Political News and Commentary with the Right Perspective. NAVIGATION
  • Front Page
  • News
  • Multimedia
  • RSS Feed


  • Tax Hike Wall of Shame























    Hillary's big wins could mean one thing for Michigan... an end to democracy and the rule of law


    By Nick, Section News
    Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:56:15 AM EST

    The cable news networks were abuzz last night as Hillary Clinton swept the big primary contests in Ohio and Texas.  (Looks like maybe a little bit of the Comeback Kid's magic has finally rubbed off on his wife, though it may still be too little too late.)  That has renewed interest and discussion here at home and across the nation about the possibility of a voided election and a new set of ballots being printed here in Michigan.  Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, the press is entirely focused on the horse race and is ignoring, completely, the larger questions raised by such a potential move.  Larger questions that go to the very core of democracy and the rule of law.  The sort of questions on which graduate students write thesis papers and dissertations.  

    That being the case it might not be hard to figure out why the MSM is ignoring them.  Why talk about moves that could do more to undermine the American electoral system than perhaps any others in the history of the Republic when you can talk about the neck-and-neck competition between Clinton and Obama and then toss it over to the entertainment desk for an update on the latest American Idol scandal.

    Here's how it breaks down...

    Even with the big wins yesterday the Clinton camp remains just out of striking distance of Barack Obama's delegate lead for the Democrat's Presidential nomination.  That would all change though, if, and this is a monster sized if... if the primary results from Florida and Michigan were actually allowed to stand and the delegates seated at the national convention.

    Clinton's modest Michigan win (over "Uncommitted") would pay significant dividends if her Michigan soldiers actually had the chance to prowl the convention hall a few months from now.  But alas, they've been denied credentials.

    Howard Dean and the Democrat National Committee continue to refuse to seat Michigan's legally elected delegates because they didn't like our primary date.  Will of the people?  Certified election results?  Democracy?  Bah.  Howard's way or the highway.  Michigan will play by the DNC's rules or Michigan won't play at all.  Now kneel before Zod.

    As state after state holds contest after contest and a clear winner refuses to emerge from the field, calls are surfacing again to scrap Michigan's election results and to vote again.  Perhaps worse, the talk this morning revolves not around a fresh primary, where every voter who had a chance to vote the first time would have a chance to vote again (not that that really makes the eradication of our electoral principles any easier to swallow), but around a new caucus where thousands of party activists instead of millions of regular voters would make the new decision.  

    According to the Detroit Free Press:

    Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Clinton supporter, said the victory in Ohio changes "the landscape a bit" and could open the door to a Democratic caucus -- not a primary -- in Michigan, though it would have to be privately funded and both candidates would have to agree.

    "Michigan and Florida votes should count. To not count them at all would alienate these states in the general election," she said...

    U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who led the effort for an early primary, has said he is against a do-over. On Tuesday night, state Democratic Party Chairman Mark Brewer said it would require both Clinton and Obama and the national party to reach an agreement.

    For once I agree with Carl Levin.  Tossing the results of a legally held and certified election because one does not like the result, the timing or the way one of the candidates crossed his or her eyes on a particular morning not only destroys the rule of law, it fundamentally and fatally undermines the principles of democracy.  Michigan would become nothing more than a banana republic.

    Have a problem with election results?  Just vote again until they look better.  They do that sort of thing in third world dictatorships.  We don't do that in the United States of America.  At least not in forty-eight of them.  

    I'm not a Hillary fan.  Frankly, I think she'd be a much tougher general election opponent for John McCain than Barack Obama would be.  Simply seating her legally elected delegates doesn't do me any favors personally.  And I can see a bright-side to holding this election again.  I laid a few of them out in jest HERE several weeks ago.  

    But for all the pleasant damage this sort of thing could do to the integrity and finances of the Michigan Democrat Party and the remaining candidates for the Democrat nomination I can't help but put the fundamental principles of democracy a little bit higher up the food chain.  

    First Knight is one of the more underrated Camelot tales ever to come out of Hollywood.  Sean Connery's King Arthur delivers several impressive lines throughout the film and one of them applies perfectly here.

    "Either what we hold to be right and good and true is right and good and true for all men, under God, or we're just another robber tribe."

    The rule of law counts.  Always.  If it doesn't count once it never counts again under the existing government.  Legally held elections either determine a winner the first time, every time or the government forfeits it's popular mandate.  Democracy ceases to exist and something far darker takes root.  It may not be directly at the point of a gun but it is no less oppressive.  

    Those are the stakes Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are playing chicken with in their pursuit of political power.  Those are the stakes people like Chris Matthews are giddily discussing when they salivate on camera hoping for a revote here in Michigan.  Those are the stakes our legally elected leaders like Jennifer Granholm are discussing when they talk about new caucuses.  Heaven help us all if they get their way.

    < Wednesday in the Sphere, March 5 | A Conversation About Obama -a political argument >
    Display: Sort:
    I wouldn't call it gloom and doom... (none / 0) (#1)
    by KG One on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:47:13 AM EST
    ...just quite yet.

    The longer the two of them kick the stuffing out of one another, the more likely that it will cause fractures within the DNC that will not be readily fixable and will most likely become a serious handicap for them come November.

    So let them drag out the process for several more months. It'll only do them more harm than good.

    Nick, come on (none / 0) (#2)
    by apackof2 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:50:32 AM EST
    since when did the Democrat Party have integrity?

    And if there is a do-over it will just help to expose "Hiltery", Granholm and the Dims for what they are, power hungry at the expense of the law

     

    Third world dictatorships AND Michigan schools (none / 0) (#4)
    by Hayekian on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 11:17:26 AM EST
    "Have a problem with election results?  Just vote again until they look better."

    Heck, they do that all the time in school and municipal debt millage elections ("bond" votes). OK, the system has been reformed somewhat by the election consolidation law, but they still run these "do over" elections almost every time voters say "I don't think so" to more debt and taxes.

    • That's right by Ed Burley, 03/05/2008 11:28:16 AM EST (none / 0)
    The Constitution (none / 0) (#6)
    by tenex22 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 01:34:14 PM EST
    Has never meant much to the Dems, remember that they see it as a "living document" to be changed, interpreted, or just disregarded as they see fit. Unfortunately a "revote" would not surprise me at all and if either Clinton or Obama get elected then the rest of the country will know the pain that Michigan has felt since Granholm became governor.

    Rule of Law or Following the Rules? (none / 0) (#7)
    by DMOnline on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 01:35:11 PM EST
    I understand where you're coming from, Nick.  But I respectfully disagree.

    Every state knew well in advance what the Democratic Party's rules were concerning moving up their primary/caucus dates.  With the exception of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, no other states were "allowed" to move their contests up before February 5.  Those were the well-established rules going in.

    The Michigan Legislature decided to say "screw you!" to the Parties and set our primaries for January 15.  They were in clear violation of "the rules."

    To now suggest that they change the rules to seat the delegates determined by the January 15 primary is absurd.  It would mean rules have no meaning and there is no consequence for breaking them.  It would also be incredibly unfair since Obama took his name off our ballot and never competed here for any votes.  He did so because Michigan broke the rules.

    Personally, I think they should let things stand as they are - don't seat any of the Michigan or Florida delegates.

    The other option is to have a primary re-do.  And yes, Michigan should have to pay for the re-do since Michigan created this mess in the first place.

    Actions have consequences.

    DCuz
    www.RightCuz.com



    We wouldn't have this problem... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Dave75 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 08:54:14 AM EST
    ...if Obama had kept his name on the ballot.  He did keep his name on Florida's ballot, even though Florida also broke DNC rules.  Was there a legal reason why he couldn't remove his name, or does he just despise the little test lab for liberal policies known as Michigan?

    Display: Sort:

    Login

    Make a new account

    Username:
    Password:
    Join the RightMichigan.com Facebook Group HERE!
    Tweet along with RightMichigan by
    following us on Twitter HERE!

    Related Links

    + Detroit Free Press
    + HERE
    + Also by Nick
    create account | faq | search