Obama Sued to Win His First Election...why the feigned outrage?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

a new MyDD diary today called "Clinton Campaign Threatens to Sue Texas Democratic Party."

Obama followers are apparently outraged that an opponent might challenge election processes or procedures in a contested race.


Given Obama's history, that's surprising.


Yesterday Todd Spivak of HoustonPress.com reminded us how Obama won his first Illinois election:


He was just 35 when in 1996 he won his first bid for
political office. Even many of his staunchest supporters, such as
Black, still resent the strong-arm tactics Obama employed to win his
seat in the Illinois Legislature.


Obama hired fellow Harvard Law alum and election law expert Thomas
Johnson to challenge the nominating petitions of four other candidates,
including the popular incumbent, Alice Palmer, a liberal activist who
had held the seat for several years, according to an April 2007 Chicago
Tribune report.


Obama found enough flaws in the petition sheets -- to appear on the
ballot, candidates needed 757 signatures from registered voters living
within the district -- to knock off all the other Democratic
contenders. He won the seat unopposed.


"A close examination of Obama's first campaign clouds the image he
has cultivated throughout his political career," wrote Tribune
political reporters David Jackson and Ray Long. "The man now running
for president on a message of giving a voice to the voiceless first
entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by
clearing it."

The Spivak story is here: http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-02-28/news/barack-obama-screamed-at-me/4

[grantcart]

1. It is an old story but thank you for bringing it up and reassuring everyone

that in the event of a repeat of 2000 we have a candidate who not only is a constitutional scholar but also is not afraid to do what it takes to win legally and ethically.

Half of the time you are arguing that he is too tough and half of the time that he is not tough enough.

I guess this is what your left with when you can't formulate a message that your candidate is better.

[rocktivity]

2. If their petition sheets were wrong, THEIR PETITION SHEETS WERE WRONG.

Were HIS petition sheets wrong? If not, what's the problem--should he have LET himself be defeated by people who were either too dishonest, ignorant, or just plain lazy to ensure that they were obeying the rules? No one should be rewarded for breaking rules they agreed to play by.

:boring:
rocknation

[BearSquirrel2]

22. If you can't get a good 3000 signatures ...

Really, a good campaign would go WAY over and above to make sure they cannot be challenged. Likely, he just saw that folks were doing sloppy work. After all, if they had fradulant signatures, that is anti-democratic.

[SoFlaJet]

3. So how much do you get paid

to work at and spread your talking points here at DU? You people are PATHETIC-anything to justify usurping the will of the people is perfectly alright as long as it benefits Hillary Clinton. You remind me of the GOP in Florida in 2000

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

4. March 5th, please.

[texas_indy]

5. Lot of difference between Obama and Hillary for those with an open mind.

Obama sued to FOLLOW THE RULE!

Hillary will sue to CHANGE THE RULES! The very same rules Texas democrats had follwed for 40 years!


Texas is Obama country! VIVA Obama!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd-MVU4vtU

[Window]

20. Take 'em to school.

:thumbsup:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

6. Your OP shows that Obama will fight to see the rule of law obeyed

WHile your candidate wants rules broken when she's losing.

I can see why it would upset you that Obama knows the law
(he was President of Harvard Law Review, Hillary failed the DC bar)
and that he WILL fight to see the law followed.

Glad you posted this, it proves his strength and Hillary's weakness.

[truedelphi]

24. Thanks for the sanity expressed in your posting WYVC. n/t

[mopinko]

25. egggzactly

they couldn't get less than a thousand valid signatures? :wtf: thanks for playing, now go home is the correct response.

[cali]

7. outraged about the potential TX lawsuit? Bwahahaha. Not at all.

I think it's a riot. Simply looks desperate, and desperation smells worse than anything to voters. I say, go for it, Hill. Between that and her bizarre insistence that if Obama doesn't win all 4 primaries on Tuesday, he isn't a viable candidate; she's making herself look like a joke. That's not good for her, but it's quite good for Obama. WTF is wrong with that campaign?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

8. This man never ceases to amaze me with his hypocrisy and outright lies.

"Change politics as usual in Washington!"

Yeah right!

[shadowknows69]

10. Bwah ha ha ha ha ha ha

You Hillary supporters are really becoming laughable.

[dionysus]

17. sounds like someone needs their banky...

[Window]

21. Every thing Hillary and her followers do makes

Obama look better and better.


:rofl:

[Occam Bandage]

9. So he uncovered that his opponents were subverting the process by providing fraudulent petitions?

Good.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

13. read the entire 5 page report to see how he was made a US Sentaor by Kingpin Jones

[Occam Bandage]

16. Stay on topic. Do you have a problem with Democrats fighting opponents who try to bend the rules?

[Alexander]

23. Obviously. The OP is a Hillary supporter.

[Alexander]

11. So they didn't have the 757 signatures, and somehow this is Obama's fault.

:eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

12. HOW DARE HE FIGHT TO UPHOLD ELECTION LAW!!!!!!! I'M OUTRAGED!!!!!!!

[blm]

14. Rezko is FEIGNED OUTRAGE from those who think Jackson Stephens and BCCI deserved

to be protected by Clinton throughout the 90s as he was also protecting BushInc, Dubai and Saudi royals.

Care to discuss the limits of FEIGNING OUTRAGE?

[dionysus]

15. you are comparing apples and oranges. try again....

[blogslut]

18. Who's feigning?

You don't wake a sleeping giant and then them tell him to sit down.

The Texas Primary/Caucus system has been in place for 36 years. The process worked fine for all the years that the Democratic machine ignored us and allowed us to fall into complacency. Now, Texas Democrats are awake and hungry and they want to vote. All over the state, county clerks are reporting a five-fold increase in Democratic turnout for this primary, over 2004. Republicans aren't "crossing over" to game our primary. They are switching parties. Texas is turning blue, or at least, true violet.

Hillary Clinton has a choice here. She can choose her battles. If she wants to sue the Democratic party of Texas for rules they've had in place for 36 years, then so be it. A spark caught flame in the hearts of Texas voters and she wants to throw a bucket of water on the whole thing. I say she's too late. There's wind feeding this fire.

If her campaign wants to waste their money on some drippy lawsuit, be my guest. Go ahead and piss off Texas Democrats. I double-dog dare her.

[femmedem]

29. Beautifully written post. Thank you. n/t

[tammywammy]

34. Excellent post!

:)

[bowens43]

19. You don't see a difference between

suing to prevent election fraud and suing to change legal rules that already exist so that they favor you ?

No doubt a hillary supporter....cheat, steal, lie, distort, whatever it takes to put Hillary on the throne that is rightfully hers.

YOu just don't get it, it's shit like this that has sunk Hillary. We, as Nation, are sick and tired of it.

[Zodiak]

31. Not only that

But whatever she does to petulantly try to force her way into the nomination will only hurt Obama in the general election and paint this whole party as a bunch of hypocrites.

Of course, that is what the DLC does.....they scream and kick and threaten...and when they do not get their way, the enable the Republicans to win. After all, having a Republican win is not near as bad as losing their comfy lead position in the Democratic party....the voters and the American people be damned.

This is what the DLC does in Congress, during elections, in committees, and in inter- and intra-party negotiations. They are moles and enablers.....I hope to God we can get rid of them without them taking the party down at the same time. After all, President McCain is acceptable to them....he's a "centrist" who takes from the same corporate sponsors, you know.

[Radical Activist]

26. No it wasn't a lawsuit.

You need to read a little more and work on understanding the definition of a lawsuit.

[Blue_Roses]

27. Why is this endorsement from one of the very ones

complaining about him?:shrug:

Illinois State Representatives:

Rep. Monique Davis

[Blue_Roses]

36. Todd Spivak--the author of this piece left out quite a bit

Spivak and Obama

*This Houston Press article by former Illinois weekly newspaper reporter Todd Spivak is gaining some notoriety on the Intertubes today. The lede centers on how Barack Obama was upset at an article Spivak had written years ago for the Illinois Times…

"It’s not quite eight in the morning and Barack Obama is on the phone screaming at me. He liked the story I wrote about him a couple weeks ago, but not this garbage."


*The IT story in question is still online. The basic premise is that some of Obama’s fellow African-American legislators didn’t care for him much (which is accurate) and a few didn’t support his US Senate campaign (also accurate), and that Obama didn’t start winning the black vote until Blair Hull was essentially knocked out of contention (grossly misleading)…

"But in the weeks leading up to the election, back when multi-millionaire candidate Blair Hull led the pack of six candidates, polls showed a mere one-third of African-American voters had decided on Obama. It wasn’t until Hull’s campaign imploded, after revelations of a contentious divorce, that Obama’s ambition to become the Senate’s lone black member was dubbed a historic movement."

The IT piece completely ignored the history of how black votes tend to break late. Hull’s implosion had far less to do with Obama picking up black votes than Obama’s wooing of white Chicago-area voters, who were repulsed by the allegations against the newly disgraced millionaire and attracted to Obama’s TV ads.

* But Spivak’s Illinois Times story does cover some ground that reporters in the far more recent past have tried without success to retrace. Black state legislators were much more open with their criticisms back then than they are today, now that Obama is in the hunt for the presidency…

more here...

http://thecapitolfaxblog.com/2008/02/28/spivak-and-obama/

_________________________________


Seems there really is TWO SIDES to every story.:shrug:

[ElsewheresDaughter]

45. there really is 3 sides to every story..Obama's, Spivak's and the truth

[indimuse]

28. AND HAD expanded access to the ballot box...WHAT?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,1,57567.story

The day after New Year's 1996, operatives for Barack Obama filed into a barren hearing room of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners.

There they began the tedious process of challenging hundreds of signatures on the nominating petitions of state Sen. Alice Palmer, the longtime progressive activist

from the city's South Side. And they kept challenging petitions until every one of Obama's four Democratic primary rivals was forced off the ballot.

Fresh from his work as a civil rights lawyer and head of a voter registration project that expanded access to the ballot box, Obama launched his first campaign for the

Illinois Senate saying he wanted to empower disenfranchised citizens.

But in that initial bid for political office, Obama quickly mastered the bare-knuckle arts of Chicago electoral politics. His overwhelming legal onslaught signaled his

impatience to gain office, even if that meant elbowing aside an elder stateswoman like Palmer.

A close examination of Obama's first campaign clouds the image he has cultivated throughout his political career: The man now running for president on a message of

giving a voice to the voiceless first entered public office not by leveling the playing field, but by clearing it.

One of the candidates he eliminated, long-shot contender Gha-is Askia, now says that Obama's petition challenges belied his image as a champion of the little guy

and crusader for voter rights.

"Why say you're for a new tomorrow, then do old-style Chicago politics to remove legitimate candidates?" Askia said. "He talks about honor and democracy, but what

honor is there in getting rid of every other candidate so you can run scot-free? Why not let the people decide?"

In a recent interview, Obama granted that "there's a legitimate argument to be made that you shouldn't create barriers to people getting on the ballot."

But the unsparing legal tactics were justified, he said, by obvious flaws in his opponents' signature sheets. "To my mind, we were just abiding by the rules that had

been set up," Obama recalled.

"I gave some thought to … should people be on the ballot even if they didn't meet the requirements," he said. "My conclusion was that if you couldn't run a successful

petition drive, then that raised questions in terms of how effective a representative you were going to be."

Asked whether the district's primary voters were well-served by having only one candidate, Obama smiled and said: "I think they ended up with a very good state

senator."



Obama behind challenges
America has been defined in part by civil rights and good government battles fought out in Chicago's 13th District, which in 1996 spanned Hyde Park mansions, South

Shore bungalows and poverty-bitten precincts of Englewood.

It was in this part of the city that an eager reform Democrat by the name of Abner Mikva first entered elected office in the 1950s. And here a young, brash minister

named Jesse Jackson ran Operation Breadbasket, leading marchers who sought to pressure grocery chains to hire minorities.

Palmer served the district in the Illinois Senate for much of the 1990s. Decades earlier, she was working as a community organizer in the area when Obama was

growing up in Hawaii and Indonesia. She risked her safe seat to run for Congress and touted Obama as a suitable successor, according to news accounts and

interviews.

But when Palmer got clobbered in that November 1995 special congressional race, her supporters asked Obama to fold his campaign so she could easily retain her

state Senate seat.

Obama not only refused to step aside, he filed challenges that nullified Palmer's hastily gathered nominating petitions, forcing her to withdraw.

"I liked Alice Palmer a lot. I thought she was a good public servant," Obama said. "It was very awkward. That part of it I wish had played out entirely differently."

His choice divided veteran Chicago political activists.

"There was friction about the decision he made," said City Colleges of Chicago professor emeritus Timuel Black, who tried to negotiate with Obama on Palmer's

behalf. "There were deep disagreements."

Had Palmer survived the petition challenge, Obama would have faced the daunting task of taking on an incumbent senator. Palmer's elimination marked the first of

several fortuitous political moments in Obama's electoral success: He won the 2004 primary and general elections for U.S. Senate after tough challengers imploded

when their messy divorce files were unsealed.

[Radical Activist]

33. Has Hillary jumped on the Green collar job bandwagon?

That's nice to see. One of the chapters in Obama's book from over a year ago is about that. I guess it lacks substance when he writes about it.

[indimuse]

35. YOU need to get your facts straight!!

She has all along talked about Green Collar Jobs...Obama had ZERO plans...when he decided to run...HE HAD TO COPY others to enter...Everybody knows this! ha! Who had closer relations to Gore...was HIS passion!!? I'm certain they have discussed at length long before Obama was out of his pampers...:) Oh ad WHAT is Obama's passion again...Oh yes.OBAMA!

[Radical Activist]

37. hmm...really? Because Obama's book was released before he ran and it covered the topic

of green collar jobs in detail with some specific proposals. He was even talking about it when he ran for US Senate in '04. It sounds like you know a lot less about Obama than you think you do.

[indimuse]

38. you mean Audacity of Hope he lifted from his Rev...Rev Wright??

please...fraud master.

[Radical Activist]

39. lol I mean the book you obviously haven't read

and are clueless about. Just as clueless as you are about Obama in general.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

30. Your level of desperation seems to warrant this action. Here you go:

[TheZug]

32. She's going to sue over a system that's existed since 1972?

And apparently was not so offensive when her husband ran in 92?

[The Anti-Bush]

41. If she wants to stop the caucus, then why not stop the primary too?

Come on Hillary, all or nothing.

[VotesForWomen]

40. O lawsuit is of course legit; any by hillary is "dirty trick." nt

[GeorgeGist]

42. It's a trifecta

stupid.

[theboss]

43. They should have been punished for being bad Chicago politicians then

I'm guessing there is more to this story than is reported. But Old Man Daley used to use the signature petition as a weapon in every election.

1. On the one hand, he would gather hundreds of thousands of signatures for his own petition. I believe his record was 780-page petition.

2. On the other hand, he had his board of elections go over the Republican and Independent petitions with a fine tooth comb. Any reason to eliminate a name was used.

I'm not saying that Obama's approach was particularly noble. But anyone running in Illinois should always bury the needle on the election petition.

[Infinite Hope]

44. There goes Clinton's argument that he isn't strong and decisive. :) n/t