The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee holds key to Hillary's fate

It's mid May and the May 31 meeting of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee is approaching fast. According to the New York Times, there is a panel of 30 people on this committee. The NYT article also states that 13 of the panel members support Hillary Clinton while only 8 support Barack Obama. That leaves 9 members that could tip the scales one way or the other. Let's make no bones about it people. This panel holds the key to Hillary's fate. The logic that they use to make their decision is very important. The ruling that this panel makes could effect future elections if, God forbid, states decide to break the rules again.

Here are a couple of rulings that I would consider bad judgment:

1) FL and MI remain stripped of their delegates and the popular votes in those states do not count.

2) Split the delegates 50/50 and the popular votes in those states do not count.

Then, there are a couple of rulings that might seem more reasonable but don't really make anyone happy:

1) Split the delegates 50/50 and let the popular votes count.

2) Force a revote in both states.

Hillary Clinton wants the delegates apportioned according to popular vote. That seems to be a fair choice as long as the panel allows the overall popular vote decide who gets the nomination. Being that the DNC will have waited about 4 months to make this decision when an early, fair decision might have given Hillary more momentum, I say that all MI and FL delegates should be awarded to Hillary. Yes, this might seem unfair. However, it is also unfair that the DNC has dragged this situation out for 4 months. This lack of decision has allowed Barack to enjoy momentum he might not have had if the DNC had ruled on this by the beginning of March. Need more reasons that I think my "ruling" on the situation is fair? Well, for one thing, Barack took his name of the ballot in Michigan. Until very recently, Barack had not campaigned in either state. Last but not least, Hillary won the primaries in both states.

I say that supporters of Hillary should gather in Washington DC and put pressure on this DNC panel to make a decision that's more than just fair. A decision that compensates for momentum lost due to their not dealing with the issue in a timely manner.

Barack campaigns in Michigan - Why?

CNN gave me the hint that Barack Obama is in Michigan in an article regarding John Edwards' endorsement of the democratic candidate. So, I took the opportunity to dig a little further and found this article on the msnbc site. As I suspected, Barack Obama is in fact campaigning in Michigan. This leads us to ask the following question:

Why is Barack Obama campaigning in Michigan?

I stumbled upon this article on the Fox News site the other day. I was thinking that it's not the most fair solution; however, I was going to wait until Howard Dean and the Dysfunctional Nihilistic Committee (read Democratic National Committee) had their little meeting to discuss the issue. In light of the fact that Barack is now campaigning in MI, I thought it best to lay that proposal on the table now. This proposal was made just last week. Furthermore, Barack had already stated in March that he did not want a revote in MI. In fact, his campaign essentially blocked a MI revote. After all this, does Barack have the audacity to imply that he has already won the nomination by visiting Michigan as the Democratic presidential candidate?

I hope that U.S. citizens see this sly move for what it is. Barack showing his true colors as a two-faced, hypocritical candidate who is pulling every low blow and sneak attack possible to give him an edge. In other words, Barack Obama is Washington politics at its finest. Want real change? Give Hillary the Democratic nomination! Step up and give her a much deserved victory in Oregon next week. She already has an edge in Kentucky. Let's keep the momentum going! If Hillary can rise victorious in the OR and KY Democratic primaries, she can put pressure on the DNC to resolve the FL/MI debacle in a fair and speedy fashion.

Michigan Re-Vote: Deal or No Deal?

I don't know about Michigan, but I say "no deal!" as long as re-vote is on the table. You already know my opinion on MI and FL holding their primaries early. Therefore, I feel that Hillary won in MI fair and square. The MI delegates should be awarded to her.

Barack has already stated that he does not want a re-vote in MI. Although my reasons for not wanting a re-vote differ from his, I agree on that. I don't understand why Hillary apparently wants a re-vote. Perhaps it is because awarding her the MI delegates is not on the table right now as far as the DNC is concerned. Hey, DNC! If you want to give MI and FL a slap on the wrist, do the honorable thing and award half the delegates to Hillary since she won, by default, in both states.

Stripping MI and FL of their delegates is a bit extreme considering the only thing they did wrong was hold their primaries a little early. If they had been caught red handed "fixing" the vote, I could understand that punishment. Come on DNC! Don't give a felony sentence for a misdemeanor crime! Get off your high horse and do the right thing!

This just in:

Obama campaign calls 50-50 split of Michigan delegates fair

Clinton rejects 50-50 delegate split

Need I comment on this? Of course Barack thinks a split is fair: 1) he's got a lead on Hillary and 2) he took his name off the ballot. On the other hand, I can certainly understand why Hillary doesn't go for the split. She already won in MI and FL by default. Like I said, I feel that the DNC needs to do the right thing and award Hillary (and only Hillary) 50% of the delegates from both MI and FL. That is fair.