News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Fri. April 8, 2016: This is what I wrote last week … I’m going with Saudi Arabia “maybe” next week prisoner release? Complaining there is so much material for Obama’s America, I often switch topics even after I have settled on the new episode’s subject.
So although it had been my intent to do Obama’s prison release failure which had been bumped last week in favor of the Saud family goons, I must bump prison release again for a more pressing matter than all the prisoners unjustly languishing in prisons because of President Obama.
The photo above is President Obama today, back in Illinois to visit the law school where he taught long ago at an early stage of his plan to become President. He was there today to yet again justify his BAD decision to nominate White Boy Judge Garland to the Supreme Court where Garland is very unlikely to ever serve. Obama’s America already dug into those two episodes ago so this week is not about that.
But Obama’s law school visit is a good lead in to today’s episode
President Obama fancies himself a lot of things one of many being a legal scholar when what he should fancy himself what is true is his fundamental FAILURE as President of the United States to bring Change to America.
Obama doesn’t fancy that moniker at all but he should for one very good reason it is true unlike all that he does credit himself. So the reason prisoner release got bumped again is because we are in the midst of the Presidential campaign as you have noticed and Obama’s candidate Hillary Clinton is benefiting greatly from a legal scam so called “super” delegates, over 700 UNELECTED delegates to the Democratic Convention and 30% of the votes needed to get nominated as the Democrats candidate for President.
They are almost all in Clinton’s pocket of course and they are the reason Bernie Sanders could be prevented from being the Presidential candidate instead of one half of the Con Team of Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Obama has no problem with UNELECTED “super” delegates but he should as a self-proclaimed legal scholar, and even more because it shatters any claim to integrity the leadership of the Party he leads might claim.
The fact is a “legal scholar” (sic) and President he should be the first to claim these unelected delegates are UNCONSTITUTIONAL but since President Obama is incapable of doing so I will do so for him and you.
Yes, I know as well as anyone ‘private’ organizations have the right to make virtually any rules they wish. But here is the problem with the Democratic Party so called “super” delegates properly UNELECTED delegates and the amount of them.
Since the selection of the most important public official in the nation the President of the United States is the direct result of our two party system and their candidate selection process the Democratic and Republican Parties are NOT private groups under any definition which would allow them to create any rules for members they see fit by majority decision or any other method.
The parties have a clearly PUBLIC function and while most of their rules would be governed by typical ‘”organizational protections” under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights NOT when their ELECTION process for delegates who will choose their candidate for President of the United States UNDERMINES the very nature of that election process …
That when 30% of appointed NOT elected delegates can have a deciding impact on who that candidate is that DISENFRANCHISES all those who in each state participate in primaries and caucuses. So called “super delegates” can in fact in various scenarios “steal” the nomination for one candidate or another by supplying one candidate or another a majority that they would not have reached WITHOUT these unelected delegate votes.
FURTHER there is an additional if more subtle power “super delegates” have which also disenfranchises the selection process in the very existence of “super delegates” and their potential to be the deciding factor in the nominating process – has an impact on the process itself by potentially allowing one candidate or another to present themselves as having accumulating significant support that ONLY exists because a large number of the UNELECTED delegates pledge their support and often even before any primaries or caucuses take place. As they have for Hillary Clinton.
In fact, we see that in the all important media coverage Presidential candidates receive and are have been for the last 6 months.
If any candidate can claim that they expect to receive 600 – 700 votes of unelected delegates that will have a material impact on the perception of and prospects of ALL other candidates and potential candidates and that will become a factor in how voters in primaries and caucuses judge the viability of one candidate and the other candidates.
It is why until lately Bernie Sanders received only a very small amount of coverage compared to Clinton and also as the hopeless underdog because of all the so called “super” delegates Clinton can claim is hers.
In fact the Democratic Party even admits they created a large group of unelected delegates so they could CONTROL the nominating process and prevent certain “kinds” of candidates from gaining their Presidential nomination! So the party structure which by definition must be a disinterested arbiter of the process making sure it is FAIR to all accomplishes the opposite makes the process into a sham under various circumstances such as right now.
That is a clear case of election process voter DISENFRANCHISEMENT!
UNELECTED delegates in the nomination of major party candidates for President of the United States is clearly an UNCONSTITUTIONAL abridgment of the election process at the very heart of the American form of government in unfairly diminishing the impact of those who choose to vote in primaries and caucuses to choose the Presidential candidate.
IMAGINE if in ‘normal’ primaries in addition to those who vote on primary day there were groups of UNELECTED “super voters” who could add their votes to the final count to decide who the nominee for Congress, or state representative or local council member, etc. will be Would that be Constitutional. Absolutely not!.
I believe … this matter can be brought before the Supreme Court without having to first make its way through the lower courts because the impact any decision will have on THIS election and the selection of the Democratic Party candidate for President.
Looks like I am the “legal scholar” not Barack Obama although it would not make any difference. His priority #1 right now is to get Hillary Clinton elected President whatever it takes. Damn Constitutional law.
Why because Hillary Clinton is just like Obama and she will protect his “legacy” (sic) by being just like him, who will not expose his failure by having another President just like him concerned about themselves not us.
Bernie Sanders election as President and his sincere PROGRESSIVE agenda would expose Obama’s failure every day of the Sanders Presidency.
So wannabe legal scholar Barack Obama this episode is a lesson in Constitutional law for you and even more about the integrity you lack.
