You want a rigid adherence to the rules? THIS is what you get.

[BzaDem]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/29/obamas.first.campaign/index.html

---snip---

In his first race for office, seeking a state Senate seat on Chicago's gritty South Side in 1996, Obama effectively used election rules to eliminate his Democratic competition.

As a community organizer, he had helped register thousands of new voters. But when it came time to run for office, he employed Chicago rules to invalidate the voting petition signatures of three of his challengers.

The move denied each of them, including incumbent Alice Palmer, a longtime Chicago activist, a place on the ballot. It cleared the way for Obama to run unopposed on the Democratic ticket in a heavily Democrat district.

"That was Chicago politics," said John Kass, a veteran Chicago Tribune columnist. "Knock out your opposition, challenge their petitions, destroy your enemy, right?" Kass said. "It is how Barack Obama destroyed his enemies back in 1996 that conflicts with his message today. He may have gotten his start registering thousands of voters. But in that first race he made sure voters had just one choice."

---snip---

This really highlights the difference between a lot of Hillary supporters and a lot of Obama supporters. Many Obama supporters want to modify voting rights to adhere to the rules. Many Hillary supporters want to modify the rules to respect voting rights. (And please don't go on and on about how there is no right to vote in a primary. I am talking about the principle.)

For all those people here that don't think FL voters or MI voters should have any voice in picking our nominee, do any of you support Obama's tactics of using petition challenges to "obliterate" his opposition? If so, please post in this thread.