The Dillard Doctrine

Urban Conservative Commentary on Politics & Life

Blogging for Obama’s Arrogance?

Here’s a good one for you: a group calling themselves the Afrosphere Action Coalition has declared today a day of “Blogging for Voter Justice” and is circulating a petition to convince Sen. Clinton to give up her quest for the Democratic nomination. An excerpt:

We therefore call on Mrs. Clinton to face the reality of the earned delegates count, concede defeat, and thereby contribute to healing a wound which is opening and continues to widen. Mrs. Clinton must wholeheartedly support the winner of the nomination, who has earned the most delegates, and devote herself honestly and enthusiastically to defeating Republican electoral hopes in 2008, not attacking Democratic politicians and Democratic constituencies.

Various African American blogs are going on about the various evils of the Clinton campaign.

Here’s my take:

Yes, the Clinton campaign has been somewhat questionable in their dealings this campaign season, especially with African Americans. But what did anyone expect from someone who announced their campaign with “I’m in, and I’m in to win?”

The reality is that while Obama does lead in the popular primary vote, it is mathematically impossible for EITHER candidate to lock up the nomination before the democratic convention. Even if there was a re-vote in Florida and Michigan, neither candidate would be able to win outright.

Which leads us back to the superdelegates-a process of assigning party elites to “above the fray” status. Said process, though, might be inherently illegal. From Glenn Beck, last night:

While party leaders will still no doubt try to spin this ridiculous system as a good thing for the party and America, “The Real Story” is this is exactly the kind of thing that our founding fathers warned us about. In fact, they were so concerned that the people`s will one day be subverted by party elites, that they said in the Constitution — no, I don`t think so.

If I may quote that outdated document, “No senator or representative or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States shall be appointed an elector of the president.”

Well, guess what? Two hundred and sixty-four out of the 795 superdelegates are exactly that — senators and representatives.

You want “voter justice?” Push the question of whether the superdelegates’ existence is legal. But don’t ask a candidate to give up a candidacy just because your candidate of choice is a head in the polls at a certain moment.

A few weeks ago, when Clinton suggested that Obama would be a good vice president for her, the Obamaists called her presumptuous and arrogant. Guess what, guys: in pushing an action like this, you’re no different.

Then again, the more infighting among the democrats, the better “President” McCain sounds.

HB2DF,

-D.

Advertisements

Written by Coby Dillard

March 25, 2008 at 3:40 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with , , ,

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Beck’s knowledge and application of the Constitution is dubious.

    The Democrats aren’t electing a president, they’re picking a nominee. So there’s no basis for a legal argument that the role of the superdelegates is illegal.

    Also, the constitution says that in the event of a tie in the electoral college, the tie would be broken in the Senate.

    So even if there was a legal argument to be made that the Superdelegates are illegal, there would also be precedent to argue otherwise.

    But the system isn’t illegal. It’s just stupid.

    dnA

    March 28, 2008 at 3:25 am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: