In politics, rules aren't always rules--duh

My Thoughts

By Dr. Bill Atwood

(Updated: Wednesday, March 26, 2008, 5:15 PM)

"Take me out to the ball game, take me out to the crowd..."

The words of this famous song remind us of those great days of spring when it was time to enjoy watching a great game of baseball. In the wonderful movie, "Field of Dreams," the story line had a number of twists but one of the messages came from the character played by James Earl Jones when he tells the hero of the movie that baseball is a game that ties us together as a people. We love the game, and we want to recapture during our adult years the innocence of our youth when all you needed for a great time was a bat and ball and a lot of folks to play a game with.

Everyone knew the rules, and they were rather simple. A ball was fair or it was foul. A hit was a hit and a swing without hitting the ball was a strike. Three strikes and you were out. No debate, no appeal, you were out. We all understand that concept because it was so simple and it was so fair.

Nobody in my neighborhood or any other neighborhood for that matter would have dared to suggest, much less demand, an extra strike because it wasn't fair for them to be held to a rule so limiting. Even your own teammates would have abandoned you in that argument.

It was fair because the rule was the rule. Sometimes there was an argument about the point where the ball actually landed, and the point was to call the hit fair or foul. Finally someone would agree and the game proceeded or somebody stated, "Do it over!"

At that point the teams went back and replayed the action and the game went on. But the important point was that the rules stayed the same. Three strikes and you are out, three outs and the side retires

Those who play the game of football know the clock can be your friend or your foe, but the clock ends the game. Rules matter and everyone has agreed to live by the rules.

There is a small problem for one of the Democratic Party candidates for the office of president of the United States. The junior senator from New York has a grasp of the problems with the math that concerns her possibilities for getting the nomination of her party to stand in the general election in November. Her opponent has more popular votes and more delegate votes and now the party is faced with the situation that something the Democratic Party states they could never have foreseen has happened. They had created something called the "super delegate," which is someone appointed for past work in the party and vast knowledge of what the party really needs in the event that normal or regular members of the Democratic Party mess things up and might nominate a person the super delegates don't care to see run.

I really thought that the party of Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy and Johnson believed in the concept of "one man--one vote." Apparently none of the leaders of the DNC ever read George Orwell's "Animal Farm" with its concept of " all pigs are equal, some are just more equal than others."

So we have super duper super delegates either confirming what the regular folks have shown to prefer or we will have a select few overturn all the regular voters and have it the way they want it and the "masses be damned."

The junior Senator from New York stated in the meetings and in press conferences that since Michigan and Florida had decided to hold their primaries prior to the dates that the DNC said were acceptable that the DNC was right to deny those two states from seating any of the state delegates at the convention. The two states accepted the ruling and decided to defy the DNC and held the early primary elections.

Now the junior senator wants to change the game plan and can't understand why her opponent isn't willing to count the popular vote or accept the delegates. He did not campaign much in either state as he felt it a waste of resources to win an election in which there was no benefit to winning.

Some are calling for a "do-over," but this isn't a case of not being sure where the ball landed. This is clearly a case of one candidate not liking the scoreboard and wanting to change the rules in the middle of the game.

This attitude speaks to her character or lack of same as she was very strongly in support of the denial of those states delegation when she thought it would be either a moot point or one to her benefit. This should be an indicator of how she would lead in tough circumstances.

Kids use the expression, "duh" a great deal when discussing points so clear and obvious and when a group of kids on a playground hear that someone wants to change the rules in the middle of the game when asked their opinion of this no-brainer most would respond with a solid, "duh!"

The Democratic Party has been enjoying telling America that they are proud to offer the idea that their next nominee will either be an American of African decent or a female. They bragged about what it said about the opportunities in their party. I hope that the super duper super delegates do not listen to the junior senator and I hope that the DNC folks will not deny senator Obama his chance at running for the presidency based on his race or the junior senator and her impeached husband's feelings of being entitled to the nomination.

Duh!