrorist ties? Yes. His association with slumlords? Yes. His 6.25% blackness? A resounding no.
It’s a shame that you Obamabots can’t come up with anything more compelling than false accusations of racism, when you’re supporting one of the MOST racist people on the planet. Oh, yeah, he’s sexist, too.
I say Joe is worried. He is not used to having someone rational point out the facts about Obama. I have been on that site and there is no such thing. They discuss the many reasons they will continue to support Hillary and none of them have to do with the color of skin. it has to do with all the things that is wrong with him being president: lack of experience, his flipflops, his associations, etc.
Thanks for pointing out a good site for those supporting Hillary and not Obama to go give support.
“6.25% black”?
How did you get that?
Why am I not surprised by this latest blunder by the Obama camp? The American Idol marketing balloon is leaking air. Not having Clinton on the first ballot reveals just how fragile Dean and Obama feel his grasp on the nomination is. Between the latest gaffe with the juvenile “Presidential Seal” merit badge and working overtime to prove he doesn’t need the massive Clinton coaltion, he just keeps underscoring his freshman status. He’s still in Primary mode and his campaign message hasn’t been able to pivot. HRC’s transition has been seamless and seasoned in comparison and just serves to highlight his “political” inexperience. A smart new CEO doesn’t jettison half the shareholders. All this reminds me too much of Dubya. How long will the public and the Party be forced to carry water for this guy?