The circular firing squad analogy is much in play for the Democratic campaign.

Bang!……, you’re NOT dead!……., damn, who took the bullets!

The real issue, for Democrats, in this Florida, Michigan controversy, should be the Democratic National Committee. The DNC, clearly, must have assumed that they had their candidate, Mrs. Clinton in advance of the campaign.  No other answer seems to fit the circumstances.   

One would assume that the math would have indicated to the DNC that in the event that “inevitability” failed, a clean nomination without the delegate counts from Florida and Michigan could be a problem. It smells as if the DNC, rhetoric aside, had to have made an assumption as to the eventual winner.

It is also evident that Mrs. Clinton made the same assumption; remember that the early campaign was all about inevitability.  

Enter the opportunity to lay the blame on the Republican Florida Legislature that approved the date change. Had the DNC been truly concerned about the date change they would have brought legal action to challenge the legislature’s decision, or at least a PR campaign. I heard somewhere that legal actions to challenge elections are not all that unusual in Florida. No such litigation was forthcoming. So far, everyone is going along with the program, no campaigns, no lawsuits, no delegates and assumptions of an “inevitable” winner seemingly well in hand. 

Hell, we don’t need those miscreant delegates, screw em! Then, Mr. Obama goes and screws it all up by making it an actual contest. Someone at the DNC does the math. Oops! Houston we have a problem, no one can win!

First up on the search for the answer is the DNC in the person of Mr. Dean. Mr. Dean hopes that the candidates will make it right by coming to an “accommodation, a deal, an understanding”.  No joy on that approach, although Mrs. Clinton does eventually step up to the plate with the proposal that she, the 2^nd place candidate, might agree to put Mr. Obama, the 1^st place candidate, into the VP position on the ticket. Interesting proposal met with the predictable response, HELL NO! 

Ahhh and the fairness issues. If Mr. Obama doesn’t have time to campaign, it’s not fair, If Hillary can’t have her “hard won” delegates that she did not actually campaign for it’s not fair. If voters are disenfranchised it’s not fair. This is carnage, nothing but victims for as far as the eye can see and still no solution in sight.  

Enter the Senate and Congressional representatives insisting on a solution but not actually proposing one. Maybe a “do over”, Mr. Dean says no, too expensive. Representatives struggle to find an answer, still no answer! They agree that the taxpayers should not have to pay for a second election. They intimate that the DNC should begin a special fund raising effort to pay for the “do over”, no occluded front of incoming funds yet reported by the dollar Doppler.

The calls go out for Mr. Gore to don his cape and fly to the rescue. The calls go out for Mr. Gore as a “person of substance” in the party; surely, he can find an answer.  Just a few issues here; Issue one, Mr. Gore lost by running horrible champagne himself! Issue two, exactly what might motivate Mr. Gore to get into this particular catfight and what does he gain by doing so? Issue three, Why would the Clintons agree to, of all people, Al Gore as the Democratic Party court of last resort, no love lost between the Gore’s and the Clinton’s, just in case you forgot.

The campaigns begin to hint at lawsuits, all right! Now we’re talking!

Now, the idea of a “write in” primary. Not too expensive, voters get their voice and no possible opportunity for vote fraud!!! Detroit, Miami, Palm Beach, nah, no possibility for fraud here. Hanging chads replaced by handwriting experts?  All this based on a DNC assumption of a winner in advance of an actual campaign.

It all looked so simple just a few months ago. Amazing how messy this democracy stuff gets. Bang!……, you’re NOT dead!

PS: These are not the folks I am looking forward to making decisions on War and Peace, just saying!