“We’re seeing that right now in Zimbabwe," Clinton explained. "Tragically, an election was held, the president lost, they refused to abide by the will of the people,” Clinton told the crowd of senior citizens at a retirement community in south Florida.
“So we can never take for granted our precious right to vote. It is the single most important, privilege and right any of us have, because in that ballot box we are all equal. You’re equal to a billionaire. You’re equal to the president, every single one of us.”
For Clinton, the move to seat these delegates is similar to the movements of the abolitionists, the suffragists, the 2000 election, and now the citizens of Zimbabwe. When she provides a reason why the elections and not the results should be considered legitimate, I will listen as her characterization of the votes was much different in October of 2007 when she stated, in regards to Michigan that, "it is clear this election they are having is not going to count for anything."So, we can conclude that these elections were exactly like Zimbabwe.
Al Gore needs to address this issue. If people claim he is the elder statesman of the party, he needs to break his silence.
3 comments:
Hill's speeches on this amuse Harrogate. Yea, they remind him of the words of a woman who, having totaled her car on a drinking binge, wakes up the next morning knowing only that her car is ruined and that "something must be done" to fix the car.
Similarly, if Gore wants to be a statesman, unlike everyone else we see on television, he will need to give a speech not limited to taking a stance as to whether or not he delegates should be seated and the votes counted. Because if all Gore has to offer are opinoins on such things (opinions that will coincidentally mirror his preference between the two candidates), then he might as well not even bother, as he will only be joining gaggles.
Ethos, as they say, shmeethos.
Premise-based logic dictates that you cannot reasonably rectify a blunder without first acnkowledging that a blunder was made. In this abstract sense, the Michigan and Florida stuff interestingly mirrors current Iraq discourses emanating from both political parties.
Wanna be a statesman, Al? Acknowledge that Your party, and every major candidate in it, threatened the legitmacy of the Primary with the Pledge.
First step to recovery, admit there is a problem.
We need to have a long talk about how to rectify the primary process...
If, after speaking, we can agree on it, then the DNC ought to be able to agree...
But, some elements of the process are more easily rectifiable, as it were, than others.
For example, the stuff about getting rid of caucuses is very hairy, because it poses a challenge to state sovereignty. Doesn't mean you cannot have that battle, and even win it, but you're talking about a highly deliberative situation where reasonable people can disagree.
Same with the issue of proportional representation. Same with the way candidates are funded, etc.
But, the DNC imposing a rule that says, these here states get to go first, and if any other state legislatures violate the rule, then we're going to silence the citizens of those states.
Reasonable, disinterested people will not disagree on this. It most certainly does not require a long talk to see how fucked up the DNC was on this, nor to see how much better off we all will be when we stop the pattern.
But, human nature. Hard to admit you have screwed things up. Better to save face--
"No, really, it's legitimate! They all agreed to it!!!!!"--
and keep throwing good money after bad.
Post a Comment