Voting on the Strip a no-no, suit says

Not allowing nine polling sites would hurt Obama, help Clinton

Saturday, Jan. 12, 2008 | 2 a.m.

The teachers union has drawn knives on the Culinary Workers, deepening the potential political rifts over Nevada’s Jan. 19 Democratic caucus.

A lawsuit filed late Friday in federal court seeks to stop the Democratic Party from holding caucus meetings at nine Strip hotels, which would diminish the influence of casino workers and hamper Illinois Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign.

The complaint, with the state teachers union and some party activists as plaintiffs, came as Obama accepted the endorsement of the Culinary Union. The timing seemed designed to cloud the good buzz from his campaign, which could only help Sen. Hillary Clinton’s efforts in the state.

The lawsuit claims that those voting in at-large precincts being held on the Strip would have too much weight compared with those voting at their polling places, violating the equal protection law of the U.S. Constitution. It also claims the at-large precincts violate state statute in the way they were drawn.

State Democratic Party officials disputed the lawsuit’s contentions.

“This has been a fully transparent process,” party spokeswoman Kirsten Searer said. “These rules have been approved by the Democratic National Committee and the campaigns have been fully informed throughout this process, which started in May.”

The party decided to set up polling places at the nine casinos to accommodate those working on the Strip.

But Lynn Warne, president of the Nevada State Education Association, noted that janitors who have to open schools in which caucus meetings take place will be unable to participate if that is not their polling place.

“Why are extraordinary accommodations being made for people on Strip but not the other workers?” she said.

She acknowledged that she did not approach the state party about the problem.

“We’re approaching them now,” she said.

The Nevada State Education Association has not endorsed any candidate, Warne said.

The other plaintiffs are Dwayne Chesnut, John Cahill, Vicky and John Birkland, and Patricia Montgomery.

Some of them were active backers of Sen. Dina Titus’ 2006 bid for governor. Titus, of Las Vegas, has endorsed Clinton.

Mark Ferrario, the attorney who filed the lawsuit, would not comment on how he got the clients, other than to say they care about the fairness of the caucus process.

Discussion: 86 comments so far…

By Ruralsrule

1/12/08 at 4:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

This is a not so subtle attempt to suppress caucus participation by a Clinton surrogate group. If the teachers wanted to help their janitors (first time they've ever peeped about this group who aren't even their members) vote, they could get more school based sites.
By Gamblndan

1/12/08 at 5:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

This Law Suit is BS. It could have been filed well before the Endorsement of Obama. I wonder if the union had endorsed Clinton if the Law Suit would have been filed?

The Nevada State Education Association has said it would not endorse any Democrat, but some of its top officials have endorsed Mrs. Clinton.

The association’s deputy executive director, Debbie Cahill, for instance, was a founding member of Senator Clinton’s Nevada Women’s Leadership Council.

I also hope that the judge that is providing over this case is NOT a Bill Clinton apointee! That would be a huge conflict of interest!
By Hope

1/12/08 at 6:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Typical Clinton tactics backed by the teachers' union. Perhaps if this union's leaders spent more time caring for, nurturing and educating our kids and less time "shilling" for Clinton, education results would improve.

2008 demands the greatest possible participation to achieve a clear mandate of just where the country wants to go from here. Voter repression goes against this. I respectfully urge caucus goers to keep that in mind.
By GingerG

1/12/08 at 7:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

The Clintons are trying to deprive casino workers of the right to caucus. Don't be fooled! They should be ashamed.
By 9Leon

1/12/08 at 7:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Good morning-
If they were really worried about this issue, the suit would have come out BEFORE the unions backed Obama.
Clinton has lost my support in the past 9 days, she has shown that she is willing to exploit, lie and distort in order to get into the office. Maybe I am an idealist living in a “fairy tale”, but I am really starting to support Obama’s message of bringing honesty and hope into politics.
Take care
By pebbles

1/12/08 at 8:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Whether you are a culinary worker or anyone else, and who cares where you go to vote.
You need to really look at Obama closely before voting for him.

In an interview with Readers Digest in October 2007 he was asked about his position on the country's defense and what he would do as president. His reply was "I'll be looking for opportunities for Americans to work on transnational threats. He also feels we should be more generous with our money. He also stated,"We should double our foreign aid budget".
So Obama wants to work on our country's defense by giving foreign countrys more of America's money when on the news the other day there was a little girl who could only have formula to eat to survive as she cannot eat anything else and her insurance company will not pay for it. So Mr Obama why give more of our money away when we have people in our country who need that money. And also you send more money over there and do you really think that will solve the problem. Do you think that will make al Qaeda put down their weapons. He might be great on crisma and communication but can he really handle the reins of power that is bestowed on the President or is he to green. It's great to want to enlist help from the people but a President has to be able to make decisions for the people and he is not ready.
By aw

1/12/08 at 8:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

How sad for Nevada --

Don't the people have a voice?

You have to give it to the Reid machine -- they are multi taskers

At the same time they:
(a) play down the fairness of the caucus process by saying certain voters are disinfranchised
YET
(b) they file suit to disinfranchise voters they fear may not vote as they want

If this is the voice of experience -- and the ways of experience -- then I want to be green --
By juliobats

1/12/08 at 8:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

It is shocking that any association of any kind would make any attempts to suppress the voter rights of American workers on the Las Vegas strip, when they should be fighting tooth and nail to bring the democratic process as closest to the people as possible. Hillary Rodham Clinton should speak out on this issue immediately and distance herself from such attempts by her supporters to kill the enthusiasm for change sweeping through Nevada. Getting casino workers involved in the caucus is a good thing for democracy, because they are citizens too; it's not in any way detrimental to any other groups. If you care so much about janitors, and can justify having them caucus near the schools where they work, then try to work out a solution FOR the janitors, NOT AGAINST the casino workers on the strip. Come on, Hillary... Give us a break!
By Knowzitall

1/12/08 at 8:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

The plaintiffs were made fully aware of this on 11/3/2007 a their State Central Committee meeting and said absolutely nothing.

Most think we didn't provide enough delegates to the 9 Strip sites. The Strip sites were actually announced way, way back at the launch of the Nevada Caucus Commission, and all of the plaintiffs were in attendance and silent and the DNC approved.

Lynn Warne admits not talking to any of us first before filings. That alone will toss this.

This is a party meeting, not an election, where the US has no jurisdiction to provide injunctive relief. They may have had more success in District Court here, but still this will be tossed.

This has HRC minions all over it using persons in elected party leadership, all on the SCC, who could have voiced their concerns on 11/3/2007, or way back when this was announced in 2006!

HRC is made to look bad on this and I for one, can hardly wait until this caucus is over and we can focus on Nov.
By 9Leon

1/12/08 at 8:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Great post “juliobats”, you bring up a great point about the NSEA coming up with a solution for the janitors, which do not disenfranchise the many strip workers. Thanks for giving me more food for thought early this morning!
By stanleyconstant

1/12/08 at 9:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

The Equal Protection Clause argument against how delegates are apportioned in the 9 Strip precints will prevail because the Constitution forbids granting one vote more weight than anothers.

This is based off my reading of an article relating the the calculus for determining delegates is different for standard precints than the 9 Strip precints.

Note: I'm a lawyer but do not practice constitutional law. I support Edwards.
By bunky

1/12/08 at 9:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

hmmm,
I wonder if Hillary got the Culinary Union if this suit would have been filed, hmmm.....
By JackKennedy

1/12/08 at 9:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Humm.... we all play to win in politics! And, if the shoe were on the other foot, would Obama lay back? Of course NOT. This is a political fight for goodness sakes about the future and who can lead or nation in the 21st Century.

Make history in America and elect the most intelligent woman candidate President. Stop the sexism and discrimination againjst one of the best presidential candidates in American history. VOTE HILLARY CLINTON!

Shake-it-up Nevada. Take a chance on HILLARY CLINTON! She has the intelligence, savvy, and oh my goodness, experience.
By RandyH

1/12/08 at 10:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

From my understanding of the Caucus rules, if you show up at a caucus site that is in your county but is not your "designated site," you will not be turned away and will be allowed to participate at that site unless you could reasonably get to your "designated site" in time to participate.

So their argument that these janitors that they are so concerned about are being disenfranchised is BS. They would not be prevented from participating in the caucus being held at the school that they just happen to be opening up as a caucus site. The party's intent with this rule is to maximize turnout and minimize any disenfranchisement. It was also their intent with the creation of "at large" caucus sites.
By mysistagirl

1/12/08 at 10:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

It is disgusting for anyone, particularly Democrats (who claim the mantle of champion of voting rights) to make any attempt to surpress votes.

JackKennedy, the answer to your question is that no matter what shoe the foot is on, it should not squeeze the principle and integrity out of the wearer. That's an unprincipaled and unscrupulous posture that you have assumed there, and so has HRC, and this is the classic behavior that is responsible for her high negatives.

First she tried to surpress the caucus votes of the college students in Iowa, now her minions are doing the same thing in Nevada. When the republicans do their usual surpress attempt(as they always do) the democrats will not be able to scream foul because they will look like complete hypocrites, thanks to HRC.

HRC prides herself in her ability to fight against republicans, but the truth is she fights straight from their playbook. She is running her campaign like the flip side of the same coin.
By SunDog

1/12/08 at 10:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

These caucus sites were apparently approved months ago by both the NV Dem Party and the Dem Nat'l Committee. Earlier this week Billary doesn't get the coveted Culinary Union endorsement and voila, lawsuit appears on Friday.

Shameful, dirty, disgusting politics by HRC's campaign. They will try every play in the Karl Rove playbook to take down anyone that stands in their way. Is this the kind of dirty "experience" you want in the White House? Thanks but no thanks.

If HRC was truly a person for the people, she would repudiate this lawsuit and support the system that was already in place. Instead, she'll play coy: "what? sorry, I can't do anything about it!" Yeah, just like she can't do anything about releasing her papers from the White House. Blech, they make me sick.
By nadador

1/12/08 at 11:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

A shameless attempt by a Clinton surrogate to disenfranchise caucus-goers who *may* be more likely to support Obama.

What is particularly funny about this whole thing is that most people don't understand how very undemocratic the entire party nomination process is. Each state has extra delegates to the nominating conventions who can go with whomever they want, regardless of the state's vote. Note the total New Hampshire delegate count at cnn.com, in which Obama has 12 delegates and Clinton has 11.

Americans are under a false impression that these partisan presidential primaries are fair and democratic. BOTH political parties govern these things with great control; it is a bizarre process designed to keep control within party loyalists and the political machines.
By texex

1/12/08 at 11:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

If you dig deeper into who the "plantiffs" actually are, they are (almost) all Executive members of the Clark County Democratic Central Committee and therefore also members of the Nevada State Democratic State Central Committee.

As knowsitall 8:31 pointed out they were aware of all this going back to the time the caucusux was developed. They are NOT your generic John and Jane Six Pack.

SO... what you have here are mucky-muck Democratic insiders suing their own party! This is just the tip of the iceberg on what's wrong inside the NSDP.
By texex

1/12/08 at 11:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Here's a tidbit for you from the CCCC website http://www.clarkcountydemocrats.org/inde...

Vicki Burkland is Second Vice-Chair and Dwayne Chestnut is Third Vice Chair of the CCCC which also puts them on the NSDP SCC.

These are NOT your garden variety people but Nevada Democratic Party insiders suing their own party!
By toto

1/12/08 at 12:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

Why is anyone surprised? Obama got the Union endorsements instead of Clinton or Edwards, thus a Clinton lawsuit that will disenfranchise the workers that endorsed him. Hillary Clinton will do what ever it takes to win, she is NOT the leader we want to protect our Constitution or civil rights!
By Si_Se_Puede

1/12/08 at 1:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

If there's any reason why the Clintons should just go away, it's the fact that they're causing us to lose our identity. People are more objective when they don't support the Clintons.

1. We think it is somehow appropriate for the Clinton folks to try to change the rules of the game - in the middle of the game. But we cry foul when Republicans do the same in California.

2. We want election integrity, especially to make sure the GOP does not cheat in November. But if it's Hillary who won by machine ballots and Obama by hand-counted ballots, let's not recount the votes.

3. We villainize George Bush for the war in Iraq, but we forgive Hillary for authorizing the war with her conscience - even if she didn't even bother to apologize or shed a tear for the 4,000 dead Americans and many more dead Iraqi civilians.

4. Clinton tried to disenfranchize students in Iowa and then courted them in NH. Bill called Obama a 'fairy-tale' when he needed white votes, and said 'He might win', when he needs black votes. Now they're trying to disenfranchise another group in NV. The explanation is clear - you can't rig a caucus. The only way is to disenfrachise a particular group.

If you stop supporting the Clintons for a moment, you'd be surprised at how better you see the world.

Yes, we can! Si, se puede!
By aw

1/12/08 at 2:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

if a comment is removed - how does one know?

I posted a link to a New Yorker article earlier and cannot find it --

Think this i a VERY impt thing for the union members to read-- the New Yorker is certainly a legitimate magazine

Here goes again -- please read

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/...
By aw

1/12/08 at 3:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

http://thepage.time.com/2008/01/12/racia...

Racial Tensions a Potential Boost For Clinton
Some strategists suggest Hispanics may be reluctant to support a black candidate.

Clinton pollster Sergio Bendixen: “The Hispanic voter—and I want to say this very carefully—has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates.” The Page, 7:26 AM
By Ielderista

1/12/08 at 3:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Senator Clinton, I am trying very hard to continue my support for your election. I've looked past some troubling tactics that I've seen coming from your campaign but I will not continue to support you if you continue to try to damage and discourage my union. Why are you trying to silence me and my fellow democrats. This country was built off of our sweat and tears. We deserve to have a voice as much as any other American.

Thank you
By dcarl

1/12/08 at 4:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

This is typical Hillary. All she cares about is power. Gee, I can hardly wait to see the dirt her "research" team has on Barack and John. They will use it at just the right time. Whether it is John or Barack, this nation is not going to heal until the Bush/Clinton cabal is gone. We need someone fresh.
By dcarl

1/12/08 at 4:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

I get email from Obama, Clinton, and Edwards. Here is the very short press release from Obama HQ in Nevada:

"We believe as a party, and a country, we should be looking for ways to include working men and women in the electoral process, not disenfranchise them." David Cohen, Nevada State Director.
By dcarl

1/12/08 at 4:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail...

The Nevada State Education Association, some of whose top leaders have individually endorsed Clinton, filed the suit and is using a law firm with close ties to the onetime front-runner, Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner, Renshaw, and Ferrario. Former congressmen James H. Bilbray (D-Nev.), a lawyer at that firm, has endorsed Clinton and is stumping for her in the Silver State.

The state party quickly dismissed the lawsuit. Going back to last spring, every presidential campaign was involved in setting up the unusual casino caucus sites while state party officials and the Democratic National Committee ironed out the details. "This is a fair, legal and proper way to choose delegates under established law and legal precedent that has been reviewed by attorneys....The time for comment or complaint has passed," the party said in a statement.
By HHirsch

1/12/08 at 9:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Needless to say, I have no dog in this fight, but it seems to be a good example of the Clinton style--unchanged after fifteen years.

Howard Hirsch
Chairman, Lyon County Republican Central Committee
Dayton, Nevada
By scjmcy2k

1/12/08 at 10:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Man ! I am having a hard time digesting things coming out of the Clinton Camp Lately. As a disclaimer, I have decided to support Barack Obama, quite a while ago actually. But as a former Big time Bill supporter, I cant believe the path their campaign has chosen. Between the racially insensitive comments, to this, I cant help but solidify my support for something and someone new.

That being said, as a lifelong Democrat, if Barack Obama loses the nomination fairly then so be the will of my party. If he loses the nomination in major part due to this type of nonsense, I will leave my party and join the independent movement. I dont want to be a part of any organization that tolerates this type of infighting, and they had better loudly speak out against this.
By dasheight

1/12/08 at 11:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

I live in Maryland. We support Barack Obama.

It heartens me, and gives me hope that that the Nevada State Democratic Party is disputing this politically motivated, disgusting lawsuit that disenfranchises union voters. This is yet ANOTHER dirty Clinton campaign trick to try and stop Senator Obama's overwhelming support in Nevada.

He is running an honest campaign, and winning.

That frightens corrupted politicians like Hillary Clinton.

TO THE CULINARY UNION, AND SUPPORTERS OF SENATOR OBAMA: DO NOT TAKE THIS LYING DOWN! DO NOT LET YOUR VOICE BE SILENCED! WE ARE WITH YOU 100%!
By aw

1/13/08 at 6:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

NEVADA: you can determine the future of our country!
Please choose wisely
------------------------------
It is common knowledge that the Republicans want to run against Senator Clinton - as they feel they can beat her the easiest (easier than either Obama or Edwards); Hillary is the dream candidate for the republican machine --
They are "fired up and ready to go" should Hillary Clinton be the democratic nominee --

See link below for the following information (also was on TV this am)

"New York Sen. Hillary Clinton is Republicans' choice for a Democratic candidate.

Said GOP pollster Whit Ayres: "When it comes to Republicans, Hillary Clinton is a unifier, not a divider."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/246......

FACTS MATTER -- AT LEAST THEY SHOULD MATTER
Obama -08
By aw

1/13/08 at 12:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

as is your right--

others will come to different conclusions - that's called democracy
By Boywonder1906

1/13/08 at 2:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

I too am from Maryland, and yes we support PRESIDENT OBAMA 100%

I am also and educator, and cant believe that the teachers union is taking part in this disgusting, dirty-handed deal. Anyone with an elementary education can see that this is an underhanded attempt to support Ms. Clinton. Is this the message that we should be delivering to our students? “When things don’t go your way, find a way to get around the system?” That shows a lot of character now doesn’t it!

FYI -- Please notice that I said PRESIDENT OBAMA and Ms. Clinton!
By Boywonder1906

1/13/08 at 2:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sorry folks .....found a typo. That should read....

" I am AN educator and not "and!" I am a educator, not a typist -- LOL!!!
By DavidMorgan

1/13/08 at 2:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

At the risk of repeating somebody's statement above...this caucus stuff shows that petty politics, whether real or imagined, has a delegitimizing effect on the outcome of ANY caucus vote. If we're gonna count noses...let's do it in a real, genuine primary election. This caucus stuff is like squirting gasoline onto a match.
By Nevadanaut

1/13/08 at 6:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Get real, people. If the Culinary Union had endorsed Clinton, the Obama camp would be the one filing the suit. It's not about the candidates, it's about one-person-one vote!
By Nissl

1/13/08 at 11:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

This nothing but a naked political grab by Clinton, using surrogates so she can keep it at arms length. If you thought this was so unfair, why not sue 9 months ago? And how exactly are teachers prevented from voting on Saturday? Seems like these sites are absolutely necessary to avoid disenfranchising Union members.

I hope any Union members thinking about voting for Clinton are paying attention to her attempts to suppress their vote.
By Zoro54

1/14/08 at 12:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

This suit has nothing to do with the Clinton Campaign, despite what the "Conspiracy Theorists" may think. It does have a lot do due with how Caucuses are conducted, Precinct defined, and Delegate allocation under Nevada Revised Statute (NRS) 293.

Clearly the Nevada State Party will not win this one as their "Plan" IS in violation of many sections of the NRS section 293.

You can read the complaint here: http://vegaspundit.typepad.com/vegas_pun...

These "At Large" precincts can have a MUCH higher Delegate allocation to the Clark County Dem Convention. Furthermore every person attending an "At Large" precinct is counted twice for Delegate allocation -- once where they live (which is normal) and again when they attend an "At Large" Caucus.

Read the full complaint. Those bringing the suit are correct. If anything was "Politically motivated" it would be the Nevada State Democratic Party stacking the deck in favor of the culinary union.
By annevilla

1/14/08 at 8:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

"OBAMA PORTRAIT MUSIC VIDEO" on Youtube - Don't Miss It!

For those of you who still have not heard:

There is a WONDERFUL and INSPIRING music video on Youtube.com entitled "Obama Portrait Music Video by Bjarne O."
You can use the free downloaded high-quality stereo version from the composer's website in DVD form to show at house parties and fundraisers. Even people who knew nothing at all about Obama have been moved: either a thrilling introduction, or further inspiration for those of us who already know and fight for Obama.
The music soundtrack, which incorporates excerpts from the famous 2004 speech, can also be downloaded separately in high-quality.

It is an uplifting and informative campaign tool - so please, SPREAD THE WORD!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=mCPwbozpIzM

YES WE CAN

Anne
By lvdream

1/14/08 at 9:09 a.m.

Comment removed by staff.
By NewYorker

1/14/08 at 9:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama will be the next president. He is the change we need in this country. Our Healthcare system is broken, our energy policy is broken, our educational System is broken, our Economy is headed into a tail spin and, china is rapidly becoming the most powerful country in the world. Climate change and the environment are putting this country on a course for disaster. The next 3 to 5 years is terrifying. We need a new direction, we need new energy, we need to take strong action, Obama offers us that. Hilary will maintain the status quo, even while the world around us is collapsing.
By Zoro54

1/14/08 at 11:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

I am not an Obama supporter, but the email that was flying around depicting him as refusing to put his hand over his heart during the "Pledge of Allegiance" was an authentic picture --- but it was the "Star Spangled Banner" that was playing at the time. Nobody was saying the "Pledge of Allegiance".

Your "blood" has absolutely nothing to do with your Religion.

I have never seen anybody go to jail for unpaid parking tickets. Fines are levied and penalties imposed and in some case interest is charged. Going to Jail for an unpaid parking ticket is absolutely rediculous.

Used to be a Drug Addict. So what --- President Bush was an Alcoholic AND Drug Abuser. There millions of ex-addicts working in all kinds of respected positions around the country.

Let me get this straight, an ex-addict turns clean, becomes a State Senator and then a U.S. Senator and now a Presidential Candidate. Sounds like a heck of a lot of accomplishments to me.
By Girly_Girl

1/14/08 at 11:42 a.m.

Comment removed by staff.
By Girly_Girl

1/14/08 at 11:46 a.m.

Comment removed by staff.
By CHernan

1/14/08 at 4:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Does anyone know the status of the lawsuit? Has it been scheduled for a hearing? Has the judge stated when he will rule?
By daraya2

1/14/08 at 7:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Unbelievable. Again, uninformed and delusional people supporting Obama. The decision for the caucus votes to NOT be on the strip was decided in MARCH OF LAST YEAR!!! Why? Simple, if the union is telling people to vote for one candidate and someone votes against his/her boss, the votes WILL be bias. Caucus votes are PUBLIC. Open your eyes and see the "Lies" that you are being fed by the Obama crew and the bias reporters! The law suit would have been filed by the Obama crew if the situation were reversed. Obama supporters - GET EDUCATED and, for the sake of this country, be informed rather than inspired by the illusion of Obama "hope" campaign. If you want FOOD on your table, vote for Clinton.
By aw

1/14/08 at 8:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

if you want food on your table?
where in the world does that come from?

Has Darryl undergone a sex change operation and emerged as daraya2?

Caucus votes are public - as were the founders votes in the Constitutional Congress in Philadelphia when the Bill of Rights was borne

DATELINE: 1787:
"LATE WORD: BEN FRANKLIN FILED A LAWSUIT TO BLOCK THOMAS JEFFERSON FROM VOTING DUE TO HIS CONCERN ABOUT THE UNDUE INFLUENCE OF SALLY HEMMINGS-- this move will delay the writing of the Constitution should it prevail"

Luckily - freedom prevailed
By Chuck

1/14/08 at 11:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hillary Clinton has no shame. She will make me vote Republican if she gets the Dem nomination. The lawsuit has no merit. It will get tossed just like HRC will when we Nevadan's Caucus against her on Saturday Jan 19th
By Sue

1/15/08 at 5:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

This is the Clintons. They divide and conquer. It's not about the Country, or the People, with them....it's about THEM getting POWER of the Presidency at ANY cost. Now they have sparked Women against Men (to get the WOMAN Vote), Union against Union (to GET and STOP CERTAIN Votes), and Race!!...WHAT is next?

God help the US.
By aw

1/15/08 at 7:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

from the Clinton for President Website - least there be any doubt who is behind the lawsuit to disenfranchise voters (who do not endorse her)

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/relea......

"7/16/2007
Leaders in Education Endorse Clinton for President
Hillary Clinton today received the endorsement of a group of Nevada officials known for their leadership in education -- longtime Clark County School District official and current State Senator Joyce Woodhouse, Nevada System of Higher Education Regents Cedric Crear and Thalia Dondero, and Nevada State Education Association (NSEA) Deputy Executive Director Debbie Cahill."

"These four great leaders -- Joyce, Cedric, Thalia and Debbie -- bring diverse community experiences and networks to our campaign," said Clinton Nevada Chair Rory Reid. "They share Senator Clinton's commitment to making our education system strong and accessible at all levels, so that every American can fulfill his or her potential. We are extremely gratified for their support."

Nevada State Education Association is the Plantiff in the suit --
we just went through 7 years of not taking responsibility ---

Let's move on
Obama '08
By JenniferM

1/15/08 at 9:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hillary Clinton could call off this lawsuit with one phone call. Instead, she and her surrogates perpetuate this battle and cause so much strife in this process. Hillary understands very well that Obama's message is powerful. When these campaigns aren't bogged down in political messes--Obama thrives. Hillary can only win if she quells Obama's message, by creating a smokescreen of chaos. Hillary is demonstrating that she and her surrogates are about tearing down and manipulation. I don't know how any politician could be more openly calculating annd cold-hearted. Obama ended the back-and-forth between the campaigns yesterday, regarding the racial issues. He demonstrated inspiring leadership by trying to move both campaigns out of a bad place. Maybe Hillary needs to show some leadership, and end this lawsuit now---and let the voters of Nevada decide who wins this election. No one had a problem until the Culinary Workers endorsed Obama. This really is a blatant outrage and an insult to the people of Nevada, because Hillary is trying to go around the citizens of Nevada and manipulate their election results with lawsuits!
By lori11

1/15/08 at 10:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

I'm concerned not about the voting locations, but by the caucus process in general. The way a caucus works is that it is NOT a secret ballot. You have to publically declare who you vote for. Will there be pressures from union leaders to support the union party line? Probably. Is this fair...no.
By eades

1/15/08 at 11:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

The lawsuit filed by Clinton allies in Nevada against planned "at-large" caucusing Jan. 19 on the Las Vegas Strip is beginning to look a lot like voter suppression. As we know, the plan was drawn up and approved unanimously early last year by the Nevada Democratic Party leadership, with input from the presidential campaigns, to enable caucusing by Strip workers unable to leave work to caucus in their home precincts. Indeed the plan's creators include several of those who are now plaintiffs against it. What changed their minds? Barack Obama's endorsement Jan.9 by the 60,000-member Las Vegas Culinary Workers' Union changed their minds. When the plan was approved, Hillary Clinton was presumed to be the "inevitable" Democratic frontrunner. Iowa changed all that, and Obama's subsequent endorsement by the culinary workers has brought a Clinton win in Nevada into serious question. Since it is largely members of this union who would be caucusing in the casinos, the plan is clearly no longer in Clinton's best interests. Hence the lawsuit against the plan, filed just two days after the Obama endorsement and scarcely a week before the caucus by Clinton allies from the leadership of the Nevada State Education Association (NSEA), on the grounds that it would be unfair to workers in other areas. Why didn't they think it was unfair earlier? After all, the plan was approved nearly a year ago in the very name of fairness, to enable participation by those who would otherwise be unable to caucus. The answer is simple: Because the lawsuit has nothing whatsoever to do with fairness, and everything to do with stacking the deck in favor of Hillary Clinton. The Clintons themselves are not official parties to the suit, but both Hillary and Bill Clinton have spoken in support of it despite the fact that their campaign and others were included in the at-large caucus plan from its inception. They, like their friends in the NSEA, have had more than ample time to consider and reconsider the plan, but appear to have deemed it unfair only since the culinary workers endorsed Obama. While the judge in this case obviously has every reason in the world to throw it out of court, I don't expect that even if it prevails the culinary workers will allow it to prevent their members' caucusing. In fact I wouldn't be at all surprised to see chartered buses from the union shuttling members between the Strip and their home precincts to caucus, a lot of pressure on Strip employers to comply, and a lot of anger at the Clintons and their allies for this seedy attempt to change the rules at the last minute. The whole affair seems likely indeed to do the Clintons far more harm than good in Nevada; and as we know, what happens in Vegas doesn't always stay in Vegas.
By lvdream

1/15/08 at 12:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Here’s the Republican propaganda for the salesman:

Is it obvious that they let this rookie to have a free ride about his record?

Is it obvious that the Republicans aim the attacks only to Hillary Clinton?

Is it obvious that most of the Independents (Republican) are planning to vote for this rookie during the primary? They want him to win!

Republicans know they will eat him alive if he is the Democrat nominee. Here are the facts that Republicans will use against this rookie:

WHY THIS PHONY SALESMAN CAN NOT BE TRUSTED?

..Muslim blood. Muslim’s sons are Muslims for life. Blood is sticker than water. You can run but you can not hide.
..refused to say the Pledge of Allegiance. He did not want to offend ISLAM so he refused.
..claims he’s running on his record.. He did not even know how to cast a “Yes” or “No” vote.
.. had 17 years’ old unpaid outstanding parking tickets. He should spend sometime in jail.
.insisted that his health care provides care to everyone, does he know what universal means?
..a fabulous orator, but we need more than words; we need a doer not a talker
..he says one thing and does another
..will meet with enemies without preconditions
..he said that he was not taking money from the Lobbyists. How about the Rezko connection?
..playing old politics as usual, after he promised hope and change….
..used to be a drug addict or a pusher?
…inexperienced, lack of accomplishments
By tricol123

1/15/08 at 1:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

I have been wondering why a teachers union would back a candidate (Clinton) with no agenda on education. I have heard all of the candidates (except Kucinich) multiple times in Iowa; Clinton was the only one who did not address education. Last time I was on her website there was no agenda for education. What is driving this education union to this lawsuit?
By Girly_Girl

1/15/08 at 3:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Obama es MALO!

Viva Hillary Clinton!!!!!!!!!
By Girly_Girl

1/15/08 at 4 p.m.

Suggest removal

No vote para Obama. El no tiene experiencia. El es un hombre malo malo.

VIVA HILLARY!!!!!!!!!
By UnionGRL

1/15/08 at 8:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

And this, Ladies & Gentlemen, is exactly what you'll get with the Clintons back in the Whitehouse!

Vote 4 REAL change...Vote Obama'08!

YES WE CAN
By digitaltruth

1/16/08 at 8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

At least I don't have to compare Clinton tactics to Bush tactics anymore. The Clinton camp is conducting Karl Rove/George Bush politics for all to see.
By haroldburbank

1/16/08 at 10:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

The fascist Democrats have not changed. In 2004 they brought phony national lawsuits like this versus the Ralph Nader-Peter Camejo ticket, so their voters would be disenfranchised. Now the Dems sue themselves to deny voting rights. Unbelievable.

Vote Green or independent in 2008. Both major parties are fascist, focused on corp greed, and against real workers, like restaurant employees and janitors, who should be able to vote as easily and reasonably as possible.

If Dems were really for workers, they would set up polling places near all worker sites (for janitors, dishwashers, etc). Lawsuits? Madness!
By Girly_Girl

1/16/08 at 6:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA'S UNION ENDORSEMENT IS HARASSING VOTERS INTO VOTING FOR HIM! SPREAD IT AROUND!

Culinary Union Intimidating Members to Vote for Obama
Reported from Las Vegas, Nevada

There's nothing dainty about Las Vegas but things are getting rough.

Intimidation. Pledges demanded. People to vote for Obama or stay away from the caucus.

Call this union vs. the casino workers.

I just did an interview with a Culinary union member who was intimidated while eating lunch in the cafeteria at work. She didn't want to give her name, but she wanted to tell her story. The connection is rough, but her story tells the tale. It's below in a podcast:

Culinary Union pressures members to vote for Obama.

Pamela over at Democratic Daily posted on a tip she received about the intimidation.

Jon Ralston talked about it this morning on MSNBC.

I just got off the phone with a unimpeachable source that there has been more than one confrontation between union reps and members.

This is not an indictment against unions, especially considering I joined my first union when I was in my teens, totally four eventually. Unions are the backbone of the middle class. But in every good group there lies opportunistic cretins. Obama's supporters are obviously applying Chicago style politics in Sin City and they've got three days to get the job done.

Meanwhile, you've got big shots like John Kerry talking about "let the people vote" doing so within a stacked system titled towards the Culinary union, with many of their members who'd much rather vote for someone other than Obama being intimidated and forced to sign pledge cards. Some will fight back, but most will not. From what I'm hearing, this is getting ugly. It's the opposite side, with the story actually being "make the people vote for me."

http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view...
By Taelyn

1/16/08 at 6:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

You people amaze me. And most of you are not even from Nevada.
Too much. And HILLARY is not bringing this suit. So quit laying blame on her. She is not trying to disenfranchise anyone.
We ALL want a fair, unbiased voting process.
I'm pretty positive that Nevada will never again hold a caucus, because of the nature of our business here in Vegas. not to mention the anger and upset so many feel at not being able to cast their vote (For whoever).
Frankly I will be surprised if their is a large turnout because the Hotels are NOT the culinary, and its the HOTELS who pay the employees, and they are NEVER going to allow business to suffer by allowing employees time off from work to caucus during normal work hours.And the rules for these sites state caucusing must be done during a normal work shift.
We didnt close down for 9/11 If you think the casino will allow dealers or cocktail servers, bartenders,foodservers to leave for up to 2 hours during a workday.. Thats just delusional.

The Strip Caucus sites pose many problems, but whatever turnout happens, frankly I believe they will favor Hillary, as the largest majority of Culinary workers are Hispanic and Asian.
Although those I spoke with were of all backgrounds. Black, White, Hispanic, and Asian.
They strongly favored Hillary Clinton.
By Taelyn

1/16/08 at 6:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Thank you girly -girl
That has been my experience as well. I dont know how the Union will be able to keep them from caucusing for the candidate they choose. But if these tactics are truly happening its criminal.
And frankly my biggest concern.
I think the Union should have stayed nuetral until AFTER caucus day.
This is ugly and will not reflect well on the Union, on Obama. On the whole dempcratic process.
By bacalove

1/17/08 at 1:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Teachers do NOT WORK on Saturday so there is no valid bases for them to be able to vote/cacus at their work place. The Clintons are showing their true colors as they rear their Ugly Head in trying to disenfranchise voters for their own Personal Gain (acting more like Republicans). This is old-time, dirty party politics. It is time for some one new who will not stoop to these dirty tricks and wants to elevate the political discourse and environment, bring people together and finally get America moving in the right direction again.
By vegaslee

1/17/08 at 9:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

This old fashion, out of date caucus system needs to be removed from Nevada and start running true primary's like other states.

Polls open all day so that all can vote in their home district.

This is a case of one union trying to trump the other union. Has nothing to do with the candidates that are running for office. Just remember, if a union is behind it someone is going to get the raw end of the stick.
By lani1122

1/17/08 at 9:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

IF YOU WANT TO CONTACT THE HEAD OF THE TEACHERS UNION AND GIVE HER A PIECE OF YOUR MIND EMAIL HER HERE Lynn.Warne@nsea-nv.org

I asked aren't teachers off on Saturday's, and she said it's regarding her custodians. Such B.S. Do you honestly think this lawsuit would of been filed if Hillary was endorsed. I don't think so!!
By lani1122

1/17/08 at 9:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

ATTENTION GIRLY-GIRL IS SPREADING FALSE LIES TO MAKE THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN LOOK BAD. BE CAREFUL WITH CLINTON SUPPORTERS, THEY WILL DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET THE CLINTONS BACK IN POWER...WE'VE ALREADY SEEN THEIR SHADY TACTICS.

If you would like to share your opinion regarding their (Teachers Union) lawsuit here is her email Lynn.Warne@nsea-nv.org
By Judy

1/17/08 at 2:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

How will all the doctors and nurses that are on staff during caucus hours go to caucus? What about the 711 clerks that have to work? This is a bogus power play by the union bosses and it will back fire on them & Obama before the election in November.
By FJR

1/18/08 at 5:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Please go caucus for Obama and tell everyone about Clintons and their record.

Anyone who wants to see the true Hillary, ask her or her supporters why she waffled after initially supporting NY GOV. Spitzer's plan to grant Drivers Licenses to illegal aliens in NY State; remember that terrible debate answer and then the aftermath in which she received a lot of negative airplay. The former President Bill Clinton asked the Governor to pull his plan so Hillary would not have to answer any more questions about it to get her off the hook. Look it up. That is the big supporter of Latinos.

Please call out Obama on his comments in the debate and check with any relatives or anyone else you know in Chicago to see if he has that kind of record there of saying anything to win the moment and move on with your vote to the next audience.

The Clintons record in the White House is they never stayed around to fight for us. They caved in on Affirmative Action and Welfare Reform, and most importantly, their Crime Bill that they brag put so many more officers on the street is also singularly responsible for a generation of historically high incarceration rates for black and brown people in this country. We also have the Clinton years to thank for the mandatory sentencing guidelines, eliminating the discretion of judges, and the disparity in sentencing between crack/cocaine sentences.

We Democrats mobilized to rally around them in 1998 and defend them from attacks, and that was entirely appropriate then. But they are the attackers now, attacking our Union and Obama just to make some kind of triumphant return to the White House; and we have to let them know that we love them but we need bolder, bigger cajones this time around. We need a homerun to sweep in majorities in both Houses of Congress with a message of hope and unity; and then we can claim a mandate to enact sweeping changes in legislation.

The truth that everyone reading this knows in his/her heart is that:

1. Any of our three Democratic candidates CAN win in November.

2. Only one could just as easily lose. (HRC is the only candidate with higher negative ratings than favorable one among all DEM and REP candidates)

3. And only one could win HUGE. (Obama has the biggest margin between favorable and negative ratings among all DEM and REP candidates)

We gotta go for it! This is why the female Senator McCaskill from MO and Gov. Napolitano from AZ along with Native American Sen. Nelson of Nebraska all endorsed Obama last week. No one wants the name Clinton on top of the ballot in their state, except the Republicans.

So please don't stay home. Everyone must go out Saturday and share your views with your neighbors. Go For It. And Ba-Rock the Vote!!!
By prouddemocrat

1/18/08 at 7:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama is much more progressive than Clinton, and yet he still appeals to many more Independents and Republicans than Clinton. If we want to get things done in DC, the right way, Obama is the one who has a history of creating the working majority necessary to accomplish it -- be it social security, medicare, a meaningful energy policy, enhanced natl security to real health care and a vibrant economy. Clinton's campaign continues to spread ridiculous and misleading information about Obama, which is just a signal that the old guard is threatened and is fighting for the position it feels entitled to. Long time loyalties to the family from Arkansas should give way to a true movement of change that isn't based on partisan politics. Vote your conscience. Vote Obama.
By cnmircea

1/18/08 at 7:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Why Hillary is more electable than any other democrat?
Watch the interview with the African-American Sen. Charles Rengel at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Full address:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/vi...
By JohnRoberts

1/21/08 at 2:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

JCJCD - stop spreading your propaganda videos on youtube!

You have been uploading hundreds of videos and have DISABLED the comments and ratings on them because you don't want users to post the reality on your videos!!!!

YOU ARE NOTHING BUT DIRTY! Your smearing tactics are very deceitful and we will get you REMOVED from YOUTUBE for your propaganda and dirty smearing attacks. You are as DIRTY as the party you're campaigning for, the Clintons.

SHAME ON YOU for posting hundreds of videos!! People are catching on to what the Clinton campaign has been up to... Smear campaigns and dirty attacks.

Everyone realizes how dirty the Clinton camp is. SHAME on you jcjcd! Everyone who's against his nasty actions and attacks, complain to YouTube and have jcjcd's videos removed! Be a man and allow people to be able to respond to your videos instead of hiding. You know the truth hurts and you just want to suppress the American people's say! Time to take action against jcjcd!!!

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question