digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at huffingtonpost.com

Clinton Sends Letter Demanding Obama Recognize MI,FL Votes

huffingtonpost.com — When it appears that the Michigan controversy may be resolved in a way that's fair to all parties -- but not in a way that gives Hillary Clinton all that state's delegates and Barack Obama none, as her campaign insists -- Clinton has just upped the ante

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • bitfreak, on 05/09/2008, -7/+283(in Rod Serling's voice) "Imagine a woman...devoid of common sense, and bloated with ambition, on a journey of self discovery and destruction. This is the tale of one such woman, and a political career careening off the tracks, exploding in the blinding white light of hubris. Join me as we enter....The Twilight Zone." [cue theme music]
    • paigeinphilly, on 05/09/2008, -10/+5still laughing...oh man....i wish this was TV then i could just turn it OFF.

      Obama...Webb.....now.
      • xptoast, on 05/09/2008, -17/+5Does anyone realize that the title has the word MILF in it only separated by a comma?

        EDIT...sorry it is MI,FL not MI,LF...I guess I wanted to see something that isn't pertinent to this thread...Oh well..still funny to me.
        • alittleroy101, on 05/09/2008, -3/+3....and with the last two letters out of order?
      • Wangarang, on 05/09/2008, -0/+11Mom I ***** Like?
        • RobotBuddha, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5I'd like to meet that mom, du du du du.
      • shadygrove, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7Mrs I ***** Liberals?
        the clintons -- now with 80% more vast right wing conspiracy.
    • richmomz, on 05/09/2008, -0/+30Obama needs to respond with a copy of Hillary's statement approving the nullification of both contests. Trying to change the rules just because you are losing is quite lame, and the public needs to be reminded of this fact.
    • shadygrove, on 05/09/2008, -1/+17the twilight zone comment is hilarious, brilliant, and painfully close to how it all feels... can someone just drive a stake through her heart or does she need to be shot with a silver bullet under a full-moon?
    • brjndr, on 05/09/2008, -8/+4Was I the only one who read that wrong and was wondering why Hillary was asking Obama to recognize MILF's votes?

      She is not a MILF.
    • dn11, on 05/09/2008, -0/+10I know how this episode ends. She finally wins and becomes president, but realizes in the end that the world has been destroyed in the process and she is presiding over a heap of rubble.
  • msjentay, on 05/09/2008, -1/+103She should have saved some space in her mailbox by sending a shorter email: "Obama, please, please, please count these votes so I can be president like Bill promised me. I just want to stay in a little bit longer... I promise I'll play fair."
    • mentallyinhell, on 05/09/2008, -4/+13lol, Hillary can't play fair!
  • preneel, on 05/09/2008, -0/+81So she rejects the deal offered by MI because it's her way or no way. Give me a break!
    • aliengoods, on 05/09/2008, -1/+21This is like a marriage. No matter how good your arguments, or how many facts support you, you just can win an argument against a woman. The exception is instead of sex Clinton is trying to withhold her voters in the general election.
    • Zamyatin, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Yeah, this is primarily the reason why I have been a staunch Obama supporter from the beginning (besides being from Chicago! :)
      It's not that their policies are *so* different (though they are), but that her leadership *style* just turns me off, especially for the times we live in. The country is too divided to have a "my way or the highway" type of president, because, to be honest, as politically savvy as she is, nothing will get accomplished. I think the voters in this primary have shown this to be the case, wittingly or unwittingly, as people have crossed the line for Obama, and Clinton's own campaign, shooting for the "big states", has overlooked the influence, and the significance, of those states that are not NY, CA, or TX.
  • KLBP, on 05/09/2008, -3/+50Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Hillary tasted power for eight years as First Lady and then as a Senator. She appears willing to do anything to grab power. History will not look kindly upon her unless she reigns in her blind ambition and do what is good for the country and her party and admit defeat gracefully.
    • Zamyatin, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2I don't think such a maxim fits here. She's always been a woman of ambition, even before her service as First Lady. She has always felt entitled somehow, to the White House. Personally, I think she just picked the wrong time to run for office, but she's not getting any younger, I suppose. What I just cannot stand, though, is that sense of entitlement she just carries around with her every day.
      • KLBP, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1I agree that it has been her life time ambition to be President and up until the primary started it appeared that she was destined to be anointed President (or at least the Democratic nominee). She has spent a lifetime ruthlessly building up a very powerful political machine that other Democrats were afraid to cross. She made sure to line up lots of super delegate votes to negate the unpredictable whims of voters during the primary and she skirted the rules with MI and FL to ensure that she won those states just in case she needed their votes to count. The problem was that somewhere along the way some new upstart waltzed in, stole her mantra of change and inspired a flood of normally disinterested citizens to not only register and vote during the primaries, but to pry open their wallets and donate to his cause like has never been done before. Hillary's old age and treachery has been trumped by Obama's youth and enthusiasm.

        While Hillary tries to pander and divide using tired political tactics, Obama inspires us to something greater.
  • acroyear2, on 05/09/2008, -0/+192"I have consistently said that the votes cast in Florida and Michigan in January should be counted."
    Except when she agreed that they wouldn't be counted.
    • Nevarius, on 05/09/2008, -0/+17Wasn't it Clinton that campaigned in Florida and Michigan while the others didn't, even thou they wouldn't be counted. Yet now she wants them counted.
      Sounds desperate.
    • paigeinphilly, on 05/09/2008, -0/+14the funny thing is this..even if she got them (which aint happening) she would still be behind... desperation at it lowest level...but she will sink even lower im sure.
  • acroyear2, on 05/09/2008, -5/+76WAIT a minute.

    "In 2000, the Republicans won an election by successfully opposing a fair counting of votes in Florida."

    Didn't she previously say we lost in 2000 because Al Gore was elitist? Which one is it?
    • Lyph5, on 05/09/2008, -3/+34If you go to Yale can you call ANYONE an elitist?
      • theaceoffire, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Sure.
        It just makes her a Hypocrite. Which we already knew.
    • shmatt, on 05/09/2008, -5/+5so now going to an ivy league college automatically makes you elitist? Don't be ignorant- there is more free and progressive thought going on at places like Yale, Harvard, Smith, Princeton etc. than most anywhere else in the country. There are tons of students going there on finacial aid or getting loans just like any other college. Don't forget you have to get really good grades (or be george bush jr.) to get in, not have money. And no, I went University of Maryland so I'm not a hypocrite.
      • Atomixor, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1Smith isn't Ivy League, the Ivy League is a college sports division, which Smith is not part of. Though they are just as elitist as the ivies.
      • 3tcp, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5The fact that certain schools are bastions of political theory doesn't mean that it works. Freedom works because people know whats best for themselves and are allowed to do it. The political circles at schools whose student body is mostly made up of those who were born into famillies of money, prestige and influence do not reflect reality. Most of these people have no idea what it's like to be a regular person or what is important to regular people. The few that are there on scholarship usually spent their youth tailoring their application for admission into the most prestigious school possible instead of just being young.

        You can learn a lot about politics going to a school with in a regular urban environment with regular urban problems, fellow students who weren't born into privilege and just good professors. At a school packed with rich, elitest legacy students in a fancy, expensive, white-collar Massachusetts college town where they pay 6 guys to scrape gum off the sidewalk you won't learn anything except what the professors tell you.
        • angito, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1I have to disagree with you, my girlfriend is in her third year at Princeton. Its a whole new world for her there, she came from a broken home raised by a singe mom who did not care what she did in school. On top of basicly raising her little brother, working part-time, and having a boyfriend (me) she still managed to get straight As and graduated with honors.

          At Princeton there is the elitists who have everything they could ever want, but (including herself) there are plenty of others who have full-financial aid and have to deal with the university catering to the rich students while trying to keep up with their ridiculous amount of work . She has the same problems there (if not more) then you would have at any university.

          If you want the real world get a job and an apartment.
    • YankeesSuck, on 05/09/2008, -1/+8Actually, the newspapers did their own recount, and concluded that Bush really did win the state.
      • shadygrove, on 05/09/2008, -3/+8and what about the votes that were disenfranchised by the scrubbing of the voter rolls? and the voter intimidation? and election anomolies? florida was a hatchet job from the get-go. jeb and katherine harris had the fix in on that one, just as kenneth blackwell helped them scrub the voter rolls in ohio in '04. both of bush's terms have been shams. what's tragic is that enough people supported him for him to get close enough to steal those elections without there being public uproar.
        • 3tcp, on 05/09/2008, -3/+3Retreating to this argument only shows a determination to believe that the election was stolen regardless of the evidence. Had Bush and Gore switched positions in FL yours would have switched as well. If this isn't true then please come up with an argument that wasn't already played out by the conspiracy theorist, 9/11 truther - moon-landing hoax crowd years ago.
        • Herv3, on 05/09/2008, -2/+3If you're going to use that kind of logic, what about the uncounted absentee military ballots? The truth about the 2000 election was that is was so close that if any of those would of should of could of that Gore people complain about was true and he had won, Bush people would of turned around and had their million of would of should of could of.
        • RebeL5K, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Ok, I've had enough with the overuse of the words "disenfranchised" and "elitist", especially by people who use them in the wrong context becase they do not know what they mean.
        • sandbags, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2How fuking dare you 3tcp. How fuking dare you put the moon landing ***** in with the 9/11 facts. Your a fuking complete fuktard and I hope you feel especially stupid when the facts are accepted and your willingness to be blind for the sake of your miniscule intellect is plain and evident. but you wont will you, you will pretend that you were on that bandwagon all along. I hate you and your CIA line buying moronic sheep mentality having fukn ass. God, I am so fukn pissed at you right now. I wish I could just reach out of the monitor and break your fuking skull.
    • JayTee44, on 05/09/2008, -8/+5Republicans did not oppose a 'fair recount' of Florida- they opposed a third recount of Florida, Gore having lost the first two, with the entire country wanting to move on. And, EVERY major newspaper did an INDEPENDENT recount, and BUSH won ALL OF THEM. Liberals, give up your myths.
    • yacks, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6What's so wrong about being an elitist?
      • crocodilexp, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2Elitists are out of touch with the common man... they're not someone you could enjoy a beer with, like, for instance, W. For any U.S. politician, it is an essential that an average blue collar worker thinks they'd enjoy sharing a beer together. See, W can empathize with the common man... and send them to Iraq while slashing taxes for the rich for the same time -- NOT elitist.
        • celotil, on 05/09/2008, -0/+0Bob Hawke was a Prime Minister you could have a beer with. I don't know if he should have been Prime Minister though.
  • peticsu, on 05/09/2008, -1/+72someone please pinch me, this must be a bad dream...

    so she doesn't want to count caucus states BUT she wants to count Puerto Rico who cant even vote in the fall on top MI where Obama wasn't on the ballot and FL...
    I pity this woman now, she is the queen of gutter politics
    • xptoast, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2*nutpunch* Sorry it was more funny for me...that and I don't have any pinches left in my arsenal of pain inflicting acts.
      • hater2win, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5For a second I thought you nutpInched him.
  • kelalo, on 05/09/2008, -2/+30Do you think that Clinton actually wrote this herself? If so, the "untaken" and "publically" are pretty embarrassing. Altogether, I was unimpressed--all it said was, "Let me make you out to be the bad guy because I really want all those votes, even though you weren't on the ballot" couched in "let's let those voters be heard" and "Democracy". Please. Hillary could have had a long career in the Senate had she gracefully stepped down months ago--I can't see the people of NY wanting any more of this woman. Maybe she will move to California and run for Senate there to prepare for 2012.
    In all seriousness, this is another dying gasp of a desperate campaign. Somebody euthanize this campaign--give Hillary Clinton '08 the same courtesy as we did Eight Belles.
    • spaceman84, on 05/09/2008, -4/+2She's way too right-wing for California.
    • rgodfrey, on 05/09/2008, -1/+12As a whitey without a college degree, I was totally going to vote for her until just now when she wrote "an historic." ***** elitist.
    • oldgal, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2California has a long record of rejecting carpet baggers
      • yacks, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1and plus Feinstein and Boxer have cemented their seats in for California. Both Democrats..
  • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -33/+8What did the DNC do to themselves. Their rules suck, Florida and MI got sick of having less input than ***** states 10% their size. It was inevitable!
    • whataboutdave, on 05/09/2008, -3/+35It was not inevitable. FL and MI broke the rules knowing what the consequences would be. If the DNC allows them seats at the convention now, it will open the floodgates next election cycle and primaries will start even sooner.
      • MikeSD34, on 05/09/2008, -4/+20***** you all, we're hosting our primary for the 2012 election in 2009 because they got away with it in the 2008 primaries.
      • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -5/+5I'm actually okay with it, because now I get to watch the party that "wants to count the votes" and "cares about equality" argue about voting democrats who have been disenfranchised by their own party in the party's own election, due to some seriously unbalanced ***** up rules.
    • taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -3/+10I agree that the rules were stupid, but they did agree to play by them and then decided to break them.
      • ralphodog, on 05/09/2008, -3/+3When did they ever agree to the DNC rules (Michigan and Florida that is)? This whole mess started because directly elected representatives felt they should make the decision instead of a group of appointed back room political bosses.
        • theaceoffire, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1At the DNC party before the primaries. Hillary agreed to the rules. Later, she agreed these two should be excluded for breaking these rules.
    • EtherGnat, on 05/09/2008, -0/+7How is this a Democratic only issue? It was the same thing with the Republicans, only they chose to only sanction half their delegates.
      • 3tcp, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Republican states still played a role in their primary and some states were large enough that they made a calculated decision that 1/2 the delegates early in the process would be better than all of the delegates so late in the process that they couldn't change anything. Florida is the best example...

        Democrats didn't allow any delegates so it was assumed that there was no way that the states would ever matter. Candidates even pledged not to campaign in the states. The fact that Clinton broke her word when the other candidates kept theirs shouldn't be rewarded. If all candidates had broken their word then maybe it could count but she's the only one did and she's the only one who could have benefited from including their votes.
  • dsoleil, on 05/09/2008, -1/+28Hillary certainly has a lot of kitchen sinks to throw at Obama...
  • snafflepaffle, on 05/09/2008, -2/+29How is this helping the party win the November election? Demonizing the for-sure-but-yet-to-be-anointed nominee? Making him look bad to vital states?

    This is certainly another example of win at all costs politics that the country desperately wants to be past. Hillary is bad for the party and bad for the country.
    • p0s3r, on 05/09/2008, -21/+2Hillary didn't make Obama undermine any attempt to get MI and FL counted. Obama did that all on his own. Just because you shine the light on the cockroach, doesn't mean you are the cockroach.
      • apophenic, on 05/09/2008, -0/+19They moved their primaries ahead knowing full well what the consequences were. She agreed that they should be stripped of their delegates before everything started. She is only trying to change this now, since she is grasping at straws. Don't buy in to her hype.
      • FairDinkumMate, on 05/09/2008, -0/+7@ p0s3r
        If you can explain how to make a revote fair, we'd all love to hear it!
        It was Florida's elected Democrat officials that voted to move their primary in breach of DNC rules(knowing the consequences) that cost them their primary votes.
        It was these SAME elected Democrat officials from Florida that decided it would be too expensive to hold a new primary & then started coming out with half-arsed ideas like a 'mail-in' vote or using the original results(an idea which is (1)blatantly unfair (2) can;t be used by the DNC rules(hence the issue) & (3) has already been ruled against by a Federal court.
        Michigan has an OPEN primary!
        Please explain how you work out who voted Republican in the first primary because they support the Republicans & who voted Republican because they couldn't influence the Dem nominee so figured they'd have an influence on who they ran against? With the Rush Limbaugh efect having generated reasonable numbers of votes in primaries already, how many Republicans do you think would take the chance to vote in a "re-do" of the Michigan primary to play havoc with the Dem party? Or would you prefer to just exclude Democrats that voted in the Repug primary because they were told(even by your friend Mrs.Clinton) that their vote in the Dem primary WOULD NOT COUNT!
        As per your previous pro-Clinton, anti-Obama posts I wouldn't actually expect you to be able to reply to this with a LOGICAL, FACTUAL response as it seems that sort of effort is beyond your ability.
        So basically, you can blame Obama all you want, but the problem here has 95% to do with the elected DNC officials of these states & 5% to do with Clinton & co suddenly trying to change the rules(that SHE AGREED TO!) because they are losing
    • Hangly, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1If Hillary doesn't do her part to get McCain into the white house, Dick Cheney will slit Chelsea's throat. That's the only scenario I can imagine that could justify this kind of irrational behavior.
    • KLBP, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1@snafflepaffle,

      The only issue I have with your comment is inferring that Obama is going to be anointed as if the will of the voters didn't matter. For the entire race until the past few days it was Hillary Clinton who had the most super delegate endorsements. Obama has been able to over come the DNC political machinery and gain the overall lead in delegates by winning the majority of votes one precinct at a time. Obama's delegates weren't handed to him because he was a political insider, he won them by earning the respect and votes of the majority of voters.

      Obama will win the Democratic nomination based on what the voters felt are his merits. Obama played by the DNC rules, which were in many ways set up to favor Clinton, and he has come out on top.
  • coffeebaby, on 05/09/2008, -6/+76thought it said something about MILF votes...
    • Halukard, on 05/09/2008, -4/+10Read that like that as well.
    • JackyAppleJones, on 05/09/2008, -4/+3Same here, sadly.
    • motivatedmama, on 05/09/2008, -1/+8At least then you'd know for sure the article had nothing to do with Hillary.
    • lhbaker, on 05/09/2008, -3/+2Actually, it's the GILF vote. Don't think about it too hard.
    • NormaCluster, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Do you have Dsylexia, oot?
  • GhostyBoy, on 05/09/2008, -1/+62Oh my ***** god she's still going......
  • eliot2000, on 05/09/2008, -1/+17That was just sad. They can't even afford decent proofreading.
    Apparently they also can not afford the person whose job it is to say "this isn't going to work."
  • mentallyinhell, on 05/09/2008, -3/+14She's just getting desperate here, counting down to tears in ten, nine, eight...
  • chicofaraby, on 05/09/2008, -5/+55Which part of the rules does Senator Clinton not understand? Michigan and Florida broke the rules. Game over.
    • uptown, on 05/09/2008, -4/+19That's exactly the problem .... the Clintons have become accustomed to breaking the rules and getting away with it.
      The concept of sticking to rules that work against their objectives is foreign to them.
    • taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -11/+2Why not just let them redo their primaries? What'd be the harm?
      • apophenic, on 05/09/2008, -2/+9It would be expensive, for one. Also, there's no reason to let them get away with breaking party rules.
        • taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -8/+1They'd be paying for the redo themselves obviously, and they wouldn't be "getting away" with anything considering they ended up doing the primaries after February 5.
          • taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -7/+2But how dare I contradict Obama, our great messiah!
          • RebeL5K, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4"Themselves"? In case you haven't heard, Hillary is about $20 million in the red - she can't afford to pay for *****; Obama should certainly not be footed with the entire bill, and the DNC and FL governor Charlie Christ each say they cannot afford to pay for it.
      • Hobbes24, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3it validates their breaking of the rules!

        whats to stop other states from doing the same ***** thing knowing they won't get punished!
        • taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2That the first primary would be entirely pointless?
          • RonBurgundy76, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Much like the 2008 FL and MI primaries were (and should remain) pointless. Move along... nothing to see here.
      • 3tcp, on 05/09/2008, -2/+4The rules said that if you move your primary up it won't count and will be 100% unimportant
        They moved their primary up anyway because they thought it would make them more important
        The rules were enforced and their primary wasn't important. They should not suddenly be made important again because the loser wants another chance to win.

        If the Democrats can't so much as make an ultimatum for their own party and stick to it, they will simply perpetuate the stereotype that their party is a bunch of bleeding-heart pussies. Obama is going to win anyway but he'll have to support a recount if the rest of the party does so that he doesn't lose clinton supporters in the general.... A revote will just make Obama look like he's indecisive and incapable of standing up for himself, everyone knows that he has it in the bag and he has no obligation to indulge Clinton's delusional assertions that there is still a legitimate opportunity for her to win the nomination.

        At this point anything that would cause Obama to not win the nomination should result in an Edwards, Richardson or Gore nomination at the convention. Clinton has proven that she's incapable of leading with integrity and that's the first thing voters look for in a president.
    • JayTee44, on 05/09/2008, -7/+2Reminds me of Gore losing the 2000 election..... change the recount rules slightly, hope to tip the election.... oops, that didn't work, lets try a second time. Darn. That didn't work, lets try a third time. What? The supreme court says I can't keep getting recounts until I get one I like?!?!?
      • gypsi, on 05/09/2008, -2/+4he won the election - your whole argument is therefore a failure. see, that's how logical reasoning works.
      • chicofaraby, on 05/09/2008, -3/+9How'd that "win" work out for you right wingers? Did your guys succeed in governing well? Or did your guys allow the worst terror attack on Americans ever, let a city drown, ruin the economy, commit war crimes, sink the dollar and send inflation through the roof?

        I forgot. Which of those was it?
    • judolphin, on 05/09/2008, -3/+4First of all, Hillary should give up.

      Secondly, the DNC has no one to blame but themselves for this *****. They could have chosen a million ways to deal with this. They chose the most idiotic way possible. The DNC is a principal who gave the entire fourth grade detention because their teacher broke a school rule.

      The Florida and Michigan CONVENTIONS broke the rules, not the voters. Why should the Florida and Michigan voters be penalized? The only ones really hurt by this are the citizens who wanted to vote for their candidate of choice, but had no voice in these primaries. Absolutely inexcusable on the part of the DNC. How could they not know that their myopic, retarded, petty "crack of the whip" wouldn't create this *****? How could they not know that this would at the very least create ill feelings from Florida and Michigan Democrats? (Don't forget, the Republicans took away half their delgates, which is about half as retarded as what the Democrats did. They're just lucky the Republican race wasn't as close.)

      Besides, who gives a ***** that FL and MI voted early? Who did it hurt? Why should the DNC even care? There is absolutely NO good reason. It's already a circus; changing the dates a few months in advance can't conceivably ruin anything on its own merit.
      • RonBurgundy76, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2While I agree with you that the votes of MI and FL are important, they have rendered themselves irrelevant because they let the rules of the game be broken. I am of the opinion that when you are doing something as important as choosing your party's next Presidential candidate, you DON'T want to ***** it up!

        I would be outraged if my vote were being thrown away... but my anger wouldn't be pointed at Obama or even Hillary. It would be directed at the idiots that allowed this mess to happen in the first place.
        • judolphin, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2My outrage is directed at the DNC, and at the system. It's a system where those states that hold late primaries usually have no say in the nomination process. That is what FL and MI wanted to avoid. If the powers that be would use common sense and hold all primaries within a 2-4 week period, this would not even be an issue.
  • Boopsie2008, on 05/09/2008, -1/+20I hesitate to imagine the moment when they have to just about strap her down and force her to listen to reason and the impossible stats, and to how she has lost a lot of her former supporters with her lies, gutter politics and ugly race-baiting, when she screams "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, I want the presidency, I'M SUPPOSED TO BE PRESIDENT. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO."
  • SportsViewer, on 05/09/2008, -26/+3Here's a video explaining how Clinton CAN win.
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU
  • whataboutdave, on 05/09/2008, -2/+5How about all those typos and errors... Not enough money to hire someone to copy edit, eh Hill?
  • DeskFlyer, on 05/09/2008, -9/+12At first when I glanced at the headline I read it as 'Clinton Sends Letter Demanding Obama Recognize MILF Votes'. I think I need more coffee.
    • trotskyist, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7Dude, you live in Milwaukee.
      It's 10:00.
    • krc1, on 05/09/2008, -0/+7You also need to stop copying jokes that are two hours old.
  • PacketScan, on 05/09/2008, -2/+20She's turning into the crazy ex.
  • T8erT0T, on 05/09/2008, -5/+54Dear Senator Clinton,
    My mama didn't raise no fool. I'm running this piece.
    Sincerely,
    Chocolate Thunder.
    • mariowario, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Thumbs up for the "Chocolate Thunder". Nice one.
    • Hangly, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3I don't know what you're on about but it was hilarious.
    • RebeL5K, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2LOL
    • AxmxZ, on 05/09/2008, -1/+1Are you sure the sign-off shouldn't be "Big Brown"?
    • TheBSG, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4I approve of this message so hard. Good god that was hilarious.
    • cbittle, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4I definitely just peed of laughter. I approve this message.
  • mlrigsby, on 05/09/2008, -3/+5This can't be real. Can it?
  • taradisiac, on 05/09/2008, -3/+4He's right not to recognize them. The only way those elections would be legitimate is redoing them with both their names on the ballot and maybe a week for them both to campaign there.
    • pedo, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6that would actually reward both states for breaking the rules. they broke the rules because they wanted to be first so they could be more important. doing what you propose would make them last, and even more important than the first states, because its a close race.
      • daiatan, on 05/09/2008, -4/+0you cant punish 2.5million people for what their governing party leaders have done..
        though i dont think a week would be enough campaign time clinton still has a largely unfair campaigning lead in both states...
        • paigeinphilly, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3its done...over.

          no matter how u cut it...FL & MI will get their chance in the general...
        • pedo, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2sure you can. look at what we've been doing to cubans for almost 50 years
        • RebeL5K, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5You most certainly can, they are their elected REPRESENTATIVES. That means they represent those 2.5 million people. If Floridians and Michigonians are pissed, vote in new legislatures and governors. We've all paid the price for Bush's decisions, haven't we?
        • Hamletlere, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5You realize this isn't a vote for who gets a public office, right? And that the DNC is not a government entity? It's a political party. People have no legal right what-so-ever to vote for the candidates that the party puts forth. It is simply the method used by the parties currently to select the most favorable candidate. The whole "super delegate" thing should show you how non-binding this vote is.

          So treating the citizens of FL and MI as if they were disenfranchised of their votes for government offices is incorrect. It would have been nice if these states had followed the rules of their party and had a say in the candidate choice, but it isn't required.

          Think of the parties are corporations (which they might be, actually). As an employee (member of the party), you don't get a vote unless they say you get a vote.
    • oldgal, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2I'm hoping he picks up enough super delegates to be able to give her all the delegates for Mich. and Fla. and still win.
    • 3tcp, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Even then it is inevitable that Clinton would have a built-in advantage as the candidate who insisted that they be given the chance. The democratic party denied them the vote and Clinton gave it back... that'd be an automatic 5% bonus on something that should have nothing to do with winning someone's vote
  • pedo, on 05/09/2008, -0/+42headline should read: "Clinton sends letter demanding the DNC change the rules so she can win."
    • PopcornDave, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4No, the headline should read: "Clinton pitches yet another hissy fit in order to benefit her campaign."
    • oldgal, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2although it's still not obvious she would win even then.
  • dtfinch, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6Clinton's demanding 4 more years of Bush.
  • stox, on 05/09/2008, -2/+17In related news, Astronomers have discovered we live in a Hillary-centric Universe. And you thought black holes sucked.
    • lhbaker, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4There you go playing the race card again.
      /s
  • sovereign3, on 05/09/2008, -3/+8Hate to be the grammar Nazi, but "publicly" was misspelled [publically] and "untaken" was used improperly. Was this really drafted by the Clinton campaign?
    • lhbaker, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5Ummm, did you notice the [sic] markers? That indicates that the spelling, though incorect [sic] wuz [sic] presented as speled [sic].
    • FairDinkumMate, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5You do understand that these errors were both marked in the article? That's why the put [sic] next to them

      Sic is a Latin word meaning "thus", "so", "as such", or "just as that". In writing, it is placed within square brackets and usually italicized—[sic]—to indicate that an incorrect or unusual spelling, phrase, punctuation, and/or other preceding quoted material has been reproduced verbatim from the quoted original and is not a transcription error.
    • sovereign3, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3I'm not an idiot. Of course I knew that. But whoever was the original author made spelling and grammatical errors. That's very unbecoming of a presidential campaign.
      • AxmxZ, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Bah! Hillary's a good ol' gal and ain't much for fancy book-larning. Didn't you see her down that shot of Candian whiskey?
  • Cerius, on 05/09/2008, -18/+7And ANOTHER story from the Huffington Post. Wooooooo....

    I'm not a Clinton supporter, McCain supporter, or Obama supporter, but every day, every minute, another story by Huff against Clinton hits the front page. Lame.
    • lhbaker, on 05/09/2008, -2/+5That's because the stories are relevant, and HP has a lot of contributors. I don't see any other outlets making the front page with the same story.
  • dagrouch, on 05/09/2008, -3/+13Hillary - If you're writing open letters at 3 am, at least use spell check!!
    • daizaru, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6She probably wrote it under the duress of sniper fire with no time to spell check, and she was probably also really tired.
  • cataractmoon, on 05/09/2008, -4/+4To be fair to all candidates, neither candidate was allowed to campaign in Florida or Michigan. Why wasn't Ms. Clinton discussing this long before she decided to abide by the rules?
  • AngeloM3, on 05/09/2008, -14/+9Is it November yet... I'm so sick of reading all these "Obama did this..." "Clinton said this..." ... buried cause I don't care anymore.
    Ron Paul '08
    • shadygrove, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2i'm not anti-ron paul, but i *am* anti-mccain/bush/cheney/neoconvict... that said... i read an interesting editorial on how mccain will appear "fresh" because he's stayed out of this fray and the public may be so sick of the dems that they'll adopt a "throw the bums out" stance after this primary has ended... as if the dems had any power in the past eight years. it's rather sad and pathetic. oh, and i am registered with the greens and have a green / libertarian view on most political subjects... anti-corporate welfare but not 100% anti-social welfare in a country where the disparity between the uber-rich and uber-poor is so contrasted.
    • dinot, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Grapes are sour this season, huh?
  • AwesomousPrime, on 05/09/2008, -3/+8Please god. Make her stop! Its over for her. I cannot keep hearing anymore of her speeches. She is so so fake. Like a used car salesman.
  • knobbers, on 05/09/2008, -2/+15waterboard the bitch!!
  • coultercrat, on 05/09/2008, -0/+11It was very irresponsible of Clinton play this card because now among her supporters there will be a stolen election myth, just like in 2000 that will discourage voters. Just as allowing the delegates would outrage Obama's supporters, denying them is making the Clinton supporters threaten to stay home, or not vote at all. The best way to heal the party would be to reseat the delegates and for Hillary Clinton to drop out since even with those delegates and popular votes she doesn't have enough numbers to win. That would be the best way of keeping the party from tearing itself apart.
    • motivatedmama, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6If it wasn't this it would be something else. Once the MSM really starts tearing into McCain's sexist attitude (Olbermann already highlighting McCain tonight) the tide will turn. There is no way McCain will be Prez. He offers something to offend every "true" Democrat.
      • 3tcp, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1You seem to forget that McCain is just as much a media darling as Obama is, it's going to take a lot more than a reliance on criticism from a few talking heads to beat him. Very few people make up their mind by listening to those jackasses anyway, they usually listen to the jackasses who are going to reaffirm their opinion... conservatives watch fox, liberals watch the liberal people, moderates watch chris matthews, fiscal conservatives watch larry kudlow, isolationists watch lou dobbs, etc...
        • AxmxZ, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2McCain *was* a media darling, back in 2000. He's aged and changed a lot since then. Sold out, one might say.
      • getbusyliving, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Do not underestimate the stupidity of the average dumb-***** voter.
        • motivatedmama, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Oh believe me, I was totally horrified at the level of stupidity seemingly inherent in the average voter. I just could not believe Hillary had people believing her gas tax holiday crap! Then Indiana happened. She took the people for fools and they apparently, actually looked into the issue for themselves! If you look at the exit polls concerning Hillary's trustworthy-ness, it seems they might even have been insulted!
          Horrible political positions aside, McCain is no more genuine than Shillary. You can hear the insincerity in his voice and see it in his forced mannerisms. Just as people thought Hillary and Bill were "all that" before there was an Obama, so too will some people still believe McCain is a straight shooter. Until they compare him with Obama. The contrast between a genuine, intelligent, level headed man, and this caricature of a "war hero hawk/populist" will be stark indeed. McCain has as many personalities and pandering positions as Clinton. It didn't work for her and it wont work for him. I do believe the population is awake and thinking, finally.
  • philosophiste, on 05/09/2008, -3/+11I read that as "Clinton Sends Letter Demanding Obama Recognize MILF Votes."


    ...which would have been a much more interesting article.
  • parkhead, on 05/09/2008, -7/+0WHAT ARE MILF VOTES??
  • xceptionaly, on 05/09/2008, -1/+16"I have consistently said that the votes cast in Florida and Michigan in January should be counted"...except for when she consistently said they shouldn't and agreed not to campaign there but then rescinded that and campaigned there anyway. Really, how much more pathetic and ridiculous can this get?
  • dagamer34, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Logically, Michigan's vote can never, ever, ever, be the basis of delegate proportions there. Even Florida is a bit iffy (but less so).

    Still, I'd say you just cut them in half. OR, Obama can wait until May 20th, where he can say "Have it your way Hillary, we'll let them count as you want" (if he can do that), because at that point he's assured the nomination anyway.
    • blackinthmiddle, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3I wouldn't even let her have that if I were Obama. Doing so just opens the floodgates and lets future politicians know that iron-clad rules are not really iron-clad if you bitch and moan enough.
  • WraTH017, on 05/09/2008, -1/+28Hillary truly has some balls to send a letter like that.

    "Dear Mr. Obama.

    You won, I lost. Can I please be the nominee anyway? Don't be a bitch and just fork it over, k.

    Thanks.

    -Hillary"
  • vanguardanon, on 05/09/2008, -0/+11I thought she was just going to stay positive, say nice things, pick up a few redneck votes, then concede. I'm getting so tired of her act.

    It's not that being down 7 points is a basketball game means you're not competitive. It's that there is only 10 seconds left so the game is over. It's time to run out the clock and let it go.
  • FuckXboxx, on 05/09/2008, -10/+1Clinton will win because of Michigan and Florida like Bush did because of Florida and Ohio.

    She can't lose...

    I wish this world would realize we can't be led by humans and expect anything but corruption.
    • life036, on 05/09/2008, -0/+0I feel you... But we're so CLOSE to changing things. Well, at least this one thing.
  • sdcarter, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4I totally thought that said "Clinton Sends Letter Demanding Obama Recognize MILF Votes."
  • azpat, on 05/09/2008, -0/+10yeah, cause the person losing has all the leverage to demand for rule changes.
  • wendelgee2, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6Wait. Hillary who?
    Isn't she a senator from New York? Why does she care about Michigan and Florida?
    I don't get it.
  • headzoo, on 05/09/2008, -0/+9She is out of her ***** mind.
  • DavidGX, on 05/09/2008, -1/+28I'm so tired of this ***** bitch.... GET THE ***** OUT OF THE RACE, YOU LOST!
    • corneliusJones, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2She's so delusional she'll have to be drug out kicking and screaming.
  • oselznick, on 05/09/2008, -0/+10I'm sick of Hillary and bored with this whole thing. It's really stupid. Obama won the nomination and everybody but that b***h knows it. If the Dems had any candidate other than Obama, I probably would just give up. But Obama is America's best chance of reinstating ourselves and getting back the respect of the world.
    If Hillary thinks she can blackmail the Dems into forcing Obama into giving her the second place on his ticket, well, everybody doesn't play the crooked, lying, thieving game the Clintons play.
    If Hillary makes a deal that she'll quit for the veep spot, then Obama had better get a food taster and a bullet proof jacket.
  • richmomz, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Somebody call the waaaaaaaaahh-mbulance, Hillary's ego has been seriously wounded!
    • rentmitchum, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Someone call a chinese guy, she needs waaaaahhhhcupunture!
  • richmomz, on 05/09/2008, -0/+12"I have consistently said that the votes cast in Florida and Michigan in January should be counted."

    Liar, you fully supported their disqualification until you started losing.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 102 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.