Bill defends lawsuit over NV caucus sites

Posted: Monday, January 14, 2008 7:56 PM by Mark Murray

From NBC/NJ's Mike Memoli and NBC's Abby Livingston, Sarah Demarest, and Mark Murray
LAS VEGAS -- Bill Clinton today defended a state NEA-backed lawsuit over caucus sites, saying that all Democrats should play by the same rules.

Clinton was asked about the suit this morning by a student at Green Valley High School, located in the Las Vegas suburb of Henderson. He said that, in essence, state Democrats made "a special rule only for" members of the Culinary union, the most powerful in the state, to be able to caucus at their work sites rather than at their home precincts. "I think the rules oughta be the same for everybody," he said. "I question why you would ever have a temporary caucus site and say only the people that work there -- i.e. the people that we know are going to vote in a certain way or we think they will -- should be able to caucus here. I think that we oughta make it more possible for everybody to vote."

(Of course, we'll ask again: If the Culinary Workers had endorsed Hillary, would there even be a lawsuit? And if so, would Bill be defending it?)

When asked next about the Culinary Workers endorsing Obama over Hillary, Clinton claimed that the campaign's voter outreach found that many members actually support his wife. "It will be interesting if they will be able to do so because you have to vote in public [at the caucus]," he said. "I believe if the test is who's got the best voting record for labor the answer is she does."

Speaking later at an event in Las Vegas, Clinton again emphasized the downside of a caucus rather than a primary. He claimed that polling taken in Nevada since Hillary's victory in the New Hampshire primary showed her with a steady lead among state Democrats, but that caucuses "may not be about public support." He implored the audience to "give voice to the majority." "Don't let other people out organize you," he said.

Bill Clinton is on the second day of a trip to the Silver State, which he called "a special, unusual, wonderful place." Chelsea Clinton joined him for the event in Henderson this morning, and he actually invited students to ask her questions as well as him. No one asked Chelsea a question, but she did come in handy when one of the students standing behind Clinton on stage became faint during the event. Chelsea walked her off the stage, and then rejoined the students who remained as they then sat, rather than stood, behind the former president.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Sickofitall "sore losers"

You are aboslutely right; the clinton's are sore losers! If any of this was favorable to their campaign, rest assured, they would have nothing to say about it. However, because it is to the advantage of another candidate, it becomes unfair. How fair is that? To steal the right of ones ability to freely choose by toying with voters thoughts and feelings about their candidates and doing this on a door-to-door level is just as sleezy as any other notion. This is the game the Clinton's played in NH and I am a NH resident. I can personally attest for this sort of bad campaigning. Unfortunately for the clinton's, I didn't go for it. I can somewhat understand the debates; they are carried out so the public can get an idea what each candidate stands for but, I don't understand reasoning to have a volunteer, campaign manager or whomever, show up at my door and give me this whole spew on other candidates just to try to steal my right of choice. I was actually for Hillary until I experienced this shortly before (24 hours or a little less) the polls opened. I thought that was in the poorest of taste! I voted for someone else because I cannot vision being a support to this sort of faulty politics and I cannot see where this sort of faulty politics can function in the best interest of the United States public.

Greg, NH (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 1:58 AM)

For those of you that are history buffs, Public Television is running a special on American Experience this week called "Oswald's Ghost." This explains the JFK, RFK and MLK, Jr., time frame. What I thought was amusing is that Hillary made a public statement that identified LBJ as in important key to establishing the civil rights bill.

For some reason, she failed to mention that John F. Kennedy and Robert worked on this bill for some time. After JFK's murder, Linden B. did endorse the bill however, was it his heart-felt commitment to civil rights that made him endorse or, was it because there was already the heat on the issue because of the Kennedy's and MLK, Jr? LBJ really didn't do anything for civil rights. He didn't engage himself on the front line as any of the Kennedy's. JFK and RFK are the ones that were TRULY responsible for the Civil Rights bill. He took advantage of someone elses hard work.

The big question is, if LBJ had to deal with the bill without the former hard work of the Kennedy's, would he have the commitment to establish the civil rights bill on his own? Probably not.

G, NH (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 2:14 AM)

The Clintons are pathetic and will do anything to win.

What a disapointment they have become and they are both ruining Bills Legacy even more. They need to shut up and get on the Obama Train.

Nobody wants 8 more years of Bush Clinton

jon battle creek mi (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 2:27 AM)

Well, after all Obama is not Simon pure,and criticism of him is not inadmissible,surely?

Vashia Pav,Astoria,New York (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 2:39 AM)

I'm sick of it all and we still have how many months left of this? I used to work at one of the strip hotels and when the Culinary endorsed Clinton in 1996, I didn't see them putting up a temporary voting place for us. So, why now? Yes, MLK will be busy with everyone coming in for the holiday, but there are other workers besides the strip workers who have to vote....when will we get the time? ANd, the strip is always busy. Funny, but other workers and myself always found the time to vote without the benefit of having a voting place at our hotel. This whole caucus thing is unfair period. And YES many Culinary workers will vote for Hillary. Not everyone is for Obama who is pulling the wool over his supporters eyes.He is a charmer, a talker and that is about it. At least the Clinton's have a proven record of getting the job done. When Bill was President yes he made mistakes, but he sure came through on all of his promises. But something goes wrong and it is always the Clinton's fault. Where is your proof? I thought that we were innocent UNTIL PROVEN guilty! But, alas, it is always easier to put the blame on someone then it is to have your actual facts straight.

mhaile (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 2:46 AM)

Dan Abrams is blaming the DC Media for fanning the flames on the race issue between Obama and Hillary.showing snipets from CNN,FOX and other media outlets.He should look at his own backyard first before throwing stones.Chris Matthews is,if not responsible for some or most of the distortion going on in the media today on Election 2008.

Free Bladensburg Maryland (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 2:53 AM)

Hussein Obama is cold, calculating, dishonest, unethical, divisive

martin (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 3:33 AM)

This is just another Clinton backed abuse of power.
I would like to know if Bill Clinton would say the same words had the Culinary Union endorsed his wife.
If I were Obama, I would pull the same trick the Clintons pulled in Iowa: Mass transportation of the union members.And even this did not work for them.
Clinton's statements are the same as franchising the whole union. Somenthing desperate must be done to allow everybody the right to caucus regardlees of who they are endorsing. A primary is not valid until everybody has had the same right to caucus for an election.This abuse of power is one more reason why we don't want the Clintons back in power.No more dinasties in the United States of America..

Manuel Geily, Miami, Florida (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:56 AM)

Bill Clinton said that Obama had said negative things about his wife 84 times.
There is nothing positive that can be said about the low end in Hillary's campaign.
If anyone has carried his campaign with the utmost dignity and honesty it is Barack Obama, our next President.

Sue Geily (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 7:01 AM)

Manuel Geily:
TO NBC/MSNBC
Please do not allow the Clinton backed programs in other television channels keep saying that NBC openly supports Barack Obama. They only want to stop you from being fair and exposing the truth.
The Clinton camp wants to put NBC and the rest of the press on the defensive, something which they have succeeded to do. The whole thing started with the Hillary tears then Bill denouncing the press for mistreating his wife. What the heck is this? This is a race for the Presidency of the United States, and not for a High School student governnment.

Sue Geily (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 7:13 AM)

CORRECTED MESSAGE:
THE CORRECT WORD IS DISENFRANCHISING AND NOT FRANCHISING THE WHOLE UNION AS WRITTEN IN MY PREVIOUS E-MAIL.
Manuel Geily

This is just another Clinton backed abuse of power.
I would like to know if Bill Clinton would say the same words had the Culinary Union endorsed his wife.
If I were Obama, I would pull the same trick the Clintons pulled in Iowa: Mass transportation of the union members.And even this did not work for them.
Clinton's statements are the same as disenfranchising the whole union. Somenthing desperate must be done to allow everybody the right to caucus regardlees of who they are endorsing. A primary is not valid until everybody has had the same right to caucus for an election.This abuse of power is one more reason why we don't want the Clintons back in power.No more dinasties in the United States of America..

Manuel Geily, Miami, Florida (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 7:26 AM)

Thank you, Sharon! "Do women really want this woman to be the crowning achievement of the woman's movement? "

uh, no, I, for one, don't

I changed my mind about Hillary long ago, circa 2000, when I had written a check to send to her "senate" campaign, then had an epiphany! Thank God! I, a white, middle-class, THINKING, born-in-the-USA, Maryland female saw the light then and am ever so grateful; and, it has done me good since. I will vote for a Republican over Clinton (in the general election)--at least the Republicans are up-front with their conservativism, up-front with their views being Republican, not hiding behind a facade of liberal talk when deep inside HRC is still the Republican she was oh, way back, you know, during and shortly after Wellesley! I'm surprised they didn't stone her when she went back recently--I have a very hard time thinking that Wellesley welcomes Democrats!

ladydemocrat (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 7:52 AM)

You all will wake up to a horrible truth, that Obama is a liar he can't change or unite us now. Great job you people have done on truely dividing us. GO republicans (THANKS OBAMA)

melissa, mpls (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 7:56 AM)

Seems to me that the decision to hold the caucases in the casino's for the ben efiut of the workers in the union. What about the rest of them? How convenient for the union, with no consideration for the rest of the people!!It's not only unfair to the rest of the voters ,and especially for the Clinton Campaign.The real winners will be Obama and the casinos OWNERS. I don't know of anyone that goes to a casino that doesnt drop a few coins in the machines, to say nothing about all the other ways to leave a few bucks. And if that isn't bad enough, it could very well change the outcome of the caucus! They shoud not allow this because the people that work there ,have to Be there, and all the rest have to find their way to the caucus. I say "NO" to it!!

Carl Rhode Island (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:04 AM)

I was a big fan of the Clintons in the 90s. The attacks on Obama by both Bill and Hillary and now this lawsuit have turned me off to them completely. In addition, I am a Latino that can see that the Clintons are willing to do and say whatever it takes to win; even disenfrancising the large number of Latinos that will be working on Saturday.

Shame on Hillary and Bill.

Enrique, Chicago, IL (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:19 AM)

Cathy--from Upstate, NY---you're absolutely amazing. YOu would defend the devil if the Clintons did!

Lewis, Cincinnati, Ohio (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:21 AM)

If Clinton some how manages to get the nomination, despite her sleezy tactics, I will be crossing over and voting Republican this year. I'd rather have 4 more years of a Republican White House than 4 years of Clinton.

BL, Cincinnati, Ohio (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:25 AM)

Heck, there is no vast right wing conspiracy...the most strident anti hillary crowd is on the left...poor babies, you want johnny fairplay in your primaries so the rep candidate can make you whine again in nov about another 'stolen' election...obama cant win a national election and many of you hate hillary...boohoo dems

Rick, WS, NC (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:31 AM)

First of all, you shouldn't hold caucuses at your place of work. For example, what if your boss sees you voting a different way than everyone else, maybe you don't get that next promotion. These are people you have to work next to, and really shouldn't know the way your voting, for fear of workplace retailiation. Anyone who doesn't think this would happen is not thinking clearly. It can cause all kinds of problems in the workplace. I don't think this has anything to do with Hillary. It has to do with fairness in the workplace.

Stopwatchingfoxnews, Rochester, NY (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:35 AM)

This is exactly why I will not vote for Clinton. She plays situational politics when what we need is change. Shame on you Clintons. How far you have fallen!

GungaGeek (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:37 AM)

Anyone trying to sell this line that the lawsuit is about fairness should just give up now. No one is buying it. And we all know who was behind the lawsuit.

I could have bought the notion that it was Clinton supporters acting on their own, rather than something encouraged by the campaign, if Bill hadn't weighed in on what they also want us to believe is an internal state party issue. Now I can't buy that. This came out from the Clinton campaign. Can I prove that? No. But I think we all know that's true; even Clinton's supporters.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:40 AM)

AVERY --> also: as I live in Florida - the Dem Nat'l Party stripped us of our delegates counting when the State Party moved the Primary up a week before Feb 5th -- so like Michigan -- Florida primary will be a hollow victory as no delegates will count on the democratic side

Isn't it fun when your own party disenfranchises your vote? All the teeth gnashing the Democratic voters went through in Florida during the 2000 election for how they were so-called disenfranchised, and this time around (and when the disenfranchisement is very real), hardly a peep.

James Malley, SC (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:42 AM)

Nobama - Obama had no say in how the Nevada Democratic Party set up its caucuses. To suggest its in his power to hold a primary there to prove he really was interested in enfranchising voters is ludicrous.

All the candidates deal with the respective rules each state presents. Clinton deals with those rules by having surrogates file lawsuits to get them changed to more favorable rules.

Its really stunning on the Clintons' part. They don't care how shameless they look, knowing that most party members who were bothered by that shamelessness already made the decision not to support her campaign. So they feel they have the political cover to try pulling anything that might help their cause - their only cause, which is winning.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 8:49 AM)

It funny how the American can invade other county and set up voting in their country but we still have the same voting PROBLEM here in the land of the free ....Why are we special to the unions to have caucus polls set up at their work place if one group of people should have special voting right why not the other....OH!!!!!! I forgot we have a SPECIAL black man running for office so both should have special DEALS….interesting and we fight for democracy!!!!!

and for the record do you apologize first if you did not do anything wrong...HMMMMM so why should the First lady do so....Let stick to the main issue for the people again there is no record for O-BAMA could someone tell me what has he do for u lately? Let his work show and shut Hillary up, please...HE CAN"T BECAUSE THERE IS NO RECORDS FOR HIS DEED NOTHING BUT HOT AIR...

Washington, DC (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:09 AM)

cathy , you might want to tell that to bill

ki houston (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:12 AM)

The Clinton campaign didn't bring this lawsuit. The NEA did, and I agree with it.
Who the hell does this union think it is, that it can hold caucuses in their memberships workplaces, which by the way are CASINOS, while everyone else in Nevada has to go to a caucus site, or not participate.
By the way, who here thinks it's a good idea to hold caucuses or elections....in freaking CASINOS for chripes sake! What the hell have we come to when voting for the President of the United States takes place in a damned casino! This is outreageous and Obama supporters who go along with this are trying to bend the rules in favor of their own guy without looking at the far reaching affect this could have on our country.
If VOTING IN CASINOS is part of the "CHANGE & HOPE" that Obama brings he can keep it. What's his new mantra going to be, "YES WE CAN VOTE IN CASINOS"?
Get real people, this is absurd.

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:14 AM)

The difference is that as the Clinton memo was being distributed; another Clinton surrogate; Charles Rangel of NY (which as a New Yorker who liked him really upsets me) came out calling Obama "stupid" and in another line "dumb". He also said that Obama put his teenage drug experiences into a book (written in 1996) just to sell books.

alison (Sent Monday, January 14, 2008 9:57 PM)

Oh no!!! Tell me this isn't true. Not Charlie Rangel. He was the one that urged Barack to run.

This is too sad. Last evening on the NewsHour on PBS, there was John Lewis ---- the John Lewis I was wondering about. A young hero of the movement, on the front lines having his skull cracked open. The same one who yet still envisioned the beloved community. I was concerned about his having to be embarrassed about having endorsed Sen. Clinton.

Lo and behold, there was John Lewis, who we must STILL not forget, not only NOT being embarrassed, but vociferously STILL supporting Sen. Clinton. BUT, what is REALLY, REALLY SAD, is that he was accusing the Obama campaign with having some responsibility for what is going on now. Well John, as Mr. Lowery pointed out the Obama campaign is NOT responsible. Further, as I opine, the CLINTONS, particularly, slick Willie, opened the Pandora's box.

At least, nevertheless, John Lewis was not crass as was Andrew Young with his "joke". And then THERE was Sheila Jackson Lee telling us (on MSNBC) that we did not see what we saw ----- Bob Johnson doing Hillary Clinton's dirty work.

POLpursun (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:19 AM)

hans, are you for real , if so i pray for you because you are ethier realy naive or racist if you see no race reference form the clinton in the last 6 months.

ki houston (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:23 AM)

I think the clintons should stay in New York enjoy all the money and Millions of dollars they have made from the American People...I guess being President makes you better than everyone else...I will say one thing about the NEA it a union that does more for itself than what its supose to be about... Let me say if i Had your money i would be enjoying life to its fullest but I guess its more important to you for ous peons to bow to you. Change. Nothing became of your 35yrs that really benefited to the American people. We do need change 35 more yrs of the same never.

Russ Wells, Maine (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:32 AM)

Is this the Clintons' haters website, or only haters comments are printed. Commentators tends to try to create news any way they can. Voters lose when voters do not listen to speeches being made by the candidates. Don't be played by people who think they can snow you.

Gloria Harris, Newnan, Georgia (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:35 AM)

good one avery

ki houston (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:36 AM)

I love how quickly all of the "rank-and file Obama lays gold bricks and does nothing wrong so let's attack the Clintons" comments come flying out when their choice in president is challenged. The fact of the matter is that the temporary caucuses are not fair unless temporary causus sites are set up acorss the state for any and every citizen of Nevada. This lawsuit would have happened no matter who received the endorsement of the Culinary Union. To my great sadness, the Culinary Union is acting like a corporate power and flexing it's influence on the race and could cause for bullying at caucus sites into voting for the candidte they endorsed. Endorsing organizations worked properly in Iowa and New Hamshire. Let the rules play the same way as it did in the previous two states: without special exceptions.

Mark M Cary, NC (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:38 AM)

Sodahead.com has a question up on their website that says " If Obama is elected pres. will all blacks get their 40 acres and a mule". I was shocked to read further and see that Big Al Sharpton supports that.
I posted and said "Yes" they will if Obama is elected.
That is precisely why the majority of White America will not support Obama. Let the Blacks get up off their ass and work like everyone else and they can certainly in a land of opportunity like ours earn that 40 acres and a mule.

Betty B. S.C. (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:44 AM)

I am so sick of the Clintons. They are corrupt, power-hungry, and have only ever been the 51% candidates. Bill Clinton was a 51% consensus President. What that means is he feels comfortable leaving every instution of exploitation in place in our country, everything from trade to subsidies, waging war, you name it. But then he throws a bone to his liberal base that helped him get elected and spends 51% of his time helping them. He forfeits 49% of his presidency to the highest bidder and then gives 51% to his base. I guess some could call that change, and hey the Presidency is intended by law to be a slow moving ship that can only steer a few degrees in one direction or another, that's what staves off disaster if we have a horrible president. So Clinton will balance the budget, throw a few bones, he'll put a band-aid on the problems we have and make us feel good with his Camelot speeches, but in the end the status quo will stay the same. Our country has reached a point where we need more than a 51% leader, our ship has hit a bog and it will require more force than that mundane 2% margin to get out of it. I apologize for the barrage of metaphors but I'm trying to save time and most of you who are informed about the Clintons know what I mean. The best candidates in my view are Mike Huckabee, John Edwards, Barack Obama, period. I usually write with more tact but as the election grows nearer, and with this latest Clinton scumbag maneuver in Nevada I am just so frustrated and I'm starting to lose heart. Even McCain is starting to take over in the Republican side. I just feel like the parties dangle change in our faces and we get excited about a new and genuine candidate and then whoosh, the establishment comes in and steals it from us. Maybe Adam Smith was right, the people, the "Bewildered herd", are meant to be just spectators. At this point, I would bet my bottom dollar on either Clinton, Romney or McCain being president, all establishment douchebags. This sucks.

Robert, Huntsville AL (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:49 AM)

Alison,
What about each and every time Obama speaks? He plays the race card by saying" We are going to make history" referring to the first black president.
The black church that he spoke at in Las Vegas Sunday violated the IRS code by the pastor endorsing Obama from the pulpit, and telling the members to vote for him. That is illegal.
Obama's wife Michelle made a very racist statement yesterday in a speech in Florida. It was an all black crowd and she said we can win with white folks
"there ain't no blacks in Iowa" - How much more racist can you get than this? They play the race card constantly but never get called on it for they are black. That is way too scary for me to even think of having him as president.

Joe, Atlanta (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:52 AM)

ki houston (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:15 AM)

so many racist so little time on here. gees do you guys have any shame .

ki houston (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:37 AM)

I am a Realtor and good news as follows just out from Inmannews.com;

Real estate money favors Hillary Clinton in the 2008 presidential race, according to statistics posted at opensecrets.org, a Web site operated by The Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan, nonprofit research group.

Go Hilary 2008 - We Realtors are all behind you.
Oh btw, here is more news from the article -
Democratic presidential candidates Clinton and Obama topped the list in total money raised from all sources: Clinton had raised $90.9 million and spent $40.5 million through the third-quarter, with year-end reports due Jan. 31.

Obama had raised $80.3 million and spent $44.2 million through the third quarter, according to opensecrets.org.
What ever happened to Obama's raising more money than Hilary and having more on hand? Guess that's proven to be false too.

Lynne, Little Rock, Arkansas (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 11:01 AM)

What's going on with all the Obama supporters?

Can you say anything besies wa! wa! wa!?

Crybabies! Anything Clinton says is bad, evil, horrendous. Please stop crying and whining.

These special voting sites are ILLEGAL, period. No group should be given special treatment. These locations violate the democracy in this country because labor leaders will be influencing the voting process by pressuring the union members to vote according to what the leaders say.

Do you think these low-income people will go against their boss in public? Of course not! They will be afraid because unions leaders are power-hungry and there will repercussions if they dont do as told.

If it was Hillary the one who got the endorsements, the members of this forum would be in favor of the lawsuit saying that Hillary is trying to use her influence to move voters in an undemocratic fashion.

PLEASE GET OVER IT

Jon Doe (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 11:38 AM)

micheal please, jhonson was just doing what any other polition does follow the lead of the country . and if you think it was jhonson and not mlk who created the sentiment for civil rights i suggest you take a history class.
------------------------------------------------------
No! Johnson did what no other polititian did before him. He passed the act. Nobody suggested that he created the sentiment, nobody suggested that those who created the civil rights sentiment deserve less credit. What Hillary said was that the president before JFK did not even try to do it. JFK Hoped to do it, Johnson DID it. Nowhere did anybody suggest that MLK role should be diminished. Get your facts straight before you post nonsense.

Michael (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 12:23 PM)

Jon Doe - If Clinton got the endorsement, the lawsuit never would have happened. And the Clinton's would be talking about how the Nevada Democratic Party went to great lengths to enfranchise voters. I have to think you know that's true.

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 12:31 PM)

Folks- I think what I am seeing here is an out and out revolt against the "Clinton Machine's" lousy and unsportsmanlike behavior throughout this campaign and I couldn't be more "on board" with you guys. Mudslinging is bad enough, but the delibearte and calculated disinfranchisement of any voter to punish Obama or any other candiate is just unamerican. Furthermore I cannot get over the irony of them trying to do so MLK day! Absolutely unforgivable. And Clinton wonders why the Republicans so vehemently hate her guts. I'm sorry to say that I waited so long to joing them in sharing the vitriol.
Will the Clinton's stop at nothing to try and prove that they are still relevant?

They are such a joke. I hope evey person commenting on thse blogs goes out and casts their vote in the primaries. It's time to send a very strong message to "Billary" that their day in the sun has long since past- the sun is setting on the Clinton Dynasty and is rising on a new kind of politics. I don tcare who you vote for- a vote not for the Clintons is a vote not for the Clintons.

Tracey, South Bend, IN (Sent Tuesday, January 15, 2008 1:25 PM)

If we can talk about Obama's drug use in his younger days, can we talk about the Clinton's laundering of drug money via state bonds in their younger days?

Sunflower, San Francisco, CA (Sent Wednesday, January 16, 2008 4:03 AM)

So the only people who have to work on a Saturday and have a right to vote in the caucus are those who work in the casinos and belong to the corrupt Culinary Worker's Union, which endorsed Obama? You believe it is acceptable that the union has had stewards threatening workers that if they don't agree to vote for Obama they can't caucus? Here's a link to a podcast interview wiht a worker who has witnessed the intimidation of workers http://www.taylormarsh.com/audio.php?audio=http://www.taylormarsh.com/podcast/mp3/stream.2008-01-16.170818.mp3

What about waitresses, waiters, nurses, store clerks, and others who will have to drive home to their neighborhoods to caucus? It's unfair and corrupt. An attempt by the corrupt SEIU controlled Culinary Workers Union to steal the votes of it's members, some who support other candidates like John Edwards, and give them illegally to Obama.

Those tactics are illegal and a violation of the rights of workers. I will never vote for Obama, and have been informing friends and others about this. In fact Americans ought to get together and sue the government to deny the outcome of the Nevada caucus if this corruption and intimidation is allowed to stand. It impacts our entire election and is as bad as what Bush did.

Jenny, Grand Rapids, MI (Sent Thursday, January 17, 2008 2:04 PM)

<< Previous

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=578200