About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

Libertarian Saturday
Author: TriSec    Date: 05/31/2008 12:36:39

Well, by now you've heard that Bob Barr was won the Libertarian Nomination for President....but who might Mr. Barr be, exactly?

Of course, he's got a campaign website, so I'll spare you the tedium of excessive cut and pastes today. However, his bio might be worth checking out, and of course we'll go back and look at his platform and positions from time to time...to compare and contrast with the 'big boys'.

Bob Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, serving as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. He now runs a consulting firm, Liberty Strategies LLC, headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia and with offices in the Washington, D.C. area.

Bob Barr chose to join the Libertarian Party because at this time in our nation’s history, it is essential to join and work with a party that is 100 percent committed to protecting liberty.

Bob Barr has served as Regional Representative of the Libertarian National Committee.

Bob Barr works tirelessly to help preserve our fundamental right to privacy and our other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.
Bob Barr

Bob Barr also occupies the 21st Century Liberties Chair for Freedom and Privacy at the American Conservative Union, and is a Board Member of the National Rifle Association. Bob Barr is also a member of The Constitution Project’s Initiative on Liberty and Security, and he served from 2003 to 2005 as a member of a project at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University addressing matters of privacy and security. In fact, recognizing Bob Barr’s leadership in privacy matters, New York Times columnist William Safire has called him “Mr. Privacy.”

Bob Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia (1986-90), and served as President of Southeastern Legal Foundation (1990-91). He was an official with the CIA (1971-78), and has practiced law for many years.




The biggest challenge facing any third-party candidate is not publicity, or funding, or name-recognition, but ballot access. Googling "ballot access" brings up a whole host of sites detailing the past, present, and future of access for third parties, and indeed ordinary Americans. In fact...without free ballot access, the Republican party may have never been able to exist, as free and fair access was key to their early growth in the 1850s. Beginning around 1930, the parties in control began to pass ever more restrictive laws, as detailed in a paper written by Richard Winger back about 1994...



Vigorous third parties existed in the last [19th] century because the election laws did not discriminate against them. People were free to form new parties, and the government treated all parties, new and old, equally. In 1854, the newly founded Republican Party won more Governor's seats, and sent more Representatives to the House, than did any other party. It was able to do so because there were no ballot-access laws until 1888. Indeed, there were no printed ballots before that year; people simply prepared their own ballots and were free to vote for the qualified candidate of their choice. When the government began to print ballots in 1888, it acknowledged this freedom of an unrestricted vote and invariably left a write-in space on the ballots.

Furthermore, in the 19th century, there was no such thing as public financing of the two major parties, which began for Presidential elections in 1974. Today, the Democrats and Republicans have their campaigns for President financed by the taxpayers. Under the 1974 law, no third party has ever received general-election public funding, although a handful of third-party Presidential candidates have received some primary season funds.

We no longer have vigorous and active third parties because Democratic and Republican state legislatures passed restrictive laws that make it exceedingly difficult for third parties to get on the ballot in many states. These laws usually require third parties to gather signatures for a petition to be on the state ballot, and they often place strict deadlines for gathering such signatures.

These restrictions did not emerge overnight. From 1888 to 1931, ballot-access laws were rather mild. In 1924, only 50,000 signatures on a petition were required to place a new party on the ballot in 48 states (a figure that represents 0.15% of the number of people who had voted in the previous election). During the 1930s, ballot-access laws became significantly restrictive, as they required new parties to gather more signatures and file for application earlier and earlier in the campaign year. Still, it was not until the 1960s that compliance with ballot-access laws became extremely difficult.

In 1994, a new party that wants to field a candidate in every race for the U.S. House of Representatives and have the party name appear on the ballot next to the candidate's name would need to register 1,593,763 members or gather an equal number of signatures. Yet the Democratic and Republican parties need not collect any signatures to assure themselves of a place on the ballot, and the number of signatures needed for individual Democratic candidates to place themselves on primary ballots in all 435 contests is 138,996 (the number would be slightly different for Republicans).



There's a chart out there at wikipedia showing the ballot access for all 50 states. Of course, the Democrats and the Republicans are in all 50, but there are some curious gaps in the primary state lists.


But wait...there's more! The coalition for free and open elections has some interesting information on their minimalist website. It's actually curious that Bob Barr (formerly R-GA) is now the Libertarian candidate and will have to face ballot-access problems. As a congressman from Georgia, he may have been part of the problem.
Georgia has had fewer presidential candidates on the ballot in the last 30 years than any other state. Georgia's state definition of "political party" is a group that receives 20% of the vote for president in the entire USA, or 20% for Governor of Georgia. No party other than the Democrats and Republicans has met that definition in Georgia since 1912 (when the Progressive "Bull Moose" Party got 27% for president in the entire USA). Even when the American Party carried Georgia in the electoral college in 1968, that still didn't qualify the American Party, since even though it got over 50% in Georgia, it "only" got 13% in the entire USA. And no third party candidate for Governor of Georgia has polled 20% since 1898.


So...if you're voting for the mainstream candidates, you can be smug and sit back and not worry that the person you like is going to be on the ballot. But if you're thinking about a less-popular or alternate selection.....well, now you know how Florida and Michigan democrats feel.

:peace:



133 comments (Latest Comment: 06/01/2008 11:56:47 by Random)
   Perma Link

Share This!

Furl it!
Spurl
NewsVine
Reddit
Technorati

Add a Comment

Please login to add a comment...


Comments:

Order comments Newest to Oldest  Refresh Comments

Comment by velveeta jones on 05/31/2008 13:01:29
Great and informative as usual TriSec.



I did go to BB's site and a few things pop out at me. He seems very vague on exactly were he stands on the issues. For example, I know he has in the past been Anti-Choice, yet on his site he decries the "Nanny State". I wonder what this means to women rights.



Otherwise, I would one day like to see a third party candidate get elected, or at least have a chance.



Bernie Sanders anyone?



:clap:

Comment by shelaghc on 05/31/2008 13:37:08
There are still a *lot* of Ron Paul supporters. I do wonder if he might switch parties as well to be Barr's running mate.



If so, McSame will *really* have a run for his money.



Comment by BobR on 05/31/2008 13:40:39
Excellent post as always. I agree that "freedom of choice" is one of our most important unspoken and unspecified freedoms, and I hate laws that take that away.



On a completely different note (no pun intended): I put together a website for my songs. It's kinda crappy looking, but fairly functional. I'm putting my stuff out there warts and all. Click on BR Music Land if you're interested...

Comment by velveeta jones on 05/31/2008 13:47:03
Great site BobR! I'll have to investigate it when I have more time. Will you add the link to the links box?

Comment by BobR on 05/31/2008 14:11:16
Quote by velveeta jones:

Great site BobR! I'll have to investigate it when I have more time. Will you add the link to the links box?


I'm working on a "home" site that will include my music and photography, and Raine's art, plus some other fun stuff (and a link here, of course). I'll add the link then...

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 14:39:31
The ballot rules were a product of the two major parties to insure that they would be unchallenged in their dominance by making it extremely difficult for minor parties to field candidates. I wonder if a legal challenge can be issued that such rules violate equal rights in voting by not allowing choice.



BTW, is anyone catching the Democratic Rules debate on C-SPAN where Shillary is trying to force Florida and Michigan in?

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 14:57:46
Since I am doing OT again this weekend, it's off to the salt mine I go.



Later gators.

Comment by shelaghc on 05/31/2008 15:19:16
Rachel mentioned on her show this week that she would be on MSNBC all day long one day.



Does anyone know which day that's supposed to be?

Comment by jd_in_ny on 05/31/2008 15:22:31
She mentioned on Countdown last night that she would be on today - for the RBC mtg. I think.

Comment by IzzyBitz on 05/31/2008 16:25:49
Happy Saturdee! I just watched Keith's response to Bill-O's NBC outrage.



The funniest part was the look on the guests faces when Bill was going off on NBC. Poor Bill. He just doesn't possess Keith's intellectual gifts. It's almost getting to the point of picking on the retarded kid on the playground. Not that there's anything wrong with that in this case. It is high-larious!



Rachel will be on MSNBC today and tomorrow. Keith will be on tomorrow. No rest for the talented.



Comment by velveeta jones on 05/31/2008 16:45:47
Hey JD! Where ya been?



Izzy, that KO piece on BillO was hysterical! Man, he really does obsess a bit too much about NBC! What a loon!



I gotta go to work in a while, I'll miss most of the voting bru-ha-ha. And, the screaming orange wearing Clinton supporters.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 17:28:12
Bill-O is very thin skinned and doesn't like when he's called on his bullshit. That's why his obsessions with Al Franken (who he never calls by name) and Keith (which is why NBC as a whole has to stand in as proxy). You would think that after the embarrassment of being laughed out of court when he and Fox News lost that lawsuit.

Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 17:32:52
Bob Barr, when in congress one of the instigators of the Republican get Bill Clinton movement. One of the floor managers for the impeachment. Bob Barr still thinks impeaching the President of United States over a blow job was needed.



I'm just sayin'



Bob Barr and I agree about the security state that Bush has created.

Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 18:35:09
GroundReport friend of mine sent me the linky thingy. Looks interesting and the founder/CEO is a hottie! :rofl:

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 18:58:28
Is anyone watching the Rules & Bylaws Committee coverage?



What fun!



Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 19:02:40
If I was off I would be. I was listening this morning. You can just hear the desperation in the Hillary fans although they are at least hiding that they are only pushing this since it is now the only way she has even a slight chance at the nomination.

Comment by MMB on 05/31/2008 19:04:21


Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 19:09:54
Hey, where's Random? I figured he would have popped in by now.

Comment by TriSec on 05/31/2008 19:19:09
Just seen at the supermarket:



Lady in front of me had an armful of those re-useable shopping bags...



"Can you put everything in plastic bags first?"







:thud:





The Struggle Continues...



Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 19:21:41
Quote by TriSec:

Just seen at the supermarket:



Lady in front of me had an armful of those re-useable shopping bags...



"Can you put everything in plastic bags first?"







:thud:





The Struggle Continues...







WTF! :thud:

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 19:22:46
Quote by livingonli:

If I was off I would be. I was listening this morning. You can just hear the desperation in the Hillary fans although they are at least hiding that they are only pushing this since it is now the only way she has even a slight chance at the nomination.




No way the committee gives Clinton everything she wants (because it is a rediculous and untenable position) - however, after they rule Clinton will disagree, continue to claim that 2210 delegates is the magic number.



So come Tuesday, Obama may claim victory having reached the adjusted total based upon today's ruling - Clinton will not concede.



Many smart people in the Democratic Party have posited that the most important part for a Democratic White House win this fall is how the loser exits. And given that, the above scenario does not bode well.



Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 19:37:58
Quote by Mondobubba:

Quote by TriSec:

Just seen at the supermarket:



Lady in front of me had an armful of those re-useable shopping bags...



"Can you put everything in plastic bags first?"







:thud:





The Struggle Continues...







WTF! :thud:


Not exactly undoing that image that Americans are idiots, is she?

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 19:50:08
Mondo - about what time was your call to the SMS yesterday? I wanted to pull it and put the audio up (some 4Fers asked for it)

Comment by TriSec on 05/31/2008 19:56:31
Oooh, and now my garden has already yielded a harvest...



making meatballs and gravy this afternoon with *fresh* basil and oregano I grew myself!





Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 19:56:31
Mondo called during the first hour (around 9:30 if I recall).



Sam Seder fans, tomorrow will be the last Seder on Sunday. It's a book show but he will be doing the last half-hour on the Sammy Cam. After that, his radio future is now uncertain.



Another nail in the AAR coffin.

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 19:58:43
Quote by livingonli:

Mondo called during the first hour (around 9:30 if I recall).




Thanks, Liv!



Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 20:12:47
Here's Mondo's call from yesterday:



If I don't post it again on Monday (for those who might not peek into the bloggie on weekends) - please, someone do!

Comment by TriSec on 05/31/2008 20:31:48
Practicing some Bird now....came up to listen to "Dewey Square". At least Miles is on it...





Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 20:36:05
...Well...uh...yes....

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 20:47:20
::: peers into Blog ::: Heya everyone! Painting and being wonderfully lazy today. We may very well have a new member of our family, btw, Kizzy is here, and seems to be loving the casa de Bob and Raine. Kizzy is a beagle. Camille seems ok with her, and Kizz is currenly sleeping in the big chair. :xfingers: We told her foster mom that we would like a few days or so to see if this is a good fit. I can say this, it is always a good sign when doggies don't eat the cat food!

Comment by TriSec on 05/31/2008 20:53:42
To borrow a phrase from Joe Castiglione...."Can You Believe It?"



A Boston-LA NBA Final? Who would have thunk it?



http://images.cafepress.com/product/187559868v3_240x240_Front_Color-AshGrey.jpg


Comment by m-hadley on 05/31/2008 21:04:57
Afternoon Everybody,

Had to work today, but have been home for a couple hours watching the DNC mess in DC as covered by MSNBC - is anybody else watching this? Does your head hurt as much as mine does? I tried blogging about it, but not sure that I made any more sense of this mess than Chuck Todd or Rachel "Rhodes Scholar" Maddow have. What I don't understand is how the Clinton camp can scream so loudly about counting every vote and completely ignore the voices registered in the caucuses? And what about all the "uncommitted votes" cast in Michigan when Clinton's name was on the ballot and Obama's was not? I have a massive headache - I think I gotta go lay down for awhile...

Cheers,

mfaye :D

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 21:08:35
ABC is probably happy because I'm sure that this will do much better in the ratings than last year's Cleveland-San Antonio final did which was the lowest-rated NBA finals ever.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 21:57:28
Quote by m-hadley: Afternoon Everybody, Had to work today, but have been home for a couple hours watching the DNC mess in DC as covered by MSNBC - is anybody else watching this? Does your head hurt as much as mine does? I tried blogging about it, but not sure that I made any more sense of this mess than Chuck Todd or Rachel "Rhodes Scholar" Maddow have. What I don't understand is how the Clinton camp can scream so loudly about counting every vote and completely ignore the voices registered in the caucuses? And what about all the "uncommitted votes" cast in Michigan when Clinton's name was on the ballot and Obama's was not? I have a massive headache - I think I gotta go lay down for awhile... Cheers, mfaye :D
I tried watching some of it earlier,,, it was too confusing... BUT... AmericaBlog is doing some FINE coverage of the whole thing. Go, rest Faye... I don't want your head to hurt...

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:06:22
Obama has resigned his Church membership. Link to come when I can get it.

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:07:12
anyone watching the rules thingie for the Dems?

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:09:53
Quote by Random:

anyone watching the rules thingie for the Dems?


Oh yes!



Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:15:25
Nora O'Donnel is reporting it right now on MSNBC. Barack O bama HAS resigned from his church. Rach is saying that this was a perfect time to do so being that news story is being dominated by the RBC meeting. (saying that the news will be buried) ... interesting take, regarding timing. I am mixed about it. I fear they will attack him for appearing to be weakm which I know is not true. The saddest thing is the reality that we are here in America where YES< it was a f*ckin' religious litmus test. SHAME on this country. SHAME.

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:16:23
If what Chuck Todd is reporting is correct (and I swear, he always is correct) - Harold Ikies is going to have a fit - Andrea Mitchell, I think, is wrong.



Look for Ikies to say things like - this committee is doing exactly what the Supreme Court did in 2000.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 22:18:03
I was listening to a little of Jon Elliot on the ride home last night. And he was commenting as to why the Democrats chose to stay at a hotel chain that gives 90% of its money to the GOP while avoiding chains like Hyatt which are more blue in their contributions.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 22:20:15
Quote by Shane-O:

If what Chuck Todd is reporting is correct (and I swear, he always is correct) - Harold Ikies is going to have a fit - Andrea Mitchell, I think, is wrong.



Look for Ikies to say things like - this committee is doing exactly what the Supreme Court did in 2000.


Like Shillary's people would have been so concerned had she actually been in the lead for the nomination and as it is, she can only get the lead by counting Michigan where Obama had no votes because he was not on the ballot because he followed DNC rules and she didn't since she signed the very same pledge.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:21:07
Motion placed on the floor to fully seat the Florida delegates... much applause... I thought that thier was an agreement behind closed doors that 1/2 delegates would be seated. this motion will be heard, and the speaker is asking the audience to PLEASE temper the applause.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:23:00
Quote by Shane-O: If what Chuck Todd is reporting is correct (and I swear, he always is correct) - Harold Ikies is going to have a fit - Andrea Mitchell, I think, is wrong. Look for Ikies to say things like - this committee is doing exactly what the Supreme Court did in 2000.
You sir, are correct. Ickes' partisanship is overwhelming today.

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:24:04
Quote by livingonli:

Quote by Shane-O:

If what Chuck Todd is reporting is correct (and I swear, he always is correct) - Harold Ikies is going to have a fit - Andrea Mitchell, I think, is wrong.



Look for Ikies to say things like - this committee is doing exactly what the Supreme Court did in 2000.


Like Shillary's people would have been so concerned had she actually been in the lead for the nomination and as it is, she can only get the lead by counting Michigan where Obama had no votes because he was not on the ballot because he followed DNC rules and she didn't since she signed the very same pledge.




I understand what you are saying - and I am against seating MI - but I really don't see how HRC violated the DNC rules or the pledge she signed. She certainly has flip-flopped and is trying to change the seating rules. But what rule did she break. I can't find a anyone who can point that out to me...



Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:24:56
IT does seem like a compromise will be made today. These people want to get back to NYC tonite for a major DNC fundraiser featuring Al Gore....

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:27:49
Quote by Shane-O:
Quote by livingonli:
Quote by Shane-O: If what Chuck Todd is reporting is correct (and I swear, he always is correct) - Harold Ikies is going to have a fit - Andrea Mitchell, I think, is wrong. Look for Ikies to say things like - this committee is doing exactly what the Supreme Court did in 2000.
Like Shillary's people would have been so concerned had she actually been in the lead for the nomination and as it is, she can only get the lead by counting Michigan where Obama had no votes because he was not on the ballot because he followed DNC rules and she didn't since she signed the very same pledge.
I understand what you are saying - and I am against seating MI - but I really don't see how HRC violated the DNC rules or the pledge she signed. She certainly has flip-flopped and is trying to change the seating rules. But what rule did she break. I can't find a anyone who can point that out to me...
Where did that pledge come from? the one that the candidates signed? Good question Shane-O. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly that if the delegates weren't going to be seated, that the candidates would assume those rules meant no going to those staes. It's like she campainged as an independent in some respects in those states.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:29:29
This is a critical issue, becuase if ALL the delegates ARE passed, then we will start having primaries years before the actual General Election.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 22:29:58
Quote by Shane-O:

Quote by livingonli:

Quote by Shane-O:

If what Chuck Todd is reporting is correct (and I swear, he always is correct) - Harold Ikies is going to have a fit - Andrea Mitchell, I think, is wrong.



Look for Ikies to say things like - this committee is doing exactly what the Supreme Court did in 2000.


Like Shillary's people would have been so concerned had she actually been in the lead for the nomination and as it is, she can only get the lead by counting Michigan where Obama had no votes because he was not on the ballot because he followed DNC rules and she didn't since she signed the very same pledge.




I understand what you are saying - and I am against seating MI - but I really don't see how HRC violated the DNC rules or the pledge she signed. She certainly has flip-flopped and is trying to change the seating rules. But what rule did she break. I can't find a anyone who can point that out to me...



She signed the same pledge that Obama and Edwards signed which is why all the other major candidates took their names off the Michigan ballot.



From the AmericaBlog postings;

For the past months, we've had to listen to Hillary Clinton and her spinners talk about the fair result in Michigan. That would be the election where she was the only person on the ballot. Former Senator Don Riegle offered his views on the Michigan primary in the Detroit News yesterday:



The Michigan Democratic primary election offered a Soviet-like ballot -- in that Michigan voters were not given a real choice among candidates. There was no competitive Democratic primary in Michigan -- a primary where viable candidates compete to earn the support of voters. Instead, Michigan Democratic Party officials permitted an election to take place even though three of the viable candidates (Barack Obama, John Edwards and Bill Richardson) had properly removed their names from the ballot to fully comply with DNC rules. The election went forward with only one viable candidate on the ballot (Hillary Rodham Clinton) in direct violation of DNC rules and with full knowledge -- and acknowledgement -- that the Michigan delegation would not be seated at the nominating convention in Denver.


Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:31:15
This whole thing makes me sick. At one point, if the DNC did not put their feet down we legitamatly were facing primaries in 2007

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:31:24
Quote by Raine:

Quote by Shane-O:

Quote by livingonli:

Quote by Shane-O:

If what Chuck Todd is reporting is correct (and I swear, he always is correct) - Harold Ikies is going to have a fit - Andrea Mitchell, I think, is wrong.



Look for Ikies to say things like - this committee is doing exactly what the Supreme Court did in 2000.


Like Shillary's people would have been so concerned had she actually been in the lead for the nomination and as it is, she can only get the lead by counting Michigan where Obama had no votes because he was not on the ballot because he followed DNC rules and she didn't since she signed the very same pledge.




I understand what you are saying - and I am against seating MI - but I really don't see how HRC violated the DNC rules or the pledge she signed. She certainly has flip-flopped and is trying to change the seating rules. But what rule did she break. I can't find a anyone who can point that out to me...

Where did that pledge come from? the one that the candidates signed?



Good question Shane-O. I assumed, perhaps incorrectly that if the delegates weren't going to be seated, that the candidates would assume those rules meant no going to those staes. It's like she campainged as an independent in some respects in those states.



Is there evidence that HRC campaigned in MI or FL prior to Jan 15? That absolutely would be breaking the rules set up under the pledge. I thought it was well-settled that neither campaign was accusing the other of doing so.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 22:31:48
Quote by Raine:

This is a critical issue, becuase if ALL the delegates ARE passed, then we will start having primaries years before the actual General Election.





And the election campaigns are already way too long. If Florida and Michigan weren't sanctioned for moving up their primaries I guarantee you the primaries would have been starting in 2007.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:34:29
Ugh... here comes Ickies. WHA??? that was it?!?!? less than 3 seconds.

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:35:13
Sorry "Ickes" - I guess my opinion of him came through in my spelling of his name :)

Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 22:38:01
Quote by TriSec:

To borrow a phrase from Joe Castiglione...."Can You Believe It?"



A Boston-LA NBA Final? Who would have thunk it?



http://images.cafepress.com/product/187559868v3_240x240_Front_Color-AshGrey.jpg






:Mondo flashes back to the mid-eighties when parachute pants, mullets, spandex mini skirts and big hair ruled the earth. A time when Larry Bird and Magic Johnson meet year after year in the post season ritual combat: Ahhh good, yet fashioned challeged times!

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:38:28
Holy Shit! -- This is crazy - it's like the House of Commons...



"OASIS RULES!!!!"

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:38:49
This is a little embarrassing. Do they realize this is not a polictal rally?

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:38:57
DENVER! DENVER! DENVER!

Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 22:39:36
Quote by Raine:

Ugh... here comes Ickies.



WHA??? that was it?!?!? less than 3 seconds.






Raine was that one of them there Freudian slips with the mis-spelling of Harold's last name? :rofl:

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:39:59
House of common's indeed. :: shakes head ::

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:42:19
Dear lord, the hissing, the....christ...i think i'm going to Canada now.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 22:42:39
Quote by Raine:

House of common's indeed. :: shakes head ::


Mr. Prime Minister is a poopy head. That's about the level of discourse. :fart:

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:43:07
Quote by Mondobubba:
Quote by Raine: Ugh... here comes Ickies. WHA??? that was it?!?!? less than 3 seconds.
Raine was that one of them there Freudian slips with the mis-spelling of Harold's last name? :rofl:
Guess so. Sometimes I not so good at names. Good on Alice Huffman for calling for Unity.

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:43:30
First motion was for show - I think this one will be unanimous - they already worked it out.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:44:00
OMG. I cannot believe these people in the audience. GOOD ON ALICE! She is right, this is not about the Campaigns!

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:45:19
We live in amazing times....

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:45:31
Quote by Shane-O:

First motion was for show - I think this one will be unanimous - they already worked it out.


well, duh, but the audience doesn't know that.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:46:38
I am really disgusted that people are heckling our DNC party leaders there. I really am.

Comment by m-hadley on 05/31/2008 22:46:50
Quote by Shane-O:

Quote by Random:

anyone watching the rules thingie for the Dems?


Oh yes!





Raine, Shane-O, & Random,

I'm back - this sh*t is better than any reality TeeVee - I am just waiting to see what the final delegate count will be - I've had to dip into the vitamin V a little early today

:D

Cheers,

mfaye

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:47:14
27 votes for, Katz a no vote. So it wasn't QUITE unanimous.

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:48:29
Quote by Random:

Quote by Shane-O:

First motion was for show - I think this one will be unanimous - they already worked it out.


well, duh, but the audience doesn't know that.




My apologies for annoying you with the obvious, Random.



Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:48:34
Quote by Raine:

27 votes for, Katz a no vote. So it wasn't QUITE unanimous.


and the two upfront can't vote, how many people there?

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:49:21
Quote by m-hadley:
Quote by Shane-O:
Quote by Random: anyone watching the rules thingie for the Dems?
Oh yes!
Raine, Shane-O, & Random, I'm back - this sh*t is better than any reality TeeVee - I am just waiting to see what the final delegate count will be - I've had to dip into the vitamin V a little early today :D Cheers, mfaye
:hug: take a few motrin and water ahead of time! I worry 'bout your migraine! me, I am having {burp}

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:49:21
Quote by Shane-O:

Quote by Random:

Quote by Shane-O:

First motion was for show - I think this one will be unanimous - they already worked it out.


well, duh, but the audience doesn't know that.




My apologies for annoying you with the obvious, Random.



Random annoyed with the idiots in the audience, it spill over here.

Random Apologizes.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:50:46
Wow. Fowler just broke from the Clinton camp?

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:51:33
...Ickies mouth scares me.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:51:47
So, who thinks the DLC will break off after the GE and become a new party on it's own? And who thinks they SHOULD? ;)

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:52:54
Shut up Harold. This is about the PARTY, not the campaign. I hate this fake outrage.

Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 22:54:12
Listen, do you hear that? It is the sound of silence in my house. Brother Mondo left for home today. It is so nice not to have the effing tvmosheen on all the time. I feel more relaxed already.



Comment by m-hadley on 05/31/2008 22:55:11
Shut the f*ck up Harold!

Cheers,

mfaye

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:56:33
Slowly Harold Turned... She is STILL taking this to the convention huh?

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 22:56:36
Oh Dear There it is.

Comment by m-hadley on 05/31/2008 22:57:41
Damn those people screamin' "Denver" they might as well be screaming "McCain!"

Cheers,

mfaye

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:57:49
Quote by Mondobubba: Listen, do you hear that? It is the sound of silence in my house. Brother Mondo left for home today. It is so nice not to have the effing tvmosheen on all the time. I feel more relaxed already.
Tosses Mondo a Raintini> Good for you. Enjoy it Mondo.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 22:57:51
Quote by Raine:

So, who thinks the DLC will break off after the GE and become a new party on it's own?



And who thinks they SHOULD? ;)


Good riddance to bad rubbish I say. Then they don't have to drag down the rest of the party. Look at how well their strategy worked in the 90's for everyone but Bill Clinton.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 22:59:07
Shameful behaviour. Hillary NEEDS to leave the race now, becuase THIS is what we are going to be facing up to and AFTER the convention.

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 22:59:43
What the hell was that?

What about Iowa, New Hampshire...?

What the hell.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:00:52
Heya Stan! :hug:

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:02:24
Quote by Random: What the hell was that? What about Iowa, New Hampshire...? What the hell.
That made no sense to me.

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:03:28
Quote by Raine:

Quote by Random:

What the hell was that?

What about Iowa, New Hampshire...?

What the hell.
That made no sense to me.



Random Saddened and confused.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 23:04:22
Quote by Raine:

Slowly Harold Turned...



She is STILL taking this to the convention huh?


Can I call her a power-hungry bitch now? She really only cares about herself and her ambitions and this proves it to me.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:06:00
From Americablog:
In Michigan, the split will be 69/59, but the delegation again gets 1/2 vote. Obama will get the two add-on superdelegates. Todd thinks the Clinton campaign will net around 20 delegates +/-2. Todd's not sure if Florida and Michigan superdelegates will get full or half votes.
Do we know what is happening about the SD's? btw: Chuck Todd is god.

Comment by Shane-O on 05/31/2008 23:06:58
If you want to see some crazy-ass Clinton bloggers (and don't do this while eating, or soon thereafter ) - go over to www.correntewire.com (where I once blogged regularly - now, I just go off on them every once in a while)

Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 23:07:00
Quote by Raine:

Quote by Mondobubba:

Listen, do you hear that? It is the sound of silence in my house. Brother Mondo left for home today. It is so nice not to have the effing tvmosheen on all the time. I feel more relaxed already.

Tosses Mondo a Raintini>



Good for you. Enjoy it Mondo.







Ahhhh refreshing! I've eating a large slab of cow, potato, a salad as part of the reclamation.



So should I, Mondo watch Black Snake Moan, Bull Durham or Kill Bill Vol. 1 first. I know what Raine is gonna say....

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:07:11
Quote by Random:
Quote by Raine:
Quote by Random: What the hell was that? What about Iowa, New Hampshire...? What the hell.
That made no sense to me.
Random Saddened and confused.
So is Raine.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:08:39
All those people in Michigan who listened to people like Randi, and voted NONcommitted done good. I must say . Their votes are being counted today.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:09:05
19 votes in favour... the motion passes.

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:10:04
*sighs*

This is how stupid the electorate is.

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 23:10:16
Quote by Raine:

Quote by Random:

Quote by Raine:

Quote by Random:

What the hell was that?

What about Iowa, New Hampshire...?

What the hell.
That made no sense to me.



Random Saddened and confused.
So is Raine.



:hug: for everyone today.

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:11:02
*sighs and sulks*

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:11:05
Mondo, you know my choice... :p

Comment by livingonli on 05/31/2008 23:13:04
Quote by Raine:

All those people in Michigan who listened to people like Randi, and voted NONcommitted done good.



I must say . Their votes are being counted today.


I thought Thom Hartmann said it first.

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:15:45
Maddow isn't optimistic.

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:18:16
Ok, I think I understand a little bit (although STILL disagree) abut ehy people get angry at Code Pink supporters. These HRC people are just off the hook. SO what is the new number?

Comment by Raine on 05/31/2008 23:19:20
Quote by livingonli:
Quote by Raine: All those people in Michigan who listened to people like Randi, and voted NONcommitted done good. I must say . Their votes are being counted today.
I thought Thom Hartmann said it first.
probably, my bad. I know Randi said it louder! :D

Comment by m-hadley on 05/31/2008 23:19:52
Come on Superduper delegates - time to step up to the plate. BTB, I like Chuck Todd.

I think he is correct - the torch has been passed from the Clintons to Obama. Yeah :D

Cheers,

mfaye

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:20:55
Quote by Raine:

Ok, I think I understand a little bit (although STILL disagree) abut ehy people get angry at Code Pink supporters.

These HRC people are just off the hook.



SO what is the new number?


code pink?

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:21:56
Quote by m-hadley:

Come on Superduper delegates - time to step up to the plate. BTB, I like Chuck Todd.

I think he is correct - the torch has been passed from the Clintons to Obama. Yeah :D

Cheers,

mfaye


Too bad for the Clintons, it happened before they wanted it to.

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:27:59
So...Now what?

Comment by Random on 05/31/2008 23:50:21
Obama has left his church.

>< i can't say i agree with him doing that.

Comment by TriSec on 05/31/2008 23:52:11
Evening, folks. I've been out at the flying field for the past 2 hours or so.



I am saddened to report that I was forced to retire my Constellation today. I've been having problems with it for weeks, and now it's making the system crash about an hour into every flight.



I'm also having performance problems; I could never get 200 knots (IAS) out a bird designed for 240. I just put up "The Maddowan" and my old flagship, a Martin 404, and both of them beat the pants off the Lockheed.



I'm still flying cross-country, but I'm going to switch aircraft for the rest of the trip now.







I see that the Senator from New York can never be turned from the Dark Side...







Comment by Mondobubba on 05/31/2008 23:53:13
Ice cream novelty. Check. Beverage. Check. Christina Ricci in daisy dukes and blond wig. Samuel Jackson playing guitar. Check. Black Snake Moan it is!

Comment by m-hadley on 06/01/2008 00:22:48
From CNN, I have the current numbers:



Obama -

Pledged Delegates: 1724

Super Delegates 326

Total: 2050



Clinton -

Pledged Delegates: 1586

Super Delegates: 291

Total: 1877



With the magic number now being 2118 to secure the nomination.

Go Obama!

Cheers,

mfaye :D

Comment by Raine on 06/01/2008 00:51:39
Quote by Random:
Quote by Raine: Ok, I think I understand a little bit (although STILL disagree) abut ehy people get angry at Code Pink supporters. These HRC people are just off the hook. SO what is the new number?
code pink?
Code Pink is an anti war group. Made mostly of women (but not solely) , they embrace the colour pink, and often protest inside the congress. Here is a link.

Comment by Raine on 06/01/2008 00:53:07
Quote by m-hadley: Come on Superduper delegates - time to step up to the plate. BTB, I like Chuck Todd. I think he is correct - the torch has been passed from the Clintons to Obama. Yeah :D Cheers, mfaye
Chuck Todd is awesome. I thik he makes math's geeks all around the country proud. :clap: for Todd!

Comment by Random on 06/01/2008 00:54:40
Random would like to point out Hillary got exactly what she wanted.

And further proof she cares little about the people

Since what the rules comittee agreed on was what the Michigan democratic party decided what they wanted.

Comment by Random on 06/01/2008 00:59:52
Quote by Raine:

Quote by Random:

Quote by Raine:

Ok, I think I understand a little bit (although STILL disagree) abut ehy people get angry at Code Pink supporters.

These HRC people are just off the hook.



SO what is the new number?


code pink?
Code Pink is an anti war group. Made mostly of women (but not solely) , they embrace the colour pink, and often protest inside the congress.





Here is a link.


hm...why would people be angry with these people?

Comment by Mondobubba on 06/01/2008 01:08:18
As much as it pains me to say this, Justin Timberlake is a pretty good actor.

Comment by livingonli on 06/01/2008 01:32:03
Right now at work we're showing Angelique Kidjo and Buddy Guy doing Voodoo Chile(Slight Return).

Comment by BobR on 06/01/2008 01:59:54
Quote by Random:



hm...why would people be angry with these people?


because they do what the Clinton supporters did at the meeting today - they disrupt civilized meetings. Sometimes that's the only way to get people to take notice... Sometimes people ARE already taking notice and that kind of behavior is self-defeating (like today).

Comment by Raine on 06/01/2008 02:13:12
What Chuck Todd Said tonite:
You know, there is a big thing we should be getting out of this party tonight, and that is the Democratic National Committee is not somehow controlled by the Clintons. Not by the Clinton campaign any more. We may have started this campaign believing that the Clinton campaign controlled, but this is Barack Obama's party now. He's already been winning the outside game, he now won the inside game. Yes it's true that Harold Ickes can threaten this stuff about the credentials, but Don Fowler really did signal today by being for the Michigan compromise that, "Guys, it's over."
The states of Michigan and FLorida had the delegate situation resolved today. A very important key here is that now that this has been resolved, HRC can no longer pretend to speak for the voters of these states. It is truly time for her to remember that she is a democratic party member and start to work to achieve the unity that was spoken of so often today. You here that Harold?!?!

Comment by Mondobubba on 06/01/2008 02:16:08
Quote by Raine:

What Chuck Todd Said tonite:
You know, there is a big thing we should be getting out of this party tonight, and that is the Democratic National Committee is not somehow controlled by the Clintons. Not by the Clinton campaign any more. We may have started this campaign believing that the Clinton campaign controlled, but this is Barack Obama's party now. He's already been winning the outside game, he now won the inside game. Yes it's true that Harold Ickes can threaten this stuff about the credentials, but Don Fowler really did signal today by being for the Michigan compromise that, "Guys, it's over."




The states of Michigan and FLorida had the delegate situation resolved today. A very important key here is that now that this has been resolved, HRC can no longer pretend to speak for the voters of these states. It is truly time for her to remember that she is a democratic party member and start to work to achieve the unity that was spoken of so often today.



You here that Harold?!?!






Harold Ickes can kiss my hairy, pimply backside! Father, Harold Sr. great American. Jr giant horse's backside.

Comment by Raine on 06/01/2008 02:30:11
BREAKING HRC to be offered *Dignified* exit from the race...
The former First Lady would get the chance to pilot Mr ObamaÕs reforms of the American healthcare system if she agrees to clear the path to his nomination as Democratic presidential candidate.
figures in the Obama camp have told Democrat colleagues that the offer to Mrs Clinton of a cabinet post as health secretary or to steer new legislation through the Senate will be a central element of their peace overtures to the New York senator.


Comment by livingonli on 06/01/2008 02:36:43
And I would suggest she take it. If she tries to start a floor fight and drag this through the convention, it will sink her political career and she can not only kiss goodbye any chance of being president but her Senate seat as well in 2012.

Comment by shelaghc on 06/01/2008 02:44:17
Quote by m-hadley:

From CNN, I have the current numbers:



Obama -

Pledged Delegates: 1724

Super Delegates 326

Total: 2050



Clinton -

Pledged Delegates: 1586

Super Delegates: 291

Total: 1877



With the magic number now being 2118 to secure the nomination.

Go Obama!

Cheers,

mfaye :D






Apparently there was a slight miscount - HuffPo's front page shows 2052. Woohoo!

Comment by Mondobubba on 06/01/2008 03:19:35
Show down at the house of the blue leaves body count 6 so far. Coming up on the Gogo Bride fight.

Comment by Raine on 06/01/2008 03:20:46
2052? Hmm... I wonder what the Chuck Todd number is. Scooting over to HuffPo. I like those numbers better. :D

Comment by Mondobubba on 06/01/2008 03:22:13
SEVEN! Gogo just bit the dust.

Comment by livingonli on 06/01/2008 03:25:28
And Terry Mcauliffe will probably still be pitching 2210 when he's on with Stephanopolous tomorrow.

Comment by Raine on 06/01/2008 03:40:47
I am convinced that these people were NEVER dems.
"[Obama] is a cult. His campaign is an anti-woman cult."
"I will actively campaign against him."
"You know who is backing him is George Soros. It'll be George Soros, not Obama, who is running the country."
"South Dakota is totally rigged for Obama because of Tom Daschle. Obama's going to win South Dakota because he's buying it and rigging it."
"[Obama] is a socialist! You know what the Nazi Party was before it was the Nazi Party? It was the Socialist Party."
These are the people who are supporting her? These are dems?

Comment by shelaghc on 06/01/2008 04:02:28
Shillary's response to the decision today.



What makes me nervous isn't so much her response as her supporters.



She's firing up her "base" and they're pissed.



Comment by livingonli on 06/01/2008 04:03:44
Quote by Raine:

I am convinced that these people were NEVER dems.
"[Obama] is a cult. His campaign is an anti-woman cult."




"I will actively campaign against him."



"You know who is backing him is George Soros. It'll be George Soros, not Obama, who is running the country."




"South Dakota is totally rigged for Obama because of Tom Daschle. Obama's going to win South Dakota because he's buying it and rigging it."



"[Obama] is a socialist! You know what the Nazi Party was before it was the Nazi Party? It was the Socialist Party."




These are the people who are supporting her? These are dems?









They sound more like Republicans. Must be dittoheads.



And one says that Obama is a murderer, shall we go back and mention the people who have said about Hillary with Vince Foster. Pot, meet kettle.

Comment by livingonli on 06/01/2008 06:16:34
A little mellowness in tonight's late night music video theater.





Comment by Random on 06/01/2008 11:56:47
Quote by Raine:

I am convinced that these people were NEVER dems.
"[Obama] is a cult. His campaign is an anti-woman cult."




"I will actively campaign against him."



"You know who is backing him is George Soros. It'll be George Soros, not Obama, who is running the country."




"South Dakota is totally rigged for Obama because of Tom Daschle. Obama's going to win South Dakota because he's buying it and rigging it."



"[Obama] is a socialist! You know what the Nazi Party was before it was the Nazi Party? It was the Socialist Party."




These are the people who are supporting her? These are dems?









makes me wish i'd seen that last night, if only to point out that whoever said some of those things is an idiot.

*sighs* idiots