The Democratic race for nomination is still very much alive – and most likely to be decided by superdelegates

If you’re tired of waiting around for those super delegates to make a decision already, go to LobbyDelegates.com and push them to support Clinton or Obama

If you haven’t done so yet, please write a message to each of your state’s superdelegates at http://www.lobbydelegates.com

Obama Supporters:

Sending a note to current Obama supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Clinton supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Obama, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Obama. It’s that easy…

Clinton Supporters too …. !

It takes a moment, but what’s a few minutes now worth to get Clinton in office?! Those are really worth !

Sending a note to current Clinton supporters lets them know it’s appreciated, sending a note to current Obama supporters can hopefully sway them to change their vote to Clinton, and sending a note to the uncommitted folks will hopefully sway them to vote for Clinton. It’s that easy…

1. The electoral college was originally inserted into the constitution because the founders did not necessarily trust the vote of the common man. Indeed, at the founding, most states had property owning requirements before one could be a voter. Women, of course, did not count.

Don’t forget that most states ALSO had a minimum voting age of 21 in addition to the property requirement (even if you owned a required property value but were under 21, you had no vote). Also, some states barred voters based on other criteria as well and there were actually people who could vote for President but were unable to vote for their own governor or state legislator (religion couldn’t be a bar to voting for President but states could, and often did, prohibit some religious groups from voting in local elections where the Constitution was not believed to be applicable).

2. The electoral college was elected to cast their own vote. In the beginning, they were free to cast that vote in whatever manner they chose. It has been an evolving legal requirement with questions still arising as to whether an elector must cast their vote as the state voted.

Well, that’s one way of putting it, but it’s also a very, very “Reader’s Digest Condensed Version” way. (Of course, the full story would make Machiavelli realize he’s a mere political amateur.)

3. Senators were not elected by the people under the original constitution. The will of the people (House of Representatives) was to be countered by the interest of each state government (Senate.) This did change with the 17th amendment. Please note that the 17th amendment was not passed by the house and senate until 1911 and 1912 with it impacting the 1913 elections. Thus, it was the will of the founding fathers that not all voting should reflect the democratic will of the people.

Actually, the Amendment was proposed in 1911, passed by the Senate that year and the House in 1912 and sent to the States on May 13. Massachusetts was the first to ratify (on May 22) and Connecticut was the 36th (and last necessary) on April 8, 1913. (Arizona, which had been admitted as a state the year before was the 2nd state to ratify.) According to the Wiki entry on the Amendment, there were 8 states which had direct elections before the Amendment was ratified (OR, NV, AZ, CO, KS, MN, OK, MT) and Maryland held a special election to fill a Senate seat. The AZ elections (held in 1911, with statehood pending) had one senator elected as a Class 1 Senator (the seat would be up in 1916) and one senator elected as a Class 3 (the seat would be up in 1914). In 1914, all Class 3 Senators were up (32 of them); in 1916, all Class 1 seats were up (32 of them); and, in 1918, all Class 2 seats (the remaining 32) were up. When the new Senate was called into session in 1919, all Senators were there via direct election. Only Alaska and Hawai’i have never had Senators under the Constitution’s original direction. (And, since 1919, as far as I’m aware, the State Legislatures’ power to name US Senators has been taken over by the State Governors.)

Yoo continues to prove that one can not take back stupid, ignorant, bumbling, should be disbarred Attorney who argued for the ability of the president to usurp the People’s Rights resulting in acts of TREASON.

Yep, he’s credible…

.

Are Yoo [;-)] a Democrat? No? Didn’t think so. Then fut the shuck up.

Parties are private concerns (and in fact, the founders didn’t think much of factionalism to begin with, so affording parties constitutional privilege would have been far from their concern).

So if they decided to award delegates based on who’s got the best slicked-back hair (Reagan?) or on a coin toss or a Texas Hold’em tourney, that’s their concern, not yours. So STFU, Yoo, and go siddown.

Cheers,

Besides the fact that your question is completely besides the point, the torture of war prisoners is banned here:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

The US has signed, ratified international treaties that ban the mistreatment of prisoners of war. Due to the clause above, that ban has also become “the supreme Law of the Land” in the United States.

You’re welcome.

What are there creditinals? Are they Scholars in the subject of WAR and related data? They may have a masters in something, but most likely in law, but what other experience do they have? Oh, thats right, they have gone on book tours after they left a department in government on our dime! But I still go back to the main question, he has no credibility because he has based his findings on propaganda pushed by government officials to justify money to cronies with out accountability.

So, Scholar in the subject (any) or a person who says he knows and understands just because he got a degree in something? I go with the scholar!

JOHN YOO = WAR CRIMINAL

But, this whole mixture of “private” political party primaries with “public” elections is totally screwed. The D’s and the R’s can hold their own nominating primaries any old way they please and pay for it all themselves. Then there should be an actual public primary general election followed by a 2 way runoff. What’s so hard about that people? Oh, that would be actual democracy and we can’t have that in this country.

Neither did the framers envision “direct election by the people” of the president, as you seem to think. Instead, they cooked up something called the electoral college. Have you ever read the U. S. Constitution, Mr. Yoo?

Have your employers (past and present) ever asked you to confirm that you have at least read it, Mr. Yoo? But no, they certainly would not do that, would they?

1. The electoral college was originally inserted into the constitution because the founders did not necessarily trust the vote of the common man. Indeed, at the founding, most states had property owning requirements before one could be a voter. Women, of course, did not count.

2. The electoral college was elected to cast their own vote. In the beginning, they were free to cast that vote in whatever manner they chose. It has been an evolving legal requirement with questions still arising as to whether an elector must cast their vote as the state voted.

3. Senators were not elected by the people under the original constitution. The will of the people (House of Representatives) was to be countered by the interest of each state government (Senate.) This did change with the 17th amendment. Please note that the 17th amendment was not passed by the house and senate until 1911 and 1912 with it impacting the 1913 elections. Thus, it was the will of the founding fathers that not all voting should reflect the democratic will of the people.

John Yoo ranks right up their with the attorneys that were recruited by Hitler to support his terrible misdeeds. He should be disbarred for a lack of ethics and moral unfitness to practice law.

Let’s hope both of the Chickhawks are brought up on charges before the World Court.