41 Comments
Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Published Thursday, Jan. 17, 2008 | 11:12 a.m.
Updated Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2008 | 10:15 a.m.
Just minutes ago, District Court Judge James Mahan rejected the lawsuit that contested the nine at-large Strip caucus sites.
He cited case law that “recognizes the parties have the right to determine how to apportion delegates.”
Attorney Mark Ferrario for the state teachers’ union and five party activists who brought the lawsuit said he didn’t know whether they would appeal, but “probably not.”
(See a list of all the Nevada Democratic caucus sites)
Clinton machine and party elite...YOUR BAD
There will be no democracy in Nevada on Saturday.
Any Culinary member who now goes in and votes for the Clintons after they tried to take their vote away should be branded a scab.
Tomdc shows what the unions are all about, intimidation.
What about the intimidation issue? From where I sit in California, it looks crooked.
I understand where the other unions were coming from. THe culinary workers union is a bully and other unions feel slighted by their tactics. However, they should have known last year that the Culinary Workers Union had effectively turned the Nevada Caucus into the Culinary Workers Caucus and should have complained then.
In any case, Obama is little substance, all hype. The key to his success: a freshness, a lack of record to run on, the constant repetition of simple feel-good platitudes that lull listeners into a sense of trust and induce in them a yearning to believe. No wonder Barack Obama is so popular among denizens of Hollywood like Oprah: they certainly have an eye for those who can create an image, can generate a buzz that compels others to suspend their disbelief, and who can induce a trance-like stargazing. But the fact is that Barack Obama does have a record to run on and its a record of vote dodging and triangulation. Barack Obama talks about the audacity of hope... but how about the audacity to show up and vote.. and not criticize others over resolutions you conveniently missed while campaigning.
Oh.. Mr. Clean ethics also collects the most from the healthcare lobby and polluters like Exelon Corp. who would love for Yucca to remain active.
Although Obama is thoroughly inexperienced, he can employ dirty machine like tactics to turn the nevada caucus into a culinary workers rally. While police officers and janitors aren't able to caucus at work and have to return home to caucus, Obama's bought votes for his supporters by letting them caucus at work. So much for democracy.
I was elected yesterday, Obama said. I have never set foot in the U.S. Senate. Ive never worked in Washington. And the notion that somehow Im immediately going to start running for higher office just doesnt make sense. So look, I can unequivocally say I will not be running for national office in four years, and my entire focus is making sure that Im the best possible senator on behalf of the people of Illinois. He further elaborated: Look, Im a state senator who hasnt even been sworn in yet. My understanding is that I will be ranked 99th in seniority. Im going to be spending the first several months of my career in the U.S. Senate looking for the washroom and trying to figure out how the phones work.
So, in four years, Obama went from figuring out how to use the telephones and finding bathrooms, to becoming a foreign policy expert, while missing 1/3 of his votes and failing to hold a single hearing as the CHAIR of Senate Foreign Relations committee. Right?
This is such wonderful news; I have been praying about this for the last few days. This lawsuit and the Clinton’s support of it have caused me to lose a lot of respect and trust in them (not to mention my vote).
John Edwards and Hillary Clinton have all been much better senators than Barack Obama. They have been serious, substantive lawmakers who have worked effectively across party lines. Obama has some accomplishments under his belt, but many of his colleagues believe that he has not bothered to master the intricacies of legislation or the maze of Senate rules. He talks about independence, but he has never quite bucked liberal orthodoxy or party discipline. When you consider two candidates for one job, you compare their resumes and weigh their latest experiences most heavily. Whoever distinguishes themselsves with their work ethic and garners respect amongst their colleagues is probably the best qualified for the job they seek. If Obama's colleagues feel he is an opportunist who is more about using his present job to build his resume rather than to actually work for substantive change, then he is just hype, and he is underqualified for the Presidency. Its nice to see the Culinary Workers Union rigged the vote for hype rather than work ethic.
Do not give up and vote for Hillary as the status quo. Do not hope that Obama can beat the Republican nominee. The media blitz for these two candidates has been playing into the Republicans hopes of retaining the White House for another four years. Nevada can make the difference this year!!
John Edwards has consistently shown that he has the biggest statistical advantage over all of the Republican candidates. John Edwards can win the national election, ensuring that this will not be a repeat of elections of 2000 and 2004. Do not inject doubt into the election by nominating an barely electable national candidate.
Caucus for John Edwards this Saturday and make him the front runner!
Question----Why on earth was it NECESSARY to sue over a regulation of which was established 12 months ago? Arbitration should have begun at its origin.
And about the intimidation by the CU----I read that a staffer of the Clinton Campaign is coming forward to verify that it was a plant----- because they're sick of the lies.
Hillary, was it worth it..? Now we see your true colors!
Well, this is not a surprise. I think the lawsuit was just filed too late, and it is true that they were aware of it for some time. I will say, though, that I do not believe it is fair that culinary workers get special provisions and a louder voice than other kinds of workers...I certainly value the work that culinary workers do and their contributions to our society, but I also value the work of teachers and nurses and blieve their voice should be equal - no more, no less. If the DNC is allowing culinary workers who cannot leave the strip special provisions, fine, but they should also create special provisions for teachers (they should be aloud to vote at the school-based caucus sites they are being forced to work at instead of being forced to miss it since they won't be at their home precinct) and nurses (a caucus site at each hospital). That may sound ridiculous, but the whole caucus system is ridiculous and it does, by its very nature, disenfranchise people.
What I am FAR MORE concerned about is the alleged strongarming of the Culinary Union...there are several witnesses who say the Culinary Union is telling workers that if they do not vote for Obama, they cannot vote at all. They are playing dirty politics, even after getting special provisions, and the media and public need to call them out on these tactics.
The Culinary Union's endorsement of Obama is ironic given his recent glowing praise of Ronald Reagan and the Reagan style of politics...Reagan was one of the most ANTI-UNION presidents in history...either Obama is a huge hypocrite and really cares about unions, or the Culinary Union bought his hype about how hope and change mean good things for workers (the same way Reagan did), or they made this endorsement as a political tactic and not in the best interests of their members....I am not sure which...
If we go by resumes'only - then Bill Richardson would have won hands down. By experience - that is - holding an elected office - Obama has more years than Clinton or Edwards.
Experience must mean more than sleeping in the presidents bed or being the wife of a govenor, will all due respect to Senator Clintons personal accomplishments.
But she should run on those accomplishments and not to quell the vote of the people by standing by this lawsuit and taking the "it's up to the courts to decide" attitude.
These is the political games that we Americans are tired of.
Vote for someone who will bring the country together - not split it further apart as Senator Clinton surely will do.
Given today's outcome of this lawsuit, I would like to know what the Democratic Party plans to do to monitor all these caucuses to be sure that the voters are protected from union intimidation.
The special voting sites would be more acceptable if the voting could be conducted in secret. With the open caucuses being sponsored by unions, it certainly seems like a situation that could be ripe for corruption and intimidation of workers.
Point of view from California, where workers get to vote privately...
Concernedcitizen, can you site any legitimate article or report to back up your arguments? No you cant.
tomdc, I can tell your an Obama fan, you know how? Only Obama supports (Usually extreme left wing nuts) equate people they dont like with Hitler. The Obama campaign attracts those that hate, this is the real reason why they are blind to how empty he is. I love it when the Obama campaign says they will unite everyone in a rainbow of love and all the bad in the world will melt away and penguins will once again be safe.
If Obama doesnt blow out Clinton, or worse, Loses to Clinton. What will you all claim this time? By all accounts, with the caucus being so heavily tilted to one candidate through rigging, how will you explain your poor showing? Will Nevadans be accused of being Racist like New Hampshire ?
Any candidate using voter suppression tactics doesn't deserve to lead our country.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mY2jmgwwmFk
MANGO- I want some of what you're smoking!
You say teachers should have Saturday cacuses at their schools too- the whole point is schools are closed on Saturday and the teachers are off work and can go vote.
I think that any Culinary worker who agrees with the Clintons that they shouldn't have been allowed to vote should feel obligated to stick to that principle and not vote at the work sites.
Culinary workers voting at work sites for the Clintons are not just hypocrites but the worst sort of scabs.
How dumb can the Clinton campaign get? Did she think dis-enfranchising people would be popular?
What's next? Demanding immigrant ID cards? Oh yeah, she already supports that...
This will clearly be a corrupt caucus. Hopefully there will be monitors at the caucus sites and prosecution of any intimidation.
BTW, I haven't seen anything new about the pledges required of union members. Has this been dropped?
Did anyone watch the Iowa caucuses?
h e l l o
The idea is that you can talk to others and try to sway them to your side...this isn't a 'secret ballot' vote...you can't have someone 'monitor for intimidation'.
Yes caucusing is messy unfiltered raw democracy (or...undemocratic...that's a different issue)
Vote and support who you believe in and don't simply vote based on a union!
Stand for Obama.
They use scare tactics in Iowa against Students...
They use race card in South Carolina against Blacks...
They use smear tactics in New Hamsphire about drugs...
They use lawsuits in Nevada against Hispanics...
They will do anything for POWER...Welcome to the Clinton's World!
Let’s be fair about the intimidation issue. Another group, The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, has deployed 225 paid employees (100 of which from California) to “strongly encourage” roughly 3,000 Nevada members to caucus for Clinton. I can imagine that it would be very intimidating to support a candidate other than Clinton, if you were a member of that organization. I am not criticizing these tactics; I am only pointing out inconsistencies in other’s intimidation accusations which appear to be based off of what candidate you support.
Clinton was all for this arrangement when she thought the culinary workers would endorse her, now she wants to disenfranchise them.
Thanks to all of the Clinton supporters posting at this site who show us all just how negative and pessimistic her campaign is!
InTown, this an Edwards/Kucinich household- we think Obama is entirely too polite with the Clintons, evidenced by the way he was so nice when the Clintons played the race card.
And for your information the New Hampshire recount which we've sent money to support began yesterday and so far is showing that the Clintons actually lost New Hampshire. The Diebold machines in Clinton areas counted ballots twice. Now how could that happen???
As for Hilter- two have us have worked with the Clintons and have no doubt that if there were political expediency in firing up the ovens the Clintons would fight over who got to light the first one. You're dealing with two people with absolutely no morals what so ever.
The whole process presents itself to intimidation when the privacy of a voting booth is denied.
Oh well,
This foreshadows what will happen to them in November.
It seems to me that many people here --including some who claim membership-- don't understand what the union is and how the unions work.
The Nature of a union such as the culinary is a group of working people who have joined together for a stronger voice in the workplace – a vote and a voice that speaks up for families, health care, safety, dignity and job security.
The members of a union don’t need to have initially the same view, but through internal negotiation, the group comes forth with the same voice that will make them stronger. In other word, the culinary have the right to debate amount themselves whom they want to vote for. Leave them alone.
If you are union member and you don’t agree with the union choice of candidate, then. You may want to know what strategy makes your union go for Obama. –It may not necessary be because all of you like Obama—
You may also want t know what leverage your union will gain–It may be because your union may gain more negotiating power with your employer or local politicians, that the union will use later to give you more benefits—Those are some of the questions you should ask before deciding to go on your own.
The whole idea of the union is to give your a greater bargaining power that none of you can achieved individually. If you break apart you are loosing your bargaining power and you are weaker. So be careful.
Hillary is visiting you because she wants to divide you. At the end you are free to choose by yourself but as a union remembers that Hillary will not make your employer pay you higher wage, she will not ask your employer to give you better working condition, better health care, better life insurance, or protection during a strike.
Here again you should do what the Clintons do. Look for your own best interest first. Hillary will not be there next month, she will not be there when you are sick, when your children are sick and your employer wants to fire you. So think for what is good for you and your family before you make your decision. Hillary has already made a decision for what is good for her before she comes to your home.
All the people who are supporting you and telling you to break with the union at this moment on the internet or at home will not be there when your child, your mother, you father, your sister or yourself will be sick and your employer will want to fire you. Believe me you will not be able to reach Hillary by phone! You will not even be able to find her phone number. But your union will be there. So be careful. This is the real world for you. Be wise. Here is America; if you don’t take care of yourself first no one will do it for you
tomdc I apologize, not for my comments but for your choice in Candidates.
Oh yea, please site your sources when you try to state fact about vote fraud. Here is an example of your candidate Edwards and why he is no good for Nevada:
Sen. Edwards voted for and against Yucca Mountain in 2000; in 2002, he supported Yucca Mountain again. "In February 2000, Edwards voted against a bill calling for nuclear waste storage in Nevada by the year 2007. But after President Clinton vetoed the bill, Edwards changed course and voted to override the veto. In July 2002, Edwards voted for President Bush's designation of Yucca Mountain as the site of a nuclear waste repository." [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 2/12/04]
Top Donor to Sen. Obama Spent Millions Lobbying to Store Nuclear Waste at Yucca Mountain
One of Sen. Obama's biggest donors is the energy giant Exelon:
Exelon is the sixth largest donor to Sen. Obama's presidential campaign and the fourth largest career donor to Obama’s federal campaigns. Exelon employees have donated over $269,100 to his federal campaigns and over $194,750 in 2008. [opensecrets.org, 2008, 2004-2008]
Exelon's CEO is a key advocate for storing nuclear waste at Yucca:
Exelon CEO John Rowe calls Yucca mountain project ‘linchpin’ to solving waste problem and building new plants. "So what does Exelon Chief Executive Officer John Rowe want? Fortune magazine, in a May 15, 2006, article titled 'Meet Mr. Nuke,' details Rowe's call to solve the waste problem before additional nuclear power plants are built. "We have to be able to look the public in the eye and say, 'If we build a plant, here's where the waste will go,' " Rowe told Fortune. The Yucca Mountain Project is the 'linchpin' to solving the waste problem and building new plants.”[Las Vegas Review Journal, 5/15/07]
Exelon has spent millions lobbying to open up Yucca mountain:
In 2002, Exelon spent $2,172,000 dollars on lobbying the federal government on issues including 'Yucca Mountain Project Management' [sopr.senate.gov, mid-year; year-end]
In 2003, Exelon spent $2,864,400 dollars on lobbying the federal government on issues including 'Yucca Mountain Project Management' [sopr.senate.gov, mid-year; year-end]
In 2004, Exelon spent over $1,000,000 dollars on lobbying the federal government on issues including 'Yucca Mountain Project Management' [sopr.senate.gov, mid-year; year-end]
In 2005, Exelon spent $1,815,000 dollars on lobbying the federal government on issues including ‘the Department of Energy’s Yucca Mountain Project.’ [sopr.senate.gov, mid-year, year-end]
In 2006, Exelon spent $1,329,014 dollars on lobbying the federal government on issues including ‘the Department of Energy’s Yucca Mountain Project.’ [sopr.senate.gov, mid-year, year-end]
In 2007, Exelon spent $1,732,321 dollars on lobbying the federal government on issues including the ‘Yucca Mountain National Interest…’ [sopr.senate.gov, mid-year]
Both the Democrat Party in Nevada and the Democratic National Committe approve of these at-large precincts and decided to do so several months ago.
The rules are reasonable and the only way to make it possible for many people to vote.
A welcome decision. let´s hope for a big turnout on Saturday!
Sen. Patrick Leahy is a perfect fit for Obama. They both can't follow through on their rhetoric.
TomDC,
I am an educated female jewish voter supporting Hillary Clinton for president, and I am extremely offended at your reference to Hitler and "ovens." What the H*** is your problem? Your attitude unfortunately reflects on all of the candidates you might prefer over Clinton. Comments like yours about Hitler are popping up on the Internet from Obama supporters, which will negatively affect his support from jewish voters.
As for the NH vote count, I just checked and the vote recount shows errors but does not change the outcome. From alternet.org today: "Election integrity activists in New Hampshire are finding all kinds of problems with the electronic vote count in last week's presidential primary, after a first day of recounting the Democratic vote. But the problems so far have not changed the outcome of the race that Hillary Clinton won."
You are certainly entitled to dislike the Clintons but let's not stoop to outright bigotry and distortion of facts.
In Town,
Blah blah blah
It is all about bodies now. Who delivers the bodies to the caucus sites? A candidate that can unite Elaine Wynn and the Culinary can unite the country. Change we can believe in....Obama is my first caucus choice, Edwards is my second. Will the county campaigns of Edwards & Obama unite for real change! We know our neighbors who support Edwards, and some supported this lawsuit, they can still come over from the dark side and make Obama your second.
Just a guess, but if Obama wins by a margin traceable to overweighted votes at the Strip caucuses, I think you will start to see a strong blue collar Democrat backlash against the Culinary's members. Perhaps INS raids at the casinos as a means of getting blue collar Democrats to vote Republican in November.
RachelB- Hitler was a nice half-Jewish boy who grew up to find it was politically expedient to play the "Jew" card. Then the Rochechilds and other Jewish families scared of losing their money to the socialists financed him, not because they agreed with his anti-Jewish propoganda but because it was expedient for them. If the Clintons were in Germany in 1934 they would have done the same thing- whatever is politically expedient. That is their way. If we don't learn from history about "leaders" with no morals who will play any card that is expedient then we'll have the same thing happen again. and again.
The NH Diebolds have been found to have counted many ballots twice. Diebolds were used mostly in Clinton areas. The count is going very slowly.
Leon the AFSCM wont know if someone is a member, or where they work, if they dont want to be known, as they aren't caucusing at work. Those members are caucusing where they live and won't be identified by uniforms or id cards.
Only the culinary union has workers caucusing at its worksites, only the culinary union will be able to intimidate its workers as it has opening said it will, "the union stands together etc." ie don't cross us and has actively told members they cant caucus unless they are supporting Obama.
I encourage all out of state organizers to go to the at large caucus sites and observe, as is allowed as long as possible, informing workers of their rights. Hopefully Culinary workplaces will also be blanketed with flyers outlining their rights to vote for whomever they want.
I also hope the press, national and international, will be present in droves with cameras, inside and outside these highly undemocratic caucus sites.
TomDC:
Your words on this blog about Hitler are helping Hillary get the Jewish vote, so thank you for that.
As for politically expedient activities, I wonder what you think of these facts: Obama's camp wrote and circulated a 4-page memo supporting claims of racism against the Clintons although he now admits that they are not racist. Last Sunday, Obama lied when he said that he was "baffled" when Hillary accused him of successfully pushing the story on Meet the Press. So, not only did Obama's campaign play the race card, he lied about it. The only reason we finally learned the truth is that Russert confronted Obama on live TV with the 4-page memo and he had no choice but to take responsiblity for it. Obama's excuse was that it's hard to control your staff. So...my questions are: 1) Did Obama know about the memo at the time it was distributed to the media; 2)Did Obama know about the memo when he was asked about the matter on Sunday and said he was baffled; and 3) Did he fire the people on his staff who wrote and circulated it? (I recall that Hillary fired her NH staff member when he mentioned Obama's drug use.) It's certainly one thing to have little control over surrogates like Bob Johnson; it's quite another thing to not have control over your own staff. What kind of president would he make with that sort of management style?
By the way, thanks again for helping Hillary with that Jewish vote!
I hope you saw today's The New York Times.
January 17, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/17/opinio...
"After watching the subject of race intrude on the primaries last week, and become even more prominent this week, we were relieved that Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama called a truce Tuesday night.
It was clearly her side that first stoked the race and gender issue."
Hillary is betting on the fact that white women can be made to fear black men in softer tones than yelling for help from the sisterhood. And Hillary is also praying Latino voters won't understand what her campaign was trying to pull in Nevada this week.
A favorite quote of this morning so far...
"You know, if someone was married to a surgeon for years, would you consider them qualified to cut you open? Then why does she think being married to a president makes her presidential material?"
I was a HUGE Clinton supporter. I voted for Bill in ‘92 and ‘96. I was one of their biggest fans. I read every article, videotaped press conferences, hated Ken Starr, the whole nine yards. As we got to 2007, I still admired them but I disliked the sense of entitlement I felt emanating from them in regards to her presidential run. Also, something about a quarter century of Bushes and Clintons in the White House (father, then son; husband, then wife…) just strikes me as wrong.
I was a fan of the Clinton presidency in the ’90s. But it’s 2008 and I don’t want to return to those times. Watching Bill and some of his red-faced, finger-jabbing before the NH primary, when they thought it was all slipping away, reminded me that I’m just tired at this point of the Clinton drama. I just really don’t want a sequel. And I can’t shake the feeling that there’s something fundamentally wrong with them getting a 3rd term in the White House. Don’t tell me that’s not a fair charge because Hillary is a different person from her husband. We all remember 1992 when he ran under the slogan “two for the price of one”. We all know she was intimately involved in the decisions of his presidency. I’ve read all the books over the years, listened to all the interviews. It was clearly a “co-presidency”. And it will be one again if Hillary wins. The constitution precludes 3rd terms and I can’t shake the feeling that this would be one.
As a former Clinton fan, I just have a depressing feeling of “been there, done that”. My question to Hillary supporters is, how can she win in November even if she wins the nomination? I’m a Democrat and I won’t vote for her and I know my feelings are not rare. That anger towards the Clintons that many of you hear from Obama supporters is not something that will go away in November. And those are just the Democrats. Many more Republicans and Independents have stronger feelings against her.
I’m a Democrat and want a Democrat to win the White House in November. I don’t believe Hillary can do that, nor do I want her to. I’m afraid the Democratic party is making a common mistake and nominating the unelectable candidate. All you Hillary fans can enjoy your victory if she wins the nomination but it will be a pyrrhic victory. You will have won the battle but lost the war. It’s a shame.