A Democratic Mess: The Fix Is In , A conspiracy theory

Barack H. Obama will not receive the Democratic Nomination for President. The die is cast; his candidacy will divide the Democratic party. Here’s why.

Back in the summer 2007, it was nearly a foregone conclusion Hillary R. Clinton would be the Dem nominee for President. The party had put forth a variety of non-hackers to take on her candidacy and the media had only one other story to report: Barack Obama.

His was a heartening story, full of the all-American spunky, comeback and determination goo that makes his a story worth telling. A mixed ancestry; an absentee father; a path to extraordinary heights. As the 1st-ever African-American to head up the Harvard Law Review, the most prestigious law journal in the United States, likely the world, it has seated a multitude of legal minds on the United States Supreme Court and furthered the careers of many, many others, including Barack. (Not so strangely, it seems Barack’s HLR appointment does not come without its detractors… particularly the legal community, Eugene Volokh, a Sandra Day O’Conner clerk has a legal blog that posted the above link on the Obama effect. The HLR research was done by David E. Bernstein.)

The rest is now a developing history.

After February 5th, a.ka., Super Tuesday, Obama’s campaign become more than a feel good story of audacious hope. It dug in its heels – took on the political machine of the Clinton(s) – and was no longer just a feel good story. People were swaying to Barack, and tired of the old, white version of what American politics has been for 200+ years. Obama had won 10 or 11 straight primaries and caucuses, and the lead was his.

It was time for a change in strategy by the Clintons.

In a series of supposely unrelated events, Obama was to see exactly how far some that think they control things will go to undermine an allegedly democratic process.
1) Feb 25/26: Cincinnati, Ohio Conservative talk show host Bill Cunningham makes several not-so-veiled references to Obama’s middle name, Hussein. Republican nominee John McCain apologizes for Cunningham.
2) Feb 26: The BBC America reports and shows Barack wearing traditional Somali dress while in a Kenyan visit from 2006. This picture was circulated by the Clinton campaign; they deny it, but the inference is clear: Barack is pro-Muslim.
3) March 3rd: A memo to Canadians about NAFTA, a Ohio hot-button issue without real merit, was released. Obama’s position was characterized as significantly different from his public position in Ohio of a renegotiated-NAFTA treaty. Meanwhile, Ohio voters, forget or ignore that William Jefferson Clinton put forth NAFTA. Whether it matters or not, is another debate.
4) March 2nd: Hillary Clinton exchanges viewpoints on Barack’s religion with Kroft:

“You don’t believe that Senator Obama’s a Muslim?” Kroft asked Sen. Clinton.

“Of course not. I mean, that, you know, there is no basis for that. I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn’t any reason to doubt that,” she replied.“You said you’d take Senator Obama at his word that he’s not…a Muslim. You don’t believe that he’s…,” Kroft said.“No. No, there is nothing to base that on. As far as I know,” she said.“It’s just scurrilous…?” Kroft
inquired.“Look, I have been the target of so many ridiculous rumors, that I have
a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets, you know, smeared with the kind
of rumors that go on all the time,” Clinton said.

All these things are suddenly coming into full view. All related to race, religion and potentially “selling out” the American people. Moreover, even the Democratic nomination process is in a word: corrupt.

Last night, it seemed significant that over 10% of Republicans and 22% of “independents” voted in the Democratic primary. Many, many more were urged by Conservative blowhard Rush Limbaugh to vote for Clinton. It didn’t seem to effect the results – or did it? (The results of Texas polling would tend to support Clinton. Alas, she won. And she did pull down more Democrats than Independents or Republicans.)

But the biggest decider will come down to the delegate count, depending on whose version you take for gospel, and the ever-changing votes of the Superdelegates.
The ‘current’ results according to Obama (1,386-1,230 – march 5th, before primaries)
Wikipedia estimates (Obama 1,354 -1,209, Superdelegates Obama 1,551 -1,449)
Real Clear Politics (Obama 1,344-1,208, Superdelegates Obama 1,548 – 1,451)
CNN.com (Obama 1,321 – 1,186, Superdelegates Obama 1,520-1,424)
MSNBC (Obama 1,355 -1,213)

Obama though continues to be bantered around as a more of a Vice-Presidential candidate than a Presidential candidate. The Democratic Party hasn’t took a stand on the Superdelegates that makes sense – they are not voting according to the popular will of the people, state by state.
The Michigan and Florida issue continues to be bantered around – the settling of this may very well decide the outcome of the Nominee.

Going to the convention raises the issue of what will they do: take away the will of the people to put in a Clinton again? Did Clinton call in conservatives to attack Obama, on the sly – who is likely more a threat to the status quo than the Clinton idealogy is to Republicans – and thus, reflects that an African-American with a Islamic name is a threat to anyone that considers themselves Indo-European in background?

Watch and see. I want to have faith in the process, but I am too cynical for that.

Democracy is a process. We vote for it. We decided some 200+ years ago to give ourselves over to the construct of that ideal. It has failed many times: Blacks, Indians, Women, Latinos, Japaneses, etc. in root to deciding who runs the country. I am hopeful that a reasonable approach happens, yet I worry.

If the Democratic party undermines the votes of millions of people in the name of Hillary, a Clinton, not the woman, then I will wonder. If she pulls off the miracle of taking over the delegate lead, this position becomes moot. However, if Barack H. Obama has more delegates – it is simple: he is the presumptive nominee.

(And the standard should be pledged delegates, not superdelegates that are in essence, fixing the election.)

I reported this in hopes that it will work out accordingly.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: