THREAD #2 / Live Blogging Committee Hearing [Update with notes of Truthteller] »

[ALERT]: C-SPAN IS ACCEPTING TELEPHONE CALLS
Sen. Clinton Supporters Call 202.585.3885
Call 202.585.3887 If You Are a Rep. or Ind. Who Supports Voter Enfranchisement

This is the 2ND THREAD covering the committee hearing / the FIRST THREAD IS HERE but comments in that thread are now closing.

[UPDATE]: COMMENTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW CLOSED. PLEASE VISIT THREAD #3.

[Truthteller]

12:38 PM EST - We are now discussing uncommitted delegates, and we are now citing exit polls. I guess Obama supporters organized at the Congressional level to adopt 30 of 36 uncommitted delegates. Brewer wants uncommitted to be allocated to Obama. But what of the other 6? And now Clinton’s delegates in MI are overstated? And we are citing exit polls as evidence? This Brewer’s argument is ridiculous. A 69/59 split is unacceptable.

12:41 PM EST - And now write in ballots no one saw are for Obama? And now they are all suddenly Obama supporters? And there is no evidence? The Obama campaign is basing another argument on no evidence? And somehow a 69/59 split will magically resolve all these problems? And data not relevant to the primary is suddenly relevant? These are specious arguments, and the Michigan Compromise should be rejected on those grounds.

12:44 PM EST - Flournoy correctly notes that exit polls are questionable. Now Obamabots suddenly support exit polls. OUT OF TOUCH.

12:45 PM EST - Kamarck, a Clinton supporter, notes that Uncommitted is an option and a preference. Just look at the rules, Brewer. It is a preference. It is in the ROOOLZ. She refers to Brewer’s argument as a willy nilly, arbitrary assignment of delegates. And she is correct. State parties, she says, cannot choose what they want from a primary. She also tells Brewer that his proposal sets a very dangerous precedent. And again, she is correct.

12:48 PM EST - Notice that Brewer hinges his entire argument on “I believe.”

12:49 PM EST - Don Fowler of SC, Clinton supporter, notes that exit polls would result in a Kerry Presidency. Only “HARD votes” should be accepted. And now the 30,000 write in votes that no one saw should suddenly be granted to Obama. And why? “I believe.”

12:51 PM EST - Katz and Fowler now “believe” this or that with a complete ballot. They have no arguments, and now they are resorting to their warped “beliefs.”

12:52 PM EST - Name the provision that allows committee to allocate delegates. And he notes that Rule 13, which notes uncommitted is a voter preference. And “shall” is not “may,” according to McDonald. AND NOW THE MICHIGAN PRIMARY IS NOT A PRIMARY ACCORDING TO BREWER. McDonald - Are you relying on any rule? Brewer admits that he is not. Voilà!!!

12:54 PM EST - Ickes reminds Brewer of the voluntary decision not mandated by the rules of Obama and others to remove names from ballot. And the desire to “curry favor with the likes of Iowa.” It was VOLUNTARY. No rules required them to remove from ballot. But now suddenly Brewer claims this is about the will of voters. Will from exit polls? Take a hike.

12:56 PM EST - Obamabot Hynes of Illinois now claims Michigan voters did not have a real election. Says Hillary vs. Uncommitted is not an election. And now exit polls are discussed again. Obamabot Hynes is programmed and ready. Not reliable numbers, but “the best we have.” This is a joke. Oh, and now a 4th category: voters who did not vote. Yes, MORE NEGATIVE EVIDENCE. I love how that which does not exist suddenly gains importance. This is specious argumentation by Team Obama. What a joke. Since when are hypotheticals evidence? Who are these people? Is this how our Party thinks? No wonder why we lose.

1:01 PM EST - Real data is not data, and hypothetical evidence that does not exist is somehow accurate. Let us turn the world upside down. This is a joke. OUT OF TOUCH.

1:02 PM EST - Senator Carl Levin now speaks. The bottom line: unity. All delegates with full voting rights. And that, Levin says, is unity. The disagreement is on allocation. And it is imperfect. There is no scientific way, he says. But somehow an argument predicated on negative evidence is rational and “unifying.” Obama wants 64/64. No thanks. Clinton desires 73/55, representing the vote as it was cast. Now it is an argument of Michigan vs. Obama vs. Clinton. Levin knows it is a flawed primary. But he wants it seated in full. SEAT THEM IN FULL WITH FULL VOTING RIGHTS. Levin calls the Brewer proposal unified allocation formula. And now Levin says he is “on the ground.” Whatever.

1:10 PM EST - Now Levin engages in a diatribe against NH and IA. Good. I agree. Opening up the process: an additional first tier caucus between IA and NH. IA and NH as a sign of a party of privilege. Michigan accepts the proposal, and applies to be one of the early states, pre window states. Michigan accepted, but said Michigan would only accept if NH accepts. Then NH Secretary of State unilaterally acted by moving the date, and MI could not gain an answer regarding the action of the NH Secretary of State. He now cites the Commission’s findings on the impact of early states. And IA and NH not representative of the county, according to the Commission. NH to be third, but NH acts unilaterally.

1:16 PM EST - NH issued a waiver. And integrity of the rules, but NH not penalized. If you give NH a waiver, then give MI a waiver. Levin says MI would accept rules if other states accepted. Since NH violated, they decided they too would violate. He reminds the Committee of the sequence. He asks the Committee not to punish MI for defending a principle. Unity, again, is the seating of the full delegation with full representation.

1:21 PM EST - Ben Johnson reminds the Committee that Brewer voted to penalize FL.

1:25 PM EST - Germond refers to Michigan as an “event.” And she cites the notion that some voters did not participate, as the “believed” the DNC. And she is also citing the write-in votes. How did MI arrive to 69/59.

1:27 PM EST - Levin insists it was flawed, and the plan of Brewer is the compromise formation of two opposed positions.

1:30 PM EST - Steed, Clinton supporter, is concerned about precedent. Good. He reminds everyone that uncommitted is a choice. And he notes that the precedent of removing delegates from one candidate and arbitrarily allocating them to some other candidate is one we should avoid. The precedent of rewarding a candidate who removed his name from a ballot is dangerous.

RETURNING IN ONE MOMENT

1:50 PM EST - Bonior is shilling for Obama. Now we understand the Edwards endorsement. And what is with the gratuitous citation of exit polls involving African-American voters and young voters? And notice that he misquoted the transcript from NH Public Radio.

1:52 PM EST - What an odd argument: it is illegitimate, but we desire full representation. The argument itself is flawed. And he too is citing negative evidence. So now we have to respect something that may or may not exist.

1:53 PM EST - And once again: it is not Bambi’s fault that his surrogates lobbied against a second primary in Lansing. Obama is never responsible. Do not blame Bambi. Leave Bambi alone!!!!!!!! Take a hike, Bonior.

1:55 PM EST - Obama wants an even split, and he does not care if the MI delegation gains full representation. It is official: OBAMA SUPPORTS DISENFRANCHISEMENT AND BACK ROOM DEALS BY CAREER POLITICIANS. Our votes mean nothing. If Obama wants votes, he will simply steal them.

1:57 PM EST - No says Obama did not participate in delegate selection process. But were not Obama supporters at the Congressional district conventions doing exactly that? The lack of consistency is breathtaking.

1:58 PM EST - Bonior and Obama want “unity.” Facts do not matter; only “unity” as Obama understands it matters. And what do Obama’s rallies in MI have to do with the delegates? What a joke.

2:00 PM EST - Elizabeth Smith, Hillary supporter, does not understand why someone would remove his name from a ballot. And this is an expression of preference, she says. And how can write in votes for Obama count if Obama did not authorize them? She also coquettishly invalidates the formula predicated on exit polls. She also notes that the caucus process is FLAWED. She also wonders how a Democratic Party can be a party of unity by overriding the vote. Good job.

2:05 PM EST - More concerns about allocation. Mame Reiley, Clinton Supporter. The integrity of the vote should be honored. Although it may be flawed, it is a vote. She may recognize 100%, but the integrity of the vote must be recognized. But Bonior says the integrity of those who did not vote or failed to vote correctly should be honored. What a joke, this Bonior. And notice again how the delegate advantage from PA and OH is cited. That is irrelevant.

2:09 PM EST - The Michigan Debacle: The Politics of the Unknown - known knowns, unknown knows, unknown unknowns, known unknowns.

2:13 PM EST - Flournoy notes how the Michigan DEMOS acknowledge the primary they say is illegitimate. She uncovered the founding contradiction that undermines their argument. And she notes how dividing the delegates arbitrarily renders all elections inconsequential.

2:15 PM EST - Obama campaign refuses to admit that they do not support full representation. Notice the verbal gymnastics whenever they are cornered.

2:18 PM EST - Governor BLANCHARD, Clinton supporter - Notes the record turnout in Michigan, and notes that Michigan has been a reliable state. WE NEED A NOMINEE OF 50 STATES.

2:21 PM EST - Notes that candidates who removed names had a flawed strategy. He has the affidavits. Notes that four candidates did leave their names on the ballot. He also corrects the record: the NH public radio statements never appeared in Michigan. Also asks committee to consider how uncommitted votes may have been the result of a protest against the entire process.

2:23 PM EST - Explains how Richardson, Edwards and Obama distributed handbills for uncommitted to the suburbs and to Wayne County. Inner city voters and suburbanites were urged to vote uncommitted. HONOR, RESPECT AND COUNT OUR 600,000 VOTERS. Michigan is pivotal, and the DNC should not punish them anymore.

2:26 PM EST - Democrats do not disenfranchise votes. That is not the Democratic way; that is not the American way. WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT NOVEMBER. TURNING A BACK ON FL AND MI IS COQUETTING WITH A McCAIN VICTORY. And Democrats in 2008 should not appear to be the Supreme Court of 2000.

2:28 PM EST - Scary and out of touch Obamabot Hynes asks if they support Brewer proposal. We support 73-55. No more, no less, no disenfranchisement. Blanchard does not view it as a flawed primary. Reminds Hynes of cost of primary and record turnout. Obamabot Hynes is not pleased he is forced to deal with facts. Now scary and out of touch Obamabot Hynes, who I am convinced is a recipient of Rezko cash, claims the Clinton campaign is responsible for the lack of unity in MI. He is an idiot. Hynes implies Blanchard does not respect rules. Blanchard’s riposte: I do not agree with rules that disenfranchise voters. Fuck you, Obamabot Hynes. Go play with your Rezko cash, you old fart from hell. The ROOLZ, the ROOLZ.

2:36 PM EST - Rule 20c1a: violation of order and consequences. What other rules did Michigan violate? Fowler notes that Michigan was legitimate, and referring to the primary as flawed is not appropriate. Good for Fowler. Fowler notes that Section 4, Article 2, of the charter requires the DNC to honor the legitimate primary of MI.

2:40 PM EST - Obamabot Katz is now claiming Obama followed the DNC. That is not true, for the DNC did not ask anyone to remove their names from the ballot. And now Obamabot Katz is sanctimonious: Florida in 2000 is not comparable to Michigan in 2008. Did he discuss Auschwitz with Obama? Blanchard responds: the right to vote is sacred.

2:43 PM EST - Obamabot Martha Clark does not want to disrespect those who did not vote. Thanks for the talking point, Martha. And now she is citing write in ballots no one has reviewed. She is not very bright. Thank you again for mindlessly repeating the notes the campaign sent you, Martha. I hope you enjoy the money you were handed, Martha. I am sure she is looking forward to lunch. Write ins cited again, but no one knows for whom those votes were cast. No evidence, just talking points.

2:46 PM EST - Obamabot Brazile now thinks we are not allowed to use the word “disenfranchise.” And she too is suddenly concerned about write in votes no one has reviewed. What if all those votes are for Mickey Mouse? And Brazile desires a “political” compromise? She is not concerned with the voters? Thank you, Donna. Now we know counting votes for you is political.

2:48 PM EST - Brazile: My momma told me to play by the rules. And now she is telling him that the Clinton campaign has cheated by “changing the rules.” And she cites the “spirit of unity.” Thank you for telling us you support Obama, Brazile. And thank you for your partisan interpretation of history. And again, let us respect voters we do not know exist. Let us respect imaginary voters.
DONNA BRAZILE IS OUT OF TOUCH.

2:52 PM EST - Blanchard reminds Brazile that Clinton did not change the rules. This is about voters, not a political candidate.

2:54 PM EST - Is his humiliate Ickes hour?

WE WILL RETURN AT 4:15 EST