ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> TalkLeft

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Legal Commentary

: TalkLeft

Rule Are Rules, Except When They Are Not

By Big Tent Democrat

ADVERTISEMENTS

By Big Tent Democrat

What a fine mess Donna Brazile and Howard Dean have created. BTW, she should be removed from commenting on CNN about this primary campaign given the fact she is part of the story, and an ugly part.

Jerome Armstrong has the details:

Speaking as someone who sent Howard Dean to the DNC to decentralize the power of that committee to the states, it was a terrible leadership for him to have allowed the Rules & Bylaws Committee to tangle the presidential nominating selection process by selectively attempting to strip two states of their delegates, while continuing to ignore the fact that Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina broke those same rules.

What's that? Yes, read the rules. . . . Yes, you read that right; under Rule 20.C.1.a., Florida, Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, and South Carolina would have all lost their super delegates and had their pledged delegates reduced by half since they all violated Rule 11.A.

However, Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina weren't punished fairly. In fact, they weren't punished at all. And what about Florida & Michigan? Well, we all know what happened to them.

MORE . . .

NOTE - Comments are now closed

Instead of strictly adhering to Rule 20.C.1.a. and reducing their pledged delegates by 50%, the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee decided to take it a step further. The DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee exercised the authority granted to them by Rules 20.C.5. and 20.C.6. which allowed them to "impose sanctions the Committee deems appropriate."

And what were those sanctions the Committee deemed appropriate? Stripping two of the largest states in the union of their votes at the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

That sort of ruling, my friends, is why it'd be worth whatever it takes to get Donna Brazile to remove herself from being in a position of authority within the Democratic Party.

Now, as I understand it, the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee has not taken up the move by IA, SC, and NH in the their meetings; that the way it played out was, those states waited until after the DNC meetings on the matter, where they ruled against FL & MI, to make their move. The best case you could make, in their defense, is that it is still pending. But it seems pretty obvious, from looking at the reporting at the time, that their moves were just as self-interested and non-conforming. . .

Howard Dean and Donna Brazile have done great damage to the Party with their shenanigans. Their "rules are are rules, except when they are not" approach will damage the Dem Party in the General Election, whoever is the nominee. Can this be fixed? I do not know. But let's discuss this issue fairly.

Full post as published by TalkLeft on February 13, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 11/08/26 18:36:54)