Sunday, June 1, 2008

Harold Ickes "Fair Reflection" comment misrepresented by the American Media.

I have had to rerun this article after noticing the american media is trying to camouflauge and change the context under which the phrase "Fair Reflection" was used when Harold Ickes questioned Robert Wexler about its meaning.

I am stunned at the level of deception our own american media is stooping to in an effort to change a pivotal moment in the Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Florida Michigan delegate battle.

Robert Wexler makes a very controversial statement...."What we are saying is that up to the number of 19, which is the maximum amount allowable under the Ausman Petition and under your rules. WE THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN WILL SUPPORT THAT EFFORT, AND WE DO SO, WE DO SO, IN AN EFFORT OF UNITY."

"Why Mr. Ickes, is it a significant concession?"

"Because in the State of Ohio and the State of Pennsylvania, TOGETHER, Senator Clinton WON A TOTAL OF 19 DELEGATES!!!"

"and here we are today offering a resolution that brings Florida voters TOGETHER, that actually amounts to both the victories of Ohio and Pennsylvania! Let us UNIFY, LET US MOVE ON!" -Robert Wexler


(The pro Obama supporters cheer this rampantly arrogant and completely misguided, idiotic reasoning. It is this "reasoning" which also permeates the elitist Obama brainchild to an alarming degree)."

-------------------------------
Commentary by Alessandro Machi about the above statement of Robert Wexler.

Besides Ohio and Pennsylvania, Mr. Wexler could have added Texas, Nevada, and Indiana to his infamous 19 Delegate list. All five states were Hillary Clinton Wins, and all five actually netted Hillary Clinton ONLY 18 delegates!

Do you see the narcissism and arrogance, the "mine, mine, mine" style of politicking the Obama camp runs? The Barack Obama camp is actually bragging that the 19 Florida delegates they want to bestow on Hillary Clinton is an incredibly generous offer. The Barack Obama 19 Florida delegate offer is one more than the sum total of delegates that Hillary Clinton picked up in the swing states of Ohio and Pennsylvania, PLUS Texas, Nevada, and Indiana, ALL HILLARY CLINTON VICTORY STATES!

lol, isn't it possible, just possible, that winning a decisive plurality when millions upon millions of voters vote, (also known as "Fair Reflection") is more significant and bankable than the cheating the Obama camp did in the caucus states to pick up a couuple of hundred questionable delegates?

"Fair Reflection" is a concept that is completely oblivious to the Barack Obama camp and clearly was not used as a bellweather to limit the amount of cheating that the Barack Obama side was involved in during their caucus campaigning.

A wise leader knows to limit the amount of cheating to just below what will be noticed. lol, Clearly Barack Obama is not a wise leader.

Ickes is stunned into Silence by the bravado of the intellectually bankrupt opposition.

Robert Wexler listens as Harold Ickes asks, "I gather that you agree with the concept of fair reflection?"

Mr. Wexler looks confused, but smugly confident nonetheless since he doesn't fear that which he cannot comprehend. The pro Obama side cheers on Mr. Wexler as if to say "You may not know what "Fair Reflection means", but we don't either so it must not matter".


In a signature moment that defines the Obama campaign motto of "If we don't understand you, then you don't make sense", Mr. Wexler mockingly and cockily presumes that not only does he not know what fair reflection is, it just doesn't matter to him nor the Obama side.

Mr. Ickes, realizing that he is up against pure bravado backed by youthful inexperience, does not attempt to educate the defiantly uneducatable. This is what the real democratic party is up against. Youthful arrogance that can't comprehend it was Bill Clinton's administration that laid the foundation for their own parents being able to save money during the 90's so they could go to college. Apparently that college education has been used to hate Hillary Clinton, and to cheat in the caucus state voting. wow.

Hillary Clinton is also up against a sordid duo of Billionaire George Soros and secret love interest Arianna Huffington and the politics of hating those who stay married, competently raise a child, and show their love and respect for each other through their mutual teamwork as husband and wife. The democratic party is being done in by ilicit lovers who have fricasseed a successful, intelligent, married woman. double wow.

3 comments:

Lindsey from North Texas said...

I don't understand what you are talking about with the caucus states. I live in Texas and participated in the caucus in both my precinct and at the Senate District level. I am about to go to Austin for the State Convention. I have witnessed no cheating. I have seem the coordinators act with the utmost caution since this such a delicate issue legally. Representatives from both Hillary and Obama camps kept a close eye on the proceedings to make sure everything was fair. To be honest, I did see some cheating for Hillary when i was totaling up the precincts. Whoever was registering voters for one precinct decided to add up their sheet on their own and padded Hillary's count. When i counted it myself, that many Hillary delegates had not registered and the overall total wasn't even correct. Maybe it was just an addition error, but there was only two people on that sheet that chose Hillary...so that's some pretty bad math skills. Don't worry though. She faired much better in other precincts. Anyways, what did Obama do that you think was cheating?

Alessandro Machi said...

For starters, Hillary won the popular vote. Once somebody wins the popular vote and then goes on to lose the overall delegate count, I consider that cheating, a slap in the face to the concept of primary voting.

Check out my CaucusCheating.com blog to see several examples of state by state cheating when it comes to delegate counts.

Alessandro Machi said...

Not only did Hillary Clinton win the popular vote by 4%, she then "lost" the caucus voting by a 2-1 margin.

How does this fairly reflect the will of the voters in Texas?