Fighting For Disenfranchisement

I just read that David Bonior and Rep. Robert Wexler will represent Obama at the RBC over the weekend. I’m curious as to what their arguments will be. This is going to go into the permanent history of the United States. Will those two argue for disenfranchisement? How will History judge them–and Obama–for what happens over the weekend?

The founders had “Give me liberty or give me death”. What will we hear from those arguing not to seat the delegates or count votes? Many are approaching this as “Hillary versus Obama”. I tend to think of this in longer terms and how it will be judged in the History books. Bush v Gore has dropped from most people’s consciousness, but I think it will be discussed more regularly in 15-20 years and it will go down as one of the stupidest rulings of the court. I don’t know what Obama’s supporters will argue, but no matter how you sugar coat it, any argument against seating the delegates will be seen from the perspective of History as an argument for disenfranchisement. Legal disenfranchisement is still disenfranchisement.

There will be a lot of emotions over the weekend, which is understandable. But everything people say will be recorded for posterity. How will future generations judge this meeting? Will they mark it as the beginning of the end of the Democratic Party? The fact that this is even the slightest bit controversial doesn’t bode well, IMO. Even if Democrats win in November based off anti-Bush sentiment, I think this weekend will be a permanent scar on the Democratic Party. I’m cynical and I think the Democratic Party is already headed toward some really tough times that they may not ever recover from. When the “good guys” are contemplating disenfranchisement, you know you’re headed for some dark times.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Fighting For Disenfranchisement

  1. jjmtacoma says:

    I think the word ‘heard’ is left off the first sentence. You can delete this comment…

    Glad to see this post, it is good to remind those who advocate for disenfranchising voters to keep in mind what they are trying to do.

  2. Frenchdoc says:

    No to mention that this is additional fodder for the Republicans. I can already see the ads on this, as I’m sure you can too.

    As for scars… it won’t be the first and probably not the last either.

  3. Pingback: The Democratic Daily

  4. JP says:

    i think the impact of this whole issue is way overblown. there is no way to understand how overblown it is when we’re right in the heat of it. but it’s nowhere near Bush v. Gore, and surprisingly most people seem to be over that. to those of us in the middle of this, it’s obviously big, but it’s just going to be an * on this election, in my opinion.

  5. Kendall Johnson says:

    We will see how this plays out. There has been a lot of TV time spent on this primary, more than most. I think this Florida and Michigan thing will linger. I don’t think Obama will be elected in the general election. If hillary loses the nomination, the media will take him down quick. John McSame will be the 44th.

  6. alrudder says:

    I write this just after 7am California time….

    A simple question Gilbert: How many Michigan delegates should Obama be allocated?