I am livid today at all the propaganda the wife of a former president is spreading right out in the open. I have been posting about it, posting her own words and those of her husband, the former president.
I am livid because despite my use of their own words, someone here said today that I have
"demonstrated a disregard for journalistic integrity throughout this campaign."Oh, really? Using someone's own words is lacking in integrity? Apparently it is okay to say that because it is still standing, still accusing me of lack of integrity.
Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign is literally making up
new rules in her travels. Now that is not showing integrity.
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton is entering the Kentucky and Oregon primaries on Tuesday with one of the most pugnacious political messages of her campaign: That she is ahead in the national popular vote when all votes are counted, including from the unsanctioned primaries in Michigan and Florida, and that party leaders who have a vote as super-delegates should reflect this level of appeal.
This argument is of a piece with Mrs. Clinton’s increasingly populist image, as a fighter on behalf of average people, but it is also a debatable claim: Most tallies of the national popular vote put Mr. Obama in the lead, especially when Michigan and Florida are not counted.
...."If all states with popular vote totals are counted — which would exclude four caucus states that have not released numbers — Mrs. Clinton would lead Mr. Obama by more than 26,000 votes out of more than 33 million cast. By other calculations, Mr. Obama is ahead in the popular vote.
No one in the party is on TV calling her out on her distortions. Where are the DNC, the DNCC, the DCCC, the DSCC....why are they not out saying that she is not telling the truth?
We are here counting the many ways in which the Clinton campaign has changed the rules daily. We are angry because she is telling untruths in public on TV about the party. We think someone should be calling her on her untruths, and no one is.
But we are forgetting that two fellows from Tampa, one a chairman of the county Democrats, still have a pending lawsuit which they have said they will continue by using Rule 11 to get to the Supreme Court. The two fellows laugh and joke about their lawsuit, as well they should. But it is nonetheless pending, and might be heard. And if it is not heard, they will still try for the Supreme Court by August.
Suing DNC for discriminating against white people in FL, using Rule 11 to get to the Supreme CourtSouth Carolina and Nevada were allowed to hold their primaries before February 5th because the high percentage of blacks and Hispanics in those states helped compensate for the pasty complexion of Iowa and New Hampshire.
That's the basis for an amended legal filing planned by Tampa Democratic activist, Victor Dimaio and attorney Michael Steinberg who are suing to have Florida's entire Democratic delegation seated at the National Convention in Denver this summer. DiMaio's original lawsuit claimed the DNC's punishment of Florida violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment, but that suit was kicked back by the federal appeals court in Atlanta. Steinberg had a brainstorm when he read discovery papers in a similar lawsuit filed by Senator Bill Nelson that showed the DNC put South Carolina and Nevada's primary dates ahead of 46 other states to give minorities more of a voice in the nominating process. Since the DNC receives federal money to hold their convention, the party is subject to federal civil rights law.
What an interesting turn of the worm. Sometime next week, we may have democrats suing democrats for carrying out a very democratic policy of advancing minorities. Steinberg and DiMaio acknowledge with a grin that their reverse racism accusation will ruffle feathers, but hope the conservative judiciary will be delighted to strike a blow against affirmative action and rule in their favor. Their only objective, they claim, is to see all of Florida's delegates seated based on the January 31st primary election
If I in my "lack of journalistic integrity" were to write a soap opera, I would not even have to make anything up at all.
All the elements are right here in front of us....a candidate failing to tell the truth, and a lawsuit that is even being laughed at by the two guys filing it.
Wait, I forgot the words of the former president where he speaks of the Democratic party in the third person, as though he were not even a party of us. He rips the rules apart.
“The Democrats said, ‘We’re going to decapitate them, smudge them, step on them, act like they never existed, act like they never voted"The Republicans are supposed to be the people that don’t count votes in Florida, not Democrats,” said Clinton.
“The Democrats said, ‘We’re going to decapitate them, smudge them, step on them, act like they never existed, act like they never voted,’” the former president said. “It’s very strange that the Democrats would be more authoritarian and more hostile to the voters.
“Do the right and decent thing by Florida and Michigan. Don’t let the Republicans look more enlightened than us, which they do today. It’s unbelievable. I never thought I’d see that,” Bill Clinton said.
That is the worst kind of lack of integrity. Making up tales about the party rules to win.
I will take my kind of integrity over theirs any old time.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore