What Would You Do with 50,000 Tickets to the Acceptance Speech?
Just wanted to check in with a detail from Denver that may not be getting national play.
Obviously, one of the big events this week is Obama’s acceptance speech at Invesco Field Mile High. 75,000 people to hear Obama accept the Democratic nomination, on the anniversary of King’s"I Have a Dream" speech. You’d think it’d be a great opportunity for all the independent voters in CO who are considering Obama to hear him speak and get excited by his candidacy. But it sounds like it’s not working out that way.
For local residents, you could apply online for 2 tickets, both of which had to go to named people with local addresses. But even people who signed up for tickets on the first morning sign-ups opened have been put onto a waiting list.
There are roughly 25,000 people associated with the convention in town, so presumably a lot of the tickets went to those people (though it sounds like not all credentialed people will get into Invesco Field Mile High). Which should leave 50,000 tickets, right?
The perception is that those tickets went to donors and those who–in the interim period after signing up and getting tickets–offered to volunteer. Apparently, the luxury boxes at Invesco Field Mile High were also thrown into packages to close the fundraising gap.
It’s not necessarily a bad thing to ensure that volunteers all get to attend the speech. Ideally, those more engaged Obama supporters will do the work to persuade those independents who are not yet sold on Obama. And if folks are volunteering, after all, they ought to get to hear Obama speak. But for ordinary Denverites who will have to deal with the traffic of the Convention, even the big acceptance speech will be out of reach.
In the end, though, that’s probably a good thing. As is fairly normal for August in Denver, there have been thunder storms every afternoon for the last several days and there’s no reason to expect Thursday will be different. The doors open at 1–which means those waiting for the speech will likely get rained on. Hardcore Obama fans might not mind so much. But asking potential supporters to weather a thunderstorm probably isn’t a good persuasion tool.
For the general reasons you cite, I really have no problem with this. But it is not really “change” now is it? Having all your campaign workers and acolytes surrounding you accepting the nomination is the norm; par for the standard old political course. So is making special room for the fat cat donors. The only thing new here is that Obama seems to want a bigger and more impressive coronation. Every party has it’s own Rachel Paulose I suppose.
As smart as you are, you cannot possibly compare Obama to Rachel Paulose, Bmaz. I’d recheck Rachel Paulose’s list of deeds and her ability to make career AUSAs with real years of litigation experience hate her guts and quit in Minnesota. Your tax money is still paying her about $100,000 a year to literally sit at Main Justice right now with her thumbs in her ass.
The simple fact is that the DNC couldn’t fund the convention. Ensign and the RNC are openly fighting right now as he has been critical of Republican Senators for not coughing up. Republicans do seem to be able to troll for billionaires to fund their Swift Boat 527s cycle after cycle though. Maybe Ensign should go to them. I don’t like those ATT and wiretapping assholes in corporate boxes any more than you or Marcy does, and I hate that NFL stadiums now have the names of the Corporate Masters of legislation all over them.
It won’t be long before every player for the Diamondbacks trying to fend off the Joe Torrey Dodgers, and in the NFL has a corporate logo on the helmet and jersey replacing the team logo will it>
But Obama is getting plenty of adulation without playing the Rachel Paulose card. I remember that for her coronation she spent a lot of money–your money by the way.
Paulose spent taxpayer money. This nommination isn’t spending taxpayer money. And Obama has absolutely no obligation to fund the miserly $200,000,000 Clintons of Chipequa who owe a measly $11 million or so and won’t dip into their stash whose origins (although they are progressively leaking out and aren’t pretty–convicted sex offender Jeff Epstein who partied on the Burkle jets with Bill and Chris Rock, deals like the kazakhstan $32 million to Clintons deal.
I think I can document some real Rachel Paulosesque behavior from the Clintons of Chippequa.
It’s amusing to me that 22% of the hard core Clintonistas say they are voting McCain.
Someone needs to hit them over the head with a sledge hammer that they chose not to be vetted because they were asked right up front by Axlerod, Kennedy, and Holder to cough up three items in detail. A few of the media reported it monthsago but it is an anathma for any liberal blogger to discuss this fact.
The tepid Clintons or Paluloses of Chipequa who are doing zip nada nothing to raise money for Obama but continually asking his contributors to put money in their swelling bank accouts are as much responsible for the cost of this convention as anyone.
And I defy anyone who is good at convention history to show me where two people who are not nominated for anything have hogged so much of the spotlight at a convention for either party. It has never happened in history, and I repeat the Clintons should never have been allowed to cross the Colorado State Line this weekend.
The Clintons are delivering nothing zip nada. But I’ll say one thing–those 22% of Clintonistas who tell “pollsters” that they are voting McI’m Doing the Bush Thing but I’ll Top Him in Fucking Up this Country and the 20% plus or so of Clinton supporters who say they are undecided are proving to me one thing–how little they understand about what Bush has done and what McBush would do and what a doddering fool they are voting for.
What rock have those people been hiding under for eight frigging years?
I wanted to ask you this and with not a bit of snark, but because you have such a grip on politics, what is really happening in this country, and the law as applied to government and on the street, if you could wave a wand and have any 3 tickets of President and VP installed in the White House for the next 8 years who would you put there?
It goes without saying also if you put together a Bmaz-Marcy ticket or a Marcy-Bmaz ticket for 2012, I will hard core campaign every way I can.
Jeez, why don’t they just hire a bunch of screeners and open the doors to all comers? Tickets, schmickets and it would be a nice gesture of “change” to have an open-door policy at the convention.
The main stream media nor the liberal blogosphere is not covering this story. The angry Clintinistas who say they are voting 22% for McCain, and 20% or greater undecided because they are furious that Clinton wasn’t vetted do not understand this and liberal blogospherites are loath to blog about this but believe me they know it.
The Clintons were told at the get go of the vetting process by Axelrod, Kennedy, Holder, several Senators and a team of lawyers that in order to begin their vetting they had to cough up three areas of information fully and Bill Clinton’s words were “go fuck yourself.”
Those refused areas by the Clintons of Chipaqua were
1) 2007 Tax Returns
2) Foundation Contributions
3) Library Contributions
As to the tax returns there were over 20 versions of when this would happen. The Clintons of Chipaqua ever contemptous of the unwashed masses like the Carringtons in Dynasty figured that if they put the intentionally nebulous and worthless Senate treated summary of taxes that they would fool everybody. The Obama vetting team insisted they produce the documents in full and when they didn’t Hillary was told months ago despite all the sturm and drang over what was never going to happen that she was not under consideration for VP–I said it then, and I said it two weeks ago, and anyone who thought she was was very confused and neglected what the media and the liberal blogs neglected.
You didn’t like the 3AM text message idea which of course wasn’t going to mean much when the Secret Service hovered over the Bidens and the Chicago jet was dispatched to Delaware–how about the drama queens plural Bill and Hillary Clinton as they take their lask bask in the convention glow. How many hours are being devoted to them.
And anyone is naive to think that any song and dance by Hillary is going to change the meaning of catharsis this week as to what it really means which is “Fuck you Obama–we’re going to parade and showcase our extreme ignorance and vote for McCain!”–we’ve evolved into revenge fucking Republicans and embrace all their fiction, false statements and stupidity. We as mothers wouldn’t let our little darlings go to a draft, no no no but we’re going to support the $15 billion in Iraq a month and dover coffins we’re so pissed off that our Hillary couldn’t skate without coughing up the vetting documents the Clintons were asked to produce and refused.
I am sick and tired of having to read your belligerent rants about the Clintons; there is never a legitimate purpose behind them beside your demented desire to pound on them. You want to mindlessly blather about unity, why don;t you show a little and allow the wounds to heal. The next one of those I see, you will be gone. We have had this discussion before, it will not be had again. And don’t even think about piling some more baloney in as a “response” to this advisory. Every time you are asked to not pollute threads with long winded repetitive rants, whether on the Clintons or anything else, you do a good job for a while, and then fall back into the same pattern of crap. There will be no next warning.
Look, it’s probably my fault for reading so many of eriposte’s lengthy, densely linked – hell, nearly infinitely linked and from some point infinitely loopy] bashing back at Hillary-bashing [an awful lot of which clearly did NOT either originate or emanate in Obamania- a factor it would not be fair to omit eriposte acknowledged more than once- as so many feathers in the Wing acted with the sort of zeal which only a Koolaid jones explains right into Senator Clinton’s formal concession under the impression they were just tenderizing the meat for the general]- – but I actually missed the point where PetePierce supposedly went certifiable on this- & due to missing that I found the suggestion that the Clintons shrugged off Obama on vetting in a manner reminiscent of how the McCampaign shrugged off Obama on his reachover on townhall meetings I actually found his take intriguing [tho of course, woe betide should such turn out unsupported or worse; that’s a given in this arena].
But- Rachel Paulose? How is that NOT a hyperbolic chamberpot explosion?
You know what seems to be happening here? eriposte- whose encyclopaedic links on the neoconartists drafting the US government intell community into doing something, anything, even just reacting to the Niger uranium b.s.[It quivers even now- we need bigger stakes.]- David Sirota now over at OpenLeft – this battle in the sandbox- tempers have become frayed. I mean, this morning I woke to the full impact of McCain’s double-take dog whistle on “I’m not [introducing the set-up robotic pause by squinting down as if out of fairness in double checking the exact words in a quote ] questioning his patriotism- I AM questioning [repeating the set up but now to act as a drum roll] his JUDGMENT [heh heh heh]”. So I felt insulated against that outrage wrecking my coffee- but then half a dozen other outrages I hadn’t seen coming jumped me like zombies in through the air vent and POOF there goes any semblance of sangfroid.
None of this sandbox sparring is helping- particularly when kids get roughed up. Time…out.
Can you translate this into an English sentence–even one that makes any sense. It’s impossible to understand your James Joyce/T.S. Eliot Alfred Pruforickian sentences and make any sense of them.
If I link it is not endless and it’s on point. You should try the same.
And again do you ever post in English?
Apparently some people actually get something from Prufrock [I never have], but given your other responses since mine, I’m going to put your reply to mine down to re-directed emotion [not that there’s necessarily anything wrong with that]. To the extent you seek translation, I point out first that my reply was directed to bmaz [something I’m loathe to do given his terrific work here – which in no way excludes his volunteering for necessary patrol work] and nothing in it actually criticized you [although I thinks its not putting it too strongly to observe that few of us are immune from someone turning to a little website archeology and re-casting the results into something ad hominem]; and otherwise pointed to eriposte & Sirota as exemplifying where someone takes & someone else proceeds to critique close, hard, difficult yet nonetheless rational positions leads to mutual entrenchment and removes not just one but both sides from the real field of battle. Its fair criticism that I failed to complete at least a couple of thoughts [I put all the blame on my editor.], and somehow left you with some other impression.
BTW [I have to find another phrase now that McCain’s using it like a greeting], its possible my incompleteness in those respects led you to assume my shot at linking being a valuable tool in one context to hammer home points to ensure a sound platform, yet in another as a weapon to the point the platform is no longer able to bear any weight at all, by the same person, was aimed at you as that person; if so then I would point out nothing in what I in fact did write bears that interpretation, as I specifically identified someone else entirely.
I think its entirely fair to ask another poster to clarify, even if the comment is post is or seems objectively plain and obvious. Its in the nature of human communication that we imagine we make ourselves understood more often than we succeed in doing so. It’s when one presses cheap shots into such a request that one risks creating needless and uncalled-for emnity- unless of course that is one’s purpose.
A BTW PS: After 35 years at law practicing exclusively court work at every conceivable level, I’m afraid it would take a lot more than your side to be convinced my ability with language is exceeded by your own. My editor on the other hand…
I have a healthy respect for your law career. I am usually entertained by your posts. I just couldn’t understand the one prior to this one.
I try to link selectively. or to call attention to a link that may not particularly support a point but that I think others might want to read.
I try very carefully to give credit to anyone whose idea I’m deploying. It’s impossible to read everything that is written though on public topics that get a volume of attention, particularly now with the web in bloom.
That’s done then.
The issue of Diebold- or whatever its called now- has a lot facets. Given the absence of Fearless Leader and the prospect of five days of intense coverage of an advertisement, is it allowed to ask whether you might consider submitting to Deputy FL a post to allow us to lay to?
If you want to see what the anti-Pete Pierce people think, try Tennessee Guerrilla Women. Here’s a sample comment:
The videos in question are in an earlier comment.
Masaccio, I have been crystal clear I see no point in religion in any political race period whether the Federalist papers did or did not (often debated) advocate separation of church and state.
I’d like to know who you want as your ticket in the White House–besides bashing Obama what is your dream ticket. Do you have people you can advocate for postively?
For starters, I don’t bash Obama, I have high hopes for him because he is so smart and so inspiring.
Second, we take the sweet with the sour: religion is part of Obama, so we get it. At least it is the mainstream variety instead of the money-driven kind popularized by Rich Warren.
Third, the point of my quote was the name-calling and the rejection of his candidacy by the HRC crowd. It was a way of pointing out that they are just as rabid as you are, and ranting isn’t going to change their tune.
For me, the best ticket is one that can win. There aren’t any winners in ideological contests.
I agree with all of this well expressed. And without exception your posts always are. I took Bmaz’s point last week that going to the megachurch forum last week had more value than I wanted to give it–I just don’t trust Rick Warren and if you look at the transcript he tried to couch many questions about what you would practically do in this government in terms of his faith mantra. Maybe a lot of people do this. I have a hard time making working decisions based on a faith context for guidance. I’d much rather look at the science, and you can have good rapport with people without having to reach for the faith angle for how you do your work.
I’m not rabid. If I came across that way to you I’m sorry. But I did think it’s been important to point out what I think is a purposefully neglected question whenever the blogs tackle the question of who should or should not have been VP.
We were “dealt” I think two very capable candidates. I would have liked to seen Joe Biden as President. The Democrats made their rules, and there has been a lot of comment on the FDL blogs about the merits of them eliminating so many people so early. Dodd and Biden come readily to mind, and many people here were Edwards backers, recent events aside. Unfortunately charisma and chemistry come into play, and as admirable and courageous as Chris Dood was in going to bat on the PAA, I don’t think he would have had enough of it to take on the attacks that are now going to gain full momentum.
I just literally almost fall out of my chair with laughter when Republicans talk about the concept experience. I love Texas. I love the spirit there. I love the way Austin has amalgamated a high performing silicon valley atmosphere in Texas and still become a good time, food, music center.
And some of this has happened in Nashville where I went to school as well.
But how in the world can they conflate Bush’s years as governor with experience that it takes to go into the White House and we’ve seen that play out.
I’ve always been puzzled by the paradox that (in terms of experience) so few Presidents have served in the Senate. I know the response is always quickly that Senators have voting records on national issues and laws, and governors don’t.
Short version of this post by the PUMA–I hate black people and hate that one is running for President and got the nomination. It’s called racial bigotry and it’s alive and kicking in 20% of the American electorate.
NY Mag did a bangup job of nailing it.
In other words, it’s the anti-Pete Pierce people, like the PUMAS who are the 22% not voting for Obama and the 20% undecided. If they are anti Pete Pierce, I’m proud that they are. It wouldn’t be pretty seeing me ask them questions about anything going on in this country though.
Are you a PUMA?
First, the Paulose comment. Maybe was a little much. The analogy was strictly to overblown coronations. I had no issue with the football stadium deal at first; but, I dunno, it almost all does seem to be getting to be too much. Maybe I am too old. But the cutsie pie text message teasing for three days stuff annoyed the crap out of me. And now the Invesco/Mile High is not “for the people” but is just a way to have more acolytes and bigwigs in skyboxes etc.? Eh, I am starting to not like the optics. It is all getting too cute and grandiose by a half. It IS getting to be about celebrity as opposed to issues. That is not good.
As to Clinton. I neither am, nor ever have been, a big Clinton supporter. But the bile and vile has consistently made me recoil. In my opinion, both sides of Obama/Clinton, and I mean their teams and supporters, are mutually at fault to the extent fault exists. I both think, and have on very good information, that the two people themselves have been fine with each other for quite some time now. Mostly though, it is an issue of constantly having this blog’s threads polluted when it is not related. This is not new, it has been an ongoing issue. Things are free flowing here, and they should be, that is how very intelligent people associate thoughts and ideas. And we are not the thought police; but jeebus, sometimes you just reach a point.
I could not agree more with you. I emailed your posts last week on the way you see Obama going and Teddy Partridge’s exhortation to him to myself so I would have them for ready reference. I thought they were not only right on target, but that the writing was exceptionally precise.
What the text messaging probably is is the extention of the money machine–and Obama is going to need all of it I think, that has worked so well to harness the net for fund raising this time around.
What worries me, and you probably have more direct involvement with kids in school and it may sound tangential to this and probably is, is that the paradox of computers and the web is that kids have the tools but are reading books much less. And if that’s true, that’s a very bad thing.
And perhaps my response to your Paulose analogy was extreme. For that I apologize but I have felt as long as the media is going to keep what place Hillary is or should be playing in this campaign front and center (and yes the media and particularly the TV media in the ratings battle would rather have a close game than a blowout just as we would rather see a playoff or a world series or an NFL game go down to the wire.
I have never advocated that Obama is “the one” or walks on water. I have been critical of the centrist pandering, but again what I have seen from Bush or see reflected in McCain’s agenda in eight years shocks a lot of people who aren’t easily shocked.
When I see the crowds at the McCain rallys, I am dying to know what’s in their heads but I have seen a good dose of that blidness on the streets around me.
There are very few issues discussed here or at FDL that McCain supporters I know have ever remotely heard of. And that doesn’t speak well for their awareness of current events.
To some who studied the LBJ JFK preconvention flames, the final outcome of their sharing the ticket imparted a moderate amount of amaze. That the primary slights heal is a sign of character, an attribute often withheld from application to people heartfelt engaged in politics.
As for the people willing to go to a stadium in a thunderstorm, probably locals are the most acclimatized. One of the approaches to distribution of admission tickets Obama and Biden might attempt to examine pre-speech could be issue-centric. CO has mining and water interests both for profit and as attracting litigators to bridle excess. CO is sufficiently near to states where some of the mineral, timber, and energy extraction entities are most pervasive, that there is an ample pool of barristers and biologists available to provide counterpoint and riposte, a field which has seen much activity during the Bush Cheney administration. I would expect some of those people would like to attend if the Obama-Biden messages and planned administration initiatives are going to improve outcomes and return some oversight to the resource extractive interests. My vantage is probably from the endzone, however. I think Barack Obama probably knows what kinds of emphases he thinks his administration would need. However, there is this legacy of folks who have helped keep Bush Cheney in check, insofar as there remains a balance of power in governance hereabouts. Perhaps some of the futuristic things the internet enables will return to Congress’ foremost concerns during congresses 111 and 112 from both hearing and regulatory perspectives. Maybe Obama has ideas about how to involve people he respects to advance his initiatives. Having an unnamed VP as an opponent on the ticket of the Republican party, plus McCain, looks like at least a partial opportunity to brand the Republican party with the Bush Cheney defects, though we will learn more about this when the Republican ticket is filled after their convention, Then, later, we will find out if the voting machines actually work, and whether the canvassing computers are hackable. Brunner’s recent report from OH on touchscreen apparatus in the so-called ‘Everest’ project was revealing in that regard. So it is a mystery how this will turn out. I think I would say, simply let Obama put his character and vision into the selection of attendees. And if there are flurries of early snow, maybe JElway is still in town and does politics; he could toss a spiral through the flakes, while running.
The recent reports of Deibold machines (now with a new corporate name) only add more compelling evidence that the problems are serious, systemic, and can again undermine the election only there won’t be the TV spectacle of the hanging chads and the appellate circus ended by a Partisan 5-4 majority that even the law clerks there couldn’t stomach and later wrote about at length pissing off their robed masters.
Just an opinion from a grandmother, I think that the text messaging was for the youth, a group that I believe is huge in it’s support for Obama, but overlooked by the pollsters and the main stream press. If it gave them a sense of being part of his campaign in a “personal” way, and keeps them involved, then good for him!
I’ve seen speculation in at least one place that the more vocal ‘pumas’ are working for the GOP (and that the total number of ‘pumas’ is much smaller than they claim). I suspect that the GOP has enough information to believe they could beat any ticket with Clinton on it, but not any other one.
If they want to have the big speech outdoors, in an area which has thunderstorms in the summer, well, they should know what they’re getting into. (A friend who was in Denver week before last described one as warm summer rain > rain > cold rain > hail, in that order.)
The Pumas defy evidence that they are smarter than a 5th grader, and the percent of people who were strong democrats who say they are supporting McCain because their first choice didn’t win the nomination are cutting off a lot of noses to spite mush brains behind their faces.
An awful lot of us had first choices that were eliminated before Super Tuesday. We knew the rules. We knew the DNC makes them, and they are far from ideal and actually very byzantine. But everyone knew the rules going in.
It’s hardly rational to say that because your first choice isn’t the nominee your sour grapes are going to push you to vote against every issue you care about.
I thought Joe Biden would have made a very constructive President–and I’ve looked at his votes carefully and know the MBNA stories you’re going to hear about. But he was out at Iowa. I’m very glad to have his input if we can get them to the White House. I think he’ll do a lot to help Congressional liasons and it is not often in Presidential politics when you have someone that experienced in the ways of the senate as VP. Lyndon Johnson took some of that knowledge into the White House. Viet Nam was a disaster to be sure, but he got a lot of constructive legislation passed in a lot of areas.
And as mean as Johnson could be, Biden has been decent to most people in the Senate and will continue to be.
I doubt there is a PUMA alive who could begin to discuss one EW topic or even knows it exists. We aren’t talking about well educated people; we’re talking about PUMAs who are bus loads of Borderline Personalities.
A Tip–if you meet a PUMA in a bar–get away fast. You don’t want that phone number. I wouldn’t go to the Mariott Wardman lokin’ for women this week.
The acronym should be PUMASFB
“Party Unity My Ass I’m Shit Fer Brains”
I just saw that the PUMAs are so brave and such bad asses they moved from the Wardman and are keeping their location secret.
I’m getting the popcorn ready for them to make absolute fools of themselves.
um, actually, afternoon thunderstorms in denver in august is not really the norm. not that unusual, but not the norm.
the forecast for this week is glorious. monday there is a 40% chance of afternoon storms, but the rest of the week is mostly sunny in the 80s.
for what that’s worth.
but it really is a good question where all those tickets are going to get sold. if the stadium isn’t filled, won’t look so great. wonder why they’re doing that waiting list.
PUMA’s see Neo-Democratic corruption. It’s not about Hillary. It’s about fighting to put democracy back into the Dem party. Get it?
And if you think Biden is a vehicle for Change(tm), YOU are not smarter than a fifth grader.
No I have very limited education and reading ability. Would you be kind enough to help educate me as to what you mean by the relative term Neo-Democratic corruption. There’s been some historic democratic corruption throughout the years, but no where in no time did it damage the government and Americans and their rights as in the last 8 years. I don’t know what you mean by the term neo-Democratic corruption.
And gee, I may not call myself a PUMA, but I have Marcy’s signed book, in fact I was instrumental in getting her to Lansing for the book signing (not know about EW’s issues, huh!)
I didn’t say SharonMI didn’t follow EW’s blog, I’ve seen you here before. What I said was I don’t believe that any PUMAs now in Denver do, and I don’t think you could get much of a discussion out of them on issues Marcy has analyzed. I wish all of this country were up in arms over the issues Marcy, Bmaz and others choose to work on–what a much better place it would be.
I have no idea but I’d be willing to bet that as avid a Hillary supporter that Jeri Merrit is, that Jeri who is hosting many friends in Denver at this moment is not fond of what the PUMAs are doing. I could be wrong but I’d be surprised. I don’t hear Jeri saying she will not vote and certainly don’t hear her saying she’s going to support Mccain because her first choice isn’t on the ticket.
I think Jeri’s seen for years what the government tries to pull in a criminal court room enough to make sure she isn’t suporting McCain or refusing to vote for a Democrat at the end. I’ve followed her blog on Biden and I agree with her that I would have rather some of his votes went differently. But almost 35 years in the Senate is a darned long time and no one is going to make you happy with every vote in that amount of time.
Obama’s PAA/FISA revision vote was eggretious political calculus and it was dead wrong. But that doesn’t make me believe I should become a PUMA.
Obama’s PAA/FISA was egregious, reprehensible political calculus to be exact, from a 5th grader’s point of view, correcting for spelling.
To complete my diatribe: I may not call myself a PUMA but I have those tendencies, and no, you wouldn’t want to meet me in a bar.
SharonMI–
No I don’t get it. When you start throwing terms like Neo-Democratic corruption around and assume most people know what you’re talking about I think you’re making a mistake there. It would enhance understanding and my ability to “get it” if you’d explain yourself and the term.
I’ll take what I knew, read and understood in the 5th grade over the bell shaped curve of apathetic adults in this country any day. You seem to know next to nothing about Joe Biden. I’d love to hear who you’re dream ticket is.
I’ve already explained why someone who isn’t running was never considered and it is the absolute truth.
You bet I believe Biden is a vehicle for change. I know every aspect of Biden’s story, every aspect of his sons, every aspect of the “plagierism” charges, and everything the Rethug 527s will throw. He was the best candidate willing to run for VP and I’m terribly glad he’s on the ticket. Hopefully you’ll be educated as to how Biden can help this country. And if not, I think it’s because SharonMI closed her mind.
I’m glad you had the good taste to get Marcy from Ann Arbor to anywhere to talk about her book. There will be many more excellent books hopefully. One of the most exciting ideas I have seen was Bmaz’s last week where he talked about the power that would be harnessed and the impact if somehow people with Marcy’s abilities could be organized and funded to refute some of the ridiculous 527esque ideas the way the Republicans pay people who don’t have a fraction of the talent Marcy and some of the liberal blogosphere has.
I’m glad you read this blog.
I just saw 3 former Clinton delegates in McCain advertisements holding up “Vote for McCain” signs. I’m not presumming to guess what anyone would say but I’d be shocked if Marcy thought it made any sense for people who are offended on so many levels by what the current administration has done to start campaigning for and voting for John McCain. It’s constructive in no earthly way.
If you cared enough about Marcy’s ideas to get her to a book signing, and have known her for a while, I find it hard to see how you could embrace PUMAs voting for McCain or staying home.
To complete my questions after your self described diatribe Sharon:
Please be kind enough since I assume anyone throwing around the term Neo-Democrat to be politically informed how you help get what you want by doing what the PUMAs are doing–
1) Tearing up Obama
2) Staying Home in November
3) Voting McCain.
I’m all ears Sharon. I am open to tyring to understand what you think the PUMAS to the extent they espouse your ideas help you get what you want.
What is it that you want our of the political process. I assume you know that the DNC set the rules; that they’re byzantine. I assume I know who you would have liked on the ticket and I’m doing everything I can to respect Bmaz’s request for me not to talk about her because I have very clearly already done so. I wanted info I could not get from that candidate. But I wasn’t the Lone Ranger in that respect.
I would be genuinely interested in knowing who you want on the ticket and more importantly what you want to get out of the process. What would Sharon implement if she were in the Oval in January. What do you want to happen?
I mean the actions of the RBCs on May 31, 2008 that handed over “uncommitted” MI votes to Obama along with 4 that were specifically for Hillary. The whole pressuring of HRC to quit and the superdelegates to choose before the primary end even as HRC’s numbers were going up and Obama’s were tanking, etc.
And this:
http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm
Well Sharon, we have had here and at FDL some very detailed comments over the last year from a lot of people on two issues I think need revising.
1) The Byzantine way the DNC rules run the primary. Had their been rotating regional primaries we wouldn’t have had the childish attitude displayed by Senator Levin, Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (whose son’s future as mayor of Detroit is now in Granholm’s hands and she will remove him in September), several union leaders, Debbie Dingell, John Dingell, and a number of other prominent Michigan dems.
They knew they were breaking the rules and they did it anyway. Florida Dems knew and I know every component of the dynamics that went into the bad choices those two states made.
Work for rotating regional primaries. The DNC decision was a just one, and further, Obama could have won no matter how those delegates were awarded.
I saw your linked videos. If Gigi and you and anyone else doesn’t like the DNC rules, no Chinese polica are going to send you to a work camp never to be heard of again if you do what you have to do to change the rules. But the rules are the rules and if the ArizoneDiamondbacks win a pennant, I don’t think you’ll see Bmaz wanting to reorganize Major League Baseball Rules so that the Dodgers go forward in the playoffs.
Bitching about it doesn’t get them changed. They’re byzantine. Work to change the rules if you don’t like the caucuses. When the caucuses helped Bill Clinton in his runs he didn’t have a scintilla of a peep of a problem with them I might point out nor did his wife. Not a peep. Bill Clinton was President for eight years and he made no initiative to change the DNC rules during that time or much after. The requests to change the rules came when one candidate saw that she was not going to win the primary.
2) I Hope you have real concern about the voting machines. They are more fragile than you could ever imagine and I mean Diebold has admitted to this in the last few weeks and very few Secretarys of State is moving to change them.
From Bloomberg News in May2008:
Do you have all the touch screens out of Michigan, Sharon? Do you have a paper trail for every vote or did Sharon waltz into the booth and use that cute little touch screen?
Gee, thanks for giving me the chance to respond.
Biden helped the repubs besmirch Anita Hill, and let a neo-con slide into a lifetime Supreme Court appointment. I wasn’t too politically astute back then but I remember what the awful feeling inspired watching that clean, articulate black woman humiliated on national teevee. And I have friends from India who are engineers, not 7-11 owners.
I will NOT support corruption by a party calling itself Democratic. The rethugs have turned into such an ugly, extremist party because more sensible, moderate voters who called themselves republicans saw fit to vote for the R candidate letting the extremists take over. I won’t do the same for the “Democrats”.
I’m not sure what the Indian reference is too. I have Indian friends who make terribly valuable contributions in all kinds of jobs. You wouldn’t spend much time in a teaching hospital without seeing them. They run major teams at MSFT. But I don’t know what the 7-11 ref is connected with.
I don’t believe that the Republican Regime we have all grown to hate the last near 8 years though has any analogy in what will become of an Obama-Biden presidency. A lot of articulate, very bright seasoned people here and now a little bit even in the MSM, certainly in the liberal blogosphere are trackking Obama’s centrist compromises and lists to the center carefully.
I just don’t think though we can predict yet with a lot of accuracy that Obama is not going to be an excellent President or Biden won’t be an excellent VP. I don’t see them as putting together an extremist democratic government if I understand what you mean and by extremist you probably mean lock step centrist votes and issues, the kind Bahy has consistently supported, Sibelius would have, and Chet Edwards has.
I am floored by the sentiment that people who supported Democrats now all of a sudden want to support McCain. Wow! They need to read a little of the FDL tab blogs and the Silo blogs and Cliff Schechter’s book.
Sorry about the 5th grader comment, PetePierce.
I would point out one very popular fiction this week driven by the people in MSM who don’t do any fact checking but are busy preening themselves.
There is no legal mechanism or DNC rules mechanism for any past primary candidate to “release their delegates.” The delegates are not imprisoned, nor or they bound by any contract whatsoever and as Roger Simon and many others at Politico have made clear, this is a fictional kabuki dance. No candidate has “delegates” to be released anywhere in Denver at this convention. The concept of released delegates on Wednesday is pure smoke and mirrors for the totally naive.
Ickes comments are totally false and based on the perception that Americans are stupid and believe that any candidate has to release delegates in order for them to vote for anyone. There is nothing in the Deomcratic National Committee Rules that says delegates are now bound to any candidate, and Ickes who helped craft them knows that when he talks about delegate release he is stepping on a parts of his anatomy often treated by urologists.
I have noticed on many blogs by a supporter of one of the primary candidates that this fiction is being slurped up. It is total igorance. No release is real and no release is required whatsoever. It’s fictional kabuki and it will be interesting to see if MSNBC who has had that explictly taught to them and Chicken Noodle Network continue to ignore what Plitico has correctly said on MSNBC’s air.
I am going to demonstrate my uncompromising neutral position I have been claiming all along. BOTH OF YOU – Knock It Off.
Do you sir,believe that any law or rule requires “release of delegates”? And I think it’s valid when someone uses a term that is not widely understood to ask for what it means and that’s what I was doing. I’ve seen you ask for clarification and when people are doing all this bashing Bmaz, it is logical to ask them
1) What do they want in a candidate
2) Who do they think delivers that bundle of everything in their dreams?
3) How can they possibly predict with any certainty that x vote in the Senate is going to produce y policy that any administration will need “the Congress” to enact?
I have not been anything but respectufl to any other commenter today.