Florida, Michigan Voters Deserve Full Representation
June 1 , 2008
by William P. Meyers

Site Search

Popular Articles:

Corruption comes in many forms. And all of those forms can be found in the Democratic Party.

Last year some States rebelled against the Republican and Democratic Party bosses. They were tired of nominees for President being picked by a few mostly white, rural voters in Iowa and New Hampshire. So they moved up the dates of their own Presidential primaries.

The Democratic Party bosses responded by nullifying the votes in Florida and Michigan. However, Senator Hillary Clinton and others are fighting to seat the delegations elected by the voters of Florida and Michigan.

Barack Obama is seeking to disenfranchise the voters of Florida and Michigan. A long-time favorite of the party bosses, a get-along, go-along kind of politician spit up by the Daley machine in Chicago, Barack Obama wants to be the first sort-of black major party nominee for President badly enough to disenfranchise the rather large number of black voters in those two states to achieve his goal.

But let's take this out of the context of rival presidential candidates. What is the right thing to do if we believe in democracy?

I believe it comes down to this question: do the governments of the States have the right and responsibility to set dates for elections, or is that up to the self-selected bosses of the Democratic Party?

The governments of the states represent the people of the states. Unless their is a federal law to the contrary, there is not even an argument here. The national party bosses can suggest dates, but the elections take place when on dates set by the States. The state governments are elected. The people of Florida effectively chose their own primary date. To deny them their rightful role in the nomination of a party candidate because they showed they can govern themselves just illustrates that the Democratic Party still has a fascistic character.

Giving Florida half its normal representation, rather than doing what is right, is an outrageous insult. It is a cutting the baby in half decision. It was cynically calculated to insure the nomination of the bosses' candidate.

The party bosses want to control the nomination process. They've had problems with the rabble getting out of control in the past, for instance when George McGovern was nominated.

One fair way to deal with the problem, going forward, is to have a rotation system. Let a different state be in the lead position each election cycle.

Iowa, be gone. The astonishingly, globally stupid Ethanol scam is a result of Iowa's long prominance in the nomination process.

Of course, in the long run the best thing for the American people is to leave both of the major parties and form or join other parties that more reflect the will of the people.