but I'm shocked that Hillary Clinton is fighting to change the
Democratic National Conventions rules.
She's a fighter, that is good, and she is even better as an underdog.
And as a fighter you never say 'uncle'. So I expect politicians to be
nasty and cut throat if required.
So it is par for the course that Hillary wants to change the rules, she
agreed to at the start of this process to gain an advantage, since she's down.
What is surprising, is that there is no out pour of disgust at Hillary
trying to change a democratic system. She might say she is fighting
for the democratic votes of FL and MI, but they, failed to follow
the rules. They freely self selected themselves out by not following the rules! It is suspect
that she is anything other than a neutral observer.
How is it that anyone could agree that Hillary can choose to take away
trust in a system to serve her needs? Is someone out there alarmed by
this? Is this what presidents should do?
It is hard to choose when to trust and when to control, but something
here is somehow entitled above the system. Which seems frightening to
me, and even more so when it's understandable to many or not ringing
alarm bells in a country built on democracy and freedom to choose your
representatives.
Http://news.bbc.co.uk/mobile/bbc_news/top_stories/742/74289/story7428909.shtml?
1 comment:
Politics is about contol. The winner meets the desires of largest voting entitlement block, AND works the system best to his or her goals.
I don't think democracy enters into it on the part of any candidate - save the lip service they pay to it to satisfy the patriot entitlement group.
Post a Comment