I'm outraged, shocked and surprised!! Okay, maybe not.
Thanks to Zell Miller, there is a rule to deal with Joe Lieberman.
Lieberman's endorsement of Republican John McCain disqualifies him as a super-delegate to the Democratic National Convention under what is informally known as the Zell Miller rule, according to Democratic State Chairwoman Nancy DiNardo.


The fact that he's an Independent should disqualify him as a delegate.
And just how is this voter suppression Dan? Shouldn't the Democrats have the right to choose the delegates to their own convention?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 06:53 AM
"Shouldn't the Democrats have the right to choose the delegates to their own convention?"
Spartan is right again. Zell Miller btw, is more conservative than most repugnicans.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 08:50 AM
Zell Miller is an insane old man...perfect for the GOP. Maybe he could be McCain's running mate to add some conservative credibility to the ticket.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 09:13 AM
He wasn't insane until he spoke at the Republican Convention of 2004. Then again, do you label all the Blue Dog Democrats as insane? What about Harold Ford Jr.? They all share the same positions as Zell Miller.
Posted by: Kaitian | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 09:30 AM
Interesting. A Democrat crosses the aisle, and he's disqualified from being a delegate to the National Convention. A Republican crosses the aisle, and we make him our nominee.
Posted by: brian | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 09:34 AM
You know, Spart, that campaigns used to have platforms, ideas and plans that a candidate stood for. Over time these platforms, at least in the media, were replaced by slogans. You know like: "Tippecanoe and Tyler Too". And, "I Like Ike". This year your favored party candidates, the Democratics, have reduced the slogans to mere words. Obama is for HOPE. Clinton is for CHANGE. This went so far as one goofy New Mexican loser, I forget his name, saying: "I love change."
But as more time passes and the Democraticic voters' attention spans become shorter and shorter, the thoughtful eggheads of your party will recognize that words are simply too long and complicated to any longer appeal to Dem and indy voters.
May I suggest a vowel would be more attractive than a consonant? Specifically, I would recommend the letter U for the next election pitting Obama against Santorum. Obama, whom people are used to hearing say he is for very abstract things like hope, should use U as his central theme. One of the many benefits this would allow is that the jerk from New Mexico in a debate could say: "I love U." The audience would think he was throwing his chubby support to Obama, and, as it were, endorsing Obama. What do you think?
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 09:39 AM
"He wasn't insane until he spoke at the Republican Convention of 2004."
He wasn't -noticeably- insane until he spoke at the Republican Convention of 2004. Before that, he was just another Senator with a funny name. And for all the flak you throw at Robert Byrd, I do appreciate how the Republicans embraced a former segregationist with such open arms. That said, he was about as San Fransisco liberal a Democrat as Olympia Snowe is a deep southern conservative Republican. I don't know if that makes him crazy, but it puts him well beyond the mainstream.
'This year your favored party candidates, the Democratics, have reduced the slogans to mere words. Obama is for HOPE. Clinton is for CHANGE. This went so far as one goofy New Mexican loser, I forget his name, saying: "I love change."'
Really? Cause I thought the favored party candidates, the DEMONratsFROMHELL, were using slogans like "univeral health care", "out of Iraq", "energy independence", and "responsible government". Maybe I was paying too much attention to the debates, the party platforms, and the white-paper policies and not enough attention to bumper stickers on the backs of people's cars.
That said, Clinton is, in fact, not so much for change as for a return to her husband's 90s-era Third Way policies. This is a stark change from Shrub's "My way or the highway" policies, but not a radical departure from DC politics and conventional wisdom.
But none of that really matters to the keen minds of the conservative punditry, when they can just run around screaming "Vince Foster!" like cats in heat. Even beyond that, if you want to run Santorum for President, please please please please do. Perhaps you can wedge George Allen on the ticket somewhere. It could be the '12 reunion of the '06 Senatorial losers convention. Fantastic. I would endorse that ticket straight till Nov 6th, then laugh all the way to the polling both.
Posted by: IslamoLlama | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:07 AM
"Ladies and gentlemen, I am proud to be here at the first Democraticic candidates' debate for the election of 2012. I come to you this evening as the candidate for U. Oh, a question from the audience already? Well I'm always ready to exchange ideas and answer questions. Shoot."
"Well, Mr. Obama, you said you were for us during your last attempt at the nomination, but you didn't win. How will it work better for you this time?"
"Well, young lady, I am not for you, Y-O-U any longer. Actually, I never really was. I was for H-O-P-E. But in this election I am definitely for U, not you. I have just published my book promised to be placed by the New York Times on their best seller list immediately after publication. The title of my book is " U, U, U. I'm in Love with U, U, U." I originally thought I'd call it "The Audacity of U", but then thought that was not very original thinking. It's a real bargain at $19.95. I'm sure you will like it."
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:35 AM
Accusing the dems of being anymore (or less) slogan driven than republicans (Mission Accomplished) is borderline retarded.
And he's not disqualified because he crossed the aisle, he's disqualified because he never crossed back. I'm not sure if you were paying attention the last time around but HE DIDN'T RUN AS A DEMOCRAT in the last election. Is the GOP inviting Bernie Sanders to the convention as a Super Delegate?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:36 AM
"...when they can just run around screaming "Vince Foster!" like cats in heat."
That's quite a metaphor there, Spart. Were you perhaps a member of the Elizabethan Club at Yale?
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:41 AM
"That's quite a metaphor there, Spart. Were you perhaps a member of the Elizabethan Club at Yale?"
I obviously am not a member. Spart's nonsensical comparison is actually a simile.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:44 AM
Here's a rundown on a few facts, LameLlama, since you are having a difficult time. Universal Health Care was promised by Bill Clinton in 1992, and it didn't happen. It has less than a 50-50 chance of happening under a Democratic regime, if in fact we get one in November. Regardless who wins in November, all troops will not be coming home from Iraq, because you see no one wants Iraq to meltdown. US troops will be there for quite some time. Sorry to burst your bubble. Energy independence is dozens of years away, even if steps are taken to gain it. You see, the trillions(yes, TRILLIONS) of barrels of oil the US has is either locked up in shale mostly in Colorado, or in ANWAR. Both projects would not be environmentally friendly, so the Democratics can't use this plentiful energy supply. Politics, you see, you Dems have your enviro nuts to deal with. As for responsible government, how's that earmark thing going for you, bud? The Democratic leadership voted to keep their earmarking power. That's what you call responsible? And various other scandals involving Democratics exist. So much for your slogans. You better go back to the U that Fred suggested.
Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:46 AM
And it wasn't my comparison to begin with...
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:47 AM
MMMMMMMMMMMMYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWW VINCE FOSTER VINCE FOSTER MMMMMMMMMMMMYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWW. (Thought I'd try it out just to get the feel of it.)
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:54 AM
"And it wasn't my comparison to begin with..."
Don't keep us in suspense, Spart. Who IS the owner of this gleaming jewel?
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 10:57 AM
I never said it period you buffoon. Look at the post again, it was Islamo. Reading comprehension not a requirement in your day?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:02 AM
It must be Howard "the Yowlerd" Dean who created it. No?
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:03 AM
"I never said it period you buffoon. Look at the post again, it was Islamo. Reading comprehension not a requirement in your day?"
My, my you are a harsh and judgmental critic, Spart, but I have been under the impression that you and Moe were the same bird. Now I see this has been unfair to Moe. Moe is the complete gentleman. You say such hurtful things.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Fred get your head out of that warm place...it's your ass. I never said it. Reread the post moron.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:08 AM
"And for all the flak you throw at Robert Byrd, I do appreciate how the Republicans embraced a former segregationist."
OH for pity's sake. Are you ACTUALLY so full of BS that you see no difference between a "segregationist" and a grand pooba of the KKK? Ahole it wasn't "segregationists" that were hanging black people for the color of their skin. Geeze you people can justify any freekin thing can't you?
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:10 AM
" Buffoon: 1: a ludicrous figure : clown2 : a gross and usually ill-educated or stupid person
Well, I am not a figure, Spart, I am just a person, though I suppose the rest is close enough.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:12 AM
If you don't stop disregarding my sensitivities, Spart, I'm going to start bawling like a Hillary.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Fred....It was the LameLLama who said it, quit annoying the Spartan.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:16 AM
So maybe you're a figurine?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:17 AM
"I never said it period you buffoon. Look at the post again, it was Islamo. Reading comprehension not a requirement in your day?"
He's not a big fan of the lie-brul book lern'n.
Posted by: IslamoLlama | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:18 AM
"Ahole it wasn't "segregationists" that were hanging black people for the color of their skin. Geeze you people can justify any freekin thing can't you?"
Wow? Really? So the lynch mobs of the fifties were composed of people in favor of integration? That's news to me. All this time, I thought the KKK was pro-segregation. Turns out the KKK was trying to integrate black people at the end of a noose. Does this have any correlation between Whole Foods and fascism?
Posted by: IslamoLlama | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Perhaps I have been deceived in thinking you were always the perfect gentleman, Moe/Boob/chris. What a letdown.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:20 AM
"Wow? Really? So the lynch mobs of the fifties were composed of people in favor of integration?"
Lama since you're still in HS I try to be a little easy on you but now I have to call you a dumb ass. I'm not going to give a history lesson though it is obvious youshould be in the library rather than screwing around here. Yes, sweet cheeks there is one hell of a difference between Lester Maddox and his axe handle and thos stupid, fucking red-neck, klan members like the one WVa put in congress.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:32 AM
"Actually ladies and gentlemen, U has a rather important place in our cultural and legal history. It is not new; I am just bringing into sharp focus one might say during my campaign. For example, there was the old U-TurnSunBurn Saloon in Panama City Beach, FL, unhappily destroyed in a hurricane a few years ago. And of course the U-turn auto maneuver from which it was derived."
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:33 AM
'Scuse me. Having lived a wee bit longer and having actually met these kinds of assholes I am VERY SURE I know more about them than some HS kid who only heard about them on MTV
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:34 AM
A modern instance is the U-Tri golf ball manufactured by Precept. Long, yet with reasonably good spin.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:36 AM
"Long, yet with reasonably good spin."
"In fact many people have said the same about me, Senator Obama.
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:39 AM
Well we the public, have recently learned, the REAL reason why the Hildebeast was shedding tears the other night. Seems her campaign is broke. She has to dig into her, uhum, I mean Bills millions to fund her campaign. That's gotta hurt. Her self-imposed entitlement for POTUS, is slowly eroding away. Hillary, I FFFFEEELLLL your pain. NOT!
Posted by: DonnaInMichigan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:44 AM
"Then there is that venerable old rental firm U-Haul helping the working class move in an economical manner. And this is the focal-point where U intersects with labor's interests."
Posted by: Fred Beloit | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 11:51 AM
Yeah, I expect cut,run,surrender out of DaBoob and his cd alter ego Chrissy but I expected better out of the school girl. C'mon back LLama and defend your point. Explain to us why George Wallace can be forgiven but Zell Miller should be villified.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 02:22 PM
Spartan couldn't list any accomplishments of Zell Miller if he tried. He just likes to throw out the boogyman "Zell Miller! Teh Evil one!"
So, when Zell tried to remove the Confederate Flag from the GA capitol pre-1996 Olympics, he did it out of his overwhelming racist hatreds? Or the fact that he left office in 1998 as GA's GOVERNOR with the highest exit approval rating in the state's history, despite that? Or that he only became a SEANATOR after the death of Paul Coverdale and at the bequest of Gov. Roy Barnes?
You know nothing of the man, a true American hero.
Posted by: Techie | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 02:39 PM
Actually having lived on the SC/GA border during most of that time frame I could name ALL of those accomplishments. As for why he wanted to remove the flag before the '96 olympics? It was to save his state embarrasment not out of some warm fuzzy feeling he hads for blacks in his state.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 02:49 PM
Isn't Zell the geezer who wanted to have a duel with Chris Matthews?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AuBnlNjZq24
Them southern-types is funny...
Posted by: Chris | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 02:51 PM
"Isn't Zell the geezer who wanted to have a duel with Chris Matthews?"
Why on earth would anyone think a guy like that was crazy?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 02:54 PM
I have no idea why people keep picking on Spartan. I have no idea what Ga's state flag has to do with racism either but wtf.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 02:55 PM
Ha!! I'd like to punch Matthews in the mouth myself!
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 03:01 PM
It did used to contain a depiction of the confederate battle flag... of course it was added during desegregation a nice not so subtle hint.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 03:19 PM
Oh, boy, I love when the white boys jump up to protect the poor, downtrodden black man kept down and out by that Georgia flag. Are you idiots for real?
Posted by: templar knight | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 04:21 PM
"It did used to contain a depiction of the confederate battle flag."
Yeah as a former resident, I kinda knew that. I also know it was done in the 50's as a sort of memorial to soldiers. It was SC that put a naval jack up in the 60's during the civil rights struggle. Strangely both of these states have a 50% or better black voter population that has never pressed for a referendum on the issue, as did Mississippi. When polled most say they have bigger issues than a rag on a pole so outsiders had to get involved.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 04:22 PM
Oh and on a historic note. Georgia was the first colony to outlaw slavery. The first colony to make it legal was Mass.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 04:24 PM
"Georgia was the first colony to outlaw slavery. The first colony to make it legal was Mass."
It didn't take long for those roles to reverse though did it?
"Yeah as a former resident, I kinda knew that. I also know it was done in the 50's as a sort of memorial to soldiers."
That's the party line, but it was done very shortly after Brown v. Board of Ed. it was pretty clearly a response to that SCOTUS decision.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 04:33 PM
"Oh, boy, I love when the white boys jump up to protect the poor, downtrodden black man kept down and out by that Georgia flag. Are you idiots for real?"
I realize no one is physically hurt by the presence of a flag, but what is the purpose of the flag in question? I would think an uber patriot like yourself would resent the flag of another sovereign nation (in art or in whole) flying over the statehouse of a US state. Isn't that treason?
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 04:35 PM
oooo Sparty, that is the best argument I ever heard!! (well, read) Except that you're a wee bit off on some of that. Now, the one in SC was a Naval Jack flown in battle from the main mast only. The one in Ga was a representation of an ANV battle flag. Niether of these were "National" flags but were used so people knew where to go in battle. SO the flag of a sovereign nation argument is a bit flat. Frankly the new Ga state flag looks more like the first national flag than the other. Now if it were MY state. My argument would be that monuments and memorials do not belong on state flags or state house domes. These things should represent the entire population of today. However, I also believe that this is something for the states themselves to decide, especially since that is what caused that war in the first place.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 05:06 PM
oooo Sparty, that is the best argument I ever heard!! (well, read) Except that you're a wee bit off on some of that. Now, the one in SC was a Naval Jack flown in battle from the main mast only. The one in Ga was a representation of an ANV battle flag. Niether of these were "National" flags but were used so people knew where to go in battle. SO the flag of a sovereign nation argument is a bit flat. Frankly the new Ga state flag looks more like the first national flag than the other. Now if it were MY state. My argument would be that monuments and memorials do not belong on state flags or state house domes. These things should represent the entire population of today. However, I also believe that this is something for the states themselves to decide, especially since that is what caused that war in the first place.
Posted by: Wahoo Willie Sez: | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 05:07 PM
So they were military flags (I was fully aware of the SC flag as I was on faculty at a Univ. in SC at that point and we voted on a resolution condemning the flying of the flag), minor difference. Still representative of a sovereign nation other than the US.
Posted by: TheSpartan | Thursday, February 07, 2008 at 05:09 PM