Print
Email Friend
Add to Favorites
del.icio.us
Digg It!
Slashdot It!
Now, I've heard a lot of misinformation about how the Democratic nominee is selected. You can go ahead and say that the Democratic nominee should be chosen by the people, not the super delegates. Fine. That's your opinion.
But the fact is that your participation is simply ceremonial. If the Democratic Party, a political not Constitutional organization, decided tomorrow all on its own to give the nomination to Hillary Clinton even though the majority of regular voters chose Barack Obama, you would have to sit there and deal with it. Sure you could protest the decision and completely bypass the November election but that would only serve to allow McCain to walk, or limp, away with the grand prize: the presidency.
Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is it written that the people shall choose the nominee of the Democratic or Republican parties. In fact, many of the founders including George Washington despised the parties and saw them as the ruin of democracy and the point of division among the people. They were factions, much like they are today. We may think they're different, but they're not. They're both political organizations that keep those powerful people we hate in power indefinitely.
I've heard all about the "Clintonian Dynasty" on this site and how terrible it would be. But you never stop and think about Barack Obama's role in the system. Is he not a Democrat? His appeal is rooted in the idea that he is no typical politician and that he is more able to change the system than Clinton.
To revise a statement made by Mark Twain:
Suppose you were a politician. And suppose you were a Democrat. But I repeat myself.
To put it another way, there are no outsiders. There is no change. There is no hope. Garbage in, garbage out. If you want a real outsider, then you better start praying for the Second American Revolution. Otherwise, your stuck with the reality that Clinton = Obama = McCain.
Back to my main point. You have no say. We've all ranted about who we wanted, whether it was Al Gore, John Edwards or Joe Biden. We wanted an strong, anti-war Democratic candidate and we got two of the Iraq war's biggest Democratic supporters from the Senate.
We have no say and to be more blunt, our role in selecting the Democratic nominee has no connection to a right. Just be thankful that the parties decided to let us get involved at all, but don't be surprised if the Party decides that after all of Obama's current problems that Hillary Clinton, tried and proven with no more dirty laundry to air, is their best bet to win in November.
We're playing with sticks, they're playing with nukes. End of story.
***
Au Contraire, mon frere! I think the point you are missing is the chink in the armor of the conservatives, for a 140 years, is they can keep people scared for awhile, they can even get some middle class folks to vote against their personal interests for awhile, and they can smear and defame the entire liberal movement.
But there comes a point when the serfs say "enough". And when those times come along, we are usually blessed with a leader who fits the "dark horse" brand - an unknown, outsider, w/o clear platforms.
- FDR, came along at a point when the conservatives' ideas had all been tried, and failed (much like today) - FDR was a likable man, ran on a sunshine, and hope campaign.
- Jimmeh Carter - a little known peanut farmer from GA
- JFK - a good looking 1 term Senator.
Otherwise, we got Bubba, Grover Cleveland, Wilson and some VP's who took office.All 3 of these outsiders were radically different, and did change the way the office of Pres worked. Unfortunately, depending on your brand of tin foil hat, it cost JFK his life - for what?, and Carter was painted as a crazy farmer, trying to get the US out of Panama, and off of oil (hmmm, oil again?) and FDR is the one who brought us the weekend, Social Security, retirement for 85% of peeps, rural electricity, and he won WWII.
Report Abuse