Obama Delegate Behind Texas Polygamy Hoax?

To rephrase Donna BraZilla’s criticism on Sen. Clinton,

Why can’t Obama just control his people and stick with the issues?

DNC Delegate Selection Rules: Florida & Michigan

True or False?

1) The DNC Rules state that pledged delegates elected by Florida and Michigan voters must be excluded because those states scheduled primaries before February 5, 2008.

FALSE: The DNC Delegate Selection Rules explicitly give the Rules and Bylaws Committee and the Credentials Committee ultimate jurisdiction over delegate selection. These committees, each in their independent capacities, can seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida at their discretion.

2) The mandatory penalty for a state holding a primary before February 5, 2008 is exclusion of that state’s delegates from the Democratic National Convention.

FALSE: The mandatory penalty is exclusion of one half of the offending state’s pledged and alternate delegates. Unless otherwise provided, the other half of that state’s pledged and alternate delegates will be seated at the convention.

3) Any attempt to seat 100% of the pledged or unpledged delegates of Florida and Michigan at this point is “changing the rules.”

FALSE: The DNC Rules explicitly contemplate that excluded delegates will eventually be seated at the Convention. For states in violation of the timing rules, the DNC Delegate Selection Rules provide remedies to reinstate all of their delegates, both pledged and unpledged.

6) Hillary violated the DNC Rules by keeping her name on the Michigan ballot.

FALSE: Nowhere in the DNC’s Delegate Selection Plans is there any suggestion or command that any candidate remove his or her name from a ballot in a state that is in violation of timing rules. This is why Obama and Edwards were on the Florida ballot, in spite of its primary also being before February 5.

7) Hillary manipulated the process by being the only candidate who kept her name on the Michigan ballot.

FALSE: Kucinich, Dodd and Gravel also kept their names on the Michigan ballot. In fact the decision of some candidates to remove their names from the Michigan ballot was a tactical move designed to curry favor with Democratic Party officials in Iowa who were concerned that the significance of their first-in-the-nation status was being diminished. The risk paid off handsomely for Obama.

Because Edwards and Obama were not on the Michigan ballot, that election cannot be considered a legitimate expression of voter preference of a presidential candidate.

FALSE: According to the Delegate Selection Rules & Bylaws, “Delegates shall be allocated in a fashion that fairly reflects the expressed presidential preference or uncommitted status of the primary voters…” The Michigan ballot included an option for “uncommitted” to ensure that voters could express a presidential preference or uncommitted status consistent with this rule. Nothing in the Rules requires a state to allocate delegates to candidates who voluntarily remove their names from the ballot as John Edwards and Barack Obama did.

13) Hillary’s activities in Florida and Michigan look suspicious, between fundraising and holding a victory rally in Florida.

FALSE: Hillary acted well within the letter and spirit of the rules. The rules stipulate that candidates can fundraise in states violating the timing rules and that fundraising activity is not considered impermissible campaigning. Further, the prohibition on campaigning in any state ends as soon as the primary in violation concludes. Hillary’s victory party was within the rules because she did not appear at a campaign event in Florida until after the polls closed.

14) Barack Obama would likely win more delegates if there were a new contest.

FALSE: The rules provide that a candidate who campaigns or holds press conferences in a state in violation of timing may not receive any of the pledged or unpledged delegates from that state. Because Barack Obama campaigned in Florida when, on Sunday September 30, 2007, he held an impromptu public news conference in Florida, when he bought television advertising time on stations in markets which included much of Florida, and when he ran a campaign in Michigan to encourage voters to vote “uncommitted,” Barack Obama may not be entitled to receive any delegates from Florida or Michigan.

15) Reinstating any of the delegates from either Florida or Michigan would be a travesty against democracy and fair elections. It would be cheating.

FALSE: There are many good and valid reasons for the DNC to have rules regarding delegate selection timing, but none of these reasons relate to ensuring that primaries accurately reflect voter preference. None of these involve the preservation of democracy.

Neither Clinton nor Obama has the power to reinstate the delegates unless they already have won 50% plus 1 of the total delegates. Therefore neither has the power to cheat. This matter lies in the hands of the DNC’s Rules & Bylaws Committee which is neutral.

Were Obama to gain control of the Credentials Committee at the DNC, he would have the power to exclude the delegates from Michigan and Florida. That would be a biased effort to disenfranchise two large states. That would be a travesty and one the Republicans could easily exploit in November.

16) Hillary has changed her position on Florida and Michigan now that she may not receive 50% + 1 of the total delegates need to win before the pledged delegate primaries conclude.

FALSE: From the beginning of the Florida controversy, Hillary has consistently stated that if she wins, meaning securing 50% + 1 of the total delegates, she will reinstate the Florida and Michigan delegation at the convention if the DNC fails to resolve the problem on their own before such time.

Obama has changed his position now that seating the Florida and Michigan delegates would put Hillary in the lead. In August of last year he said that resolving the delegate issue was not his job (“I’m like a player on the field. I shouldn’t be setting up the rules” ) and in September he suggested to Florida donors that if he were the nominee whether he would seat in the state’s excluded delegates, declaring that he would “Do right by Florida voters.”

Currently the race for pledged delegates is so split that neither candidate will receive the 50% plus 1 delegates they need to seal their nomination before the Convention. Obama now wants to set the rules and insists that the DNC must refuse to seat Florida and Michigan’s delegates, even though DNC Rules clearly provide remedies to include them. His arguments are not based in the rules and are not in the interest of democracy or the Democratic Party, but only in the fact that those delegates reflect a greater nationwide preference for Hillary Clinton.

17) A new primary or caucus would settle the issue in a fair way that would maintain party unity.

FALSE: A new primary or caucus that complies with timing rules would have been fair if the date had been set before people started voting in Iowa. Once people started voting, each subsequent primary or caucus was affected. The campaigns have campaigned and spent money in reliance on this calendar. The candidates, campaigns, and electorates are not the same today as they were before voting began. Any new contest would be on an unlevel playing field. It is unnecessary, an insult to the voters who already voted, and unacceptable.

Thanks Rev….Of course these OBAMATOTS BOOED MAYA AGELOU at he Texas convention….Right along with Jackson Lee….I’m sure the delegate from houston mentioned above led the chant….

A member of one cult ratting out members of another cult.
Strange

People, I like this site and occasionally comment, but are you really defending investigating the FLDS compound because the tipster may be an Obama delegate? You think it’s fine for 12 and 13 year old girls to be “married” to old guys and impregnated? To keep them submissive and barely educated? And you’re supporting Clinton, who has spent her life championing oppressed women?

Just because Obamabots come in asserting various things doesn’t mean we need to check our brains at the door and knee-jerk oppose them without evaluating them first.

Tell the trolls to fuck off when it’s warranted, ridicule them when their spouting lies, but please continue to think for yourselves.

N Carolina poll who gets your vote

——————————————————————————–

http://share.triangle.com/electionpoll08

Who gets your Vote:
Who gets your vote?
Barack Obama 725
Hillary Clinton 574
John McCain 585

Rozita Swinton has “a history of making false claims of sexual abuse, according to an affidavit filed in Colorado Springs.”

Washington Post

The affidavit said that in previous years, Swinton had been linked to other tales of terrifying abuse. In one, a woman calling herself Dana Anderson phoned a hotline to say that she was 13 years old and had been locked in a basement and sexually abused by her father. In another, a girl calling herself Dana said she was abused by a youth pastor at a Colorado church.

The affidavit described these events as part of a request for a warrant for Swinton, charging her with false reporting to authorities. It said she had already pleaded guilty to false reporting last year in Colorado. Attempts to reach Swinton yesterday were unsuccessful: One number listed on the affidavit was disconnected, and a call to another was not returned.

The affidavit does not put forward any motive Swinton might have had for allegedly making the calls, but it hints at a possible personality disorder. The document quotes a former worker at a shelter for abused women in Colorado Springs who may have received calls from Swinton in February. In one, Swinton allegedly said, “Rozita and Dana are in the same body, but just different personalities,” and that the “Dana personality is there to protect Rozita from being hurt.”

Obama delegate or no, this woman has serious issues. This post is unnecessary.

OMG! check out this national enquirer cover. this is gonna be all over teh supermarkets this week! looks like with wright all over tv and michelle fuming, obamalama’s got his hands full this week!

i am so not surprised this blatant misogynist also might be a CHEATER.

http://popbytes.com/archive/2008/04/marriage_drama_for_barack_obama.shtml

uuuhhh…hold on just one second.

Backtracking through the stories, the story is, IF she’s a delegate, not IS. IF there really is confirmation, it would indeed be likely to stick in MSM. IF not, probably less likely, due to possible lawsuits over slander.

Tracing the links back, the Patterico story
http://patterico.com/2008/04/18/was-the-flds-search-instigated-by-a-prank-call/ says:
“In an odd coincidence, a person named Rozita E. Swinton of Colorado Springs is listed on the El Paso County Democratic Party website as an Obama delegate. I don’t know if this is the same person but it’s an unusual name.”
and the El Paso site
http://www.peakdems.org/obama_state_del.asp
does indeed list
“Swinton, Rozita E – pct.# 269″

Unusual yes, but then the Jawa Report
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/192350.php
jumps to
“Rozita Swinton, the woman arrested today for falsely tipping off the police that she was an abused child bride at the FLDS polygamy cult in Texas is a PLEDGED BARACK OBAMA STATE DELEGATE!!”

I’m NOT saying the woman is Not THE delegate, but shouldn’t there be a confirmation?

Where is it?

YBNORMAL, are you delusional or drunk on Kool-Aid? The woman’s name is all over the news and the county Democratic Party has one delegate from Colorado Springs with the same name. Unless you seriously believe there is more than one Rozita Swinton in Colorado Springs?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhead/archive/2008/04/24/drop-out-obama.aspx?GT1=38001

I want to know when Obama will finally be forced to repudiate his other unacceptable relationship–and I’m not just talking about Rev. Wright, either.

http://tinyurl.com/5dgeww

It’s high time someone holds the man’s feet to the fire for these irresponsible and unforgivable associations!

YAWN….

Auto…Hamas is doin a roll call….Better show up to recieve your shiny new matyr backpack….There is a schedule to keep….

The El Paso County convention was held Feb 23rd. That is when they chose delegates for their county. Swinton is listed as an Obama Delegate for El Paso County.

How is that a lie??

People will make an issue of this because followers of a movement must adhere to the principles of that movement. I, for one, am really confused about the principles of this movement.

Hope and change from politics as usual. OK… so do you see where I am going or do I need to spell it out for you?

I agree that this sect of the Mormon Church needed to be shut down and the children needed protection. What this woman did was get the State of Texas in a world of trouble. It hurts their case and this will be a costly drawn out process.

Meanwhile, these poor kids will languish as wards of the State… If you are at all familiar with child welfare, you will know that is not always the best place to be. In light of how sheltered these children were, I can only imagine their trauma.

This trauma and difficult, expensive case was caused by a woman that follows Obama’s movement. Is she displaying a win at any cost attitude? The attitude that it is OK to break the law in order to do what you think is right? Do you see how many will draw a correlation between her behavior and the underground influences of Obama and his campaign?

So, go ahead, call me a crazy liar now. That seems your best defense and favorite party line.

In what way is this untruthful? It’s a fact that she’s been accused of this crime and there is a woman by this exact name and in the city and county of her arrest listed as a delegate for Sen. Obama. Where’s the lie?

“Why is the exposure of that group a bad thing?”

I thought the same thing.

Another deflection from Obama camp. Anything negative against Obama is either a lie or a racist remark.

The proof that this story is a lie is that CO doesn’t select its delegates until 5/17/08. Is that right?

So then the website for the Democratic party in El Paso County listing delegates for both candidates is either incorrect or, worse, fabricated?

Perhaps it’s a goofy story but it’s difficut to see that it’s just fiction.

Obam also need to control himself and stop lying. He lies in his TV ads that he doesn’t take lobbyists money. He mislead people in his TV ads that he don’t take oil money.

He lies through his teeth, right in front of your face. And Obama supporters believe him. You are the one that live in virtual reality. Waffle man is your hero.

” … IT IS NOT TRUE.” You wish. As others have said, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. And the faces are against you.

Then you should stop telling the lies.

That makes it nice for you, doesn’t it? You get that nice Gaza pay check and you give it back to Obama ….

Not so fast, Jumpy.

I’m not seeing a confirmation of this woman’s identity EITHER way.

Pending confirmation, that means that believing as fact that the arrested woman is the same person as the delegate, or not the same person, is a pre-mature jump to a conclusion.

How does “Leave it to Hillary fanatics..” lead to anything that gets anywhere?