FL Primary: Herald's Reinhard Wakes Up Too Little, Too Late

My comments follow the article
__________________________________
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/columnists/beth_reinhard/story/448692.html

Miami Herald
Early primary had support of Democrats
By BETH REINHARD
March 8, 2008

Ten years later, Democrat Hillary Clinton is still blaming the "vast, right-wing conspiracy.''
Only this time, instead of attacking her husband's integrity, the VRWC is depriving Florida Democrats of their voting rights.

''I have long said that they should not be the victims of the unfortunate consequences of some of these rule changes that the people of Florida, for example, had nothing to do with,'' Clinton said on NBC's Today show this week. "They were dragged into this by the Republican governor and the Republican Legislature.''

Dragged? More like hopped, skipped and jumped with both feet.
For fear that the idea that the GOP caused Florida's latest voting fiasco will gain as much traction as the equally ridiculous falsehood that Clinton rival Barack Obama is a Muslim, here are the facts:

• The legislation that moved up Florida's presidential primary from the second Tuesday in March to the last Tuesday in January was sponsored by a DEMOCRAT, Jeremy Ring, in the Senate, and a Republican, David Rivera in the House.
• EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT in both chambers voted for the early date except for one House member, all of them grown-ups knowing full well that the rules of both national parties called for delegate penalties.

Psssstt. Here's the Democratic Party's dirty little secret: It wanted to boost Florida's clout in the presidential primaries just as much as the GOP did.

True, Democrats probably couldn't have stopped the legislation even if they had tried harder than half-heartedly proposing a couple of amendments. The earlier date was a priority of House Speaker Marco Rubio, one of the most powerful people in state government.

But put that aside and consider how the two different parties then responded to Florida's defiance regarding the primary schedule. The Republican National Committee took away half of the state's delegates. The candidates shrugged and then proceeded to barnstorm the state, spend millions of dollars on television commercials and engage in vigorous debate over issues important to Florida like hurricane insurance.

In contrast, the Democratic National Committee went nuclear, taking away all of Florida's delegates. Since the primary was now worthless, the candidates readily caved to pressure to boycott the state.

If there's a conspiracy here, it's not from the vast right wing. It's from Democrats apparently bent on self-sabotage.

''I don't think a Democrat can turn his or her back on Florida, so, yes, I think Michigan and Florida should count,'' Clinton added in the televised interview, arguing that her victories in the two states should earn delegates after all.

Turn his or her back? You mean the way Clinton, Obama and every other major candidate turned their backs on Florida when they went along with the boycott? The way they all turned their backs when the national party inflicted its zero-tolerance policy against a state crucial to victory in November?

For shame.

Now the pressure is mounting for Florida and Michigan to vote again in the hope of breaking the near-tie between Clinton and Obama.

Here's the funny thing: Even if the states hold new contests, the resulting delegates are unlikely to break open the race. That's because if both states' delegates are counted, the total needed to secure the nomination also increases.

I call this the vast, wing-nut conspiracy.

Beth Reinhard is the political writer for The Miami Herald.
__________________________________________
It's nice of Beth Reinhard of the Miami Herald to finally awaken from her winter hibernation and finally start writing some backgrounder pieces about the motives of those most responsible for moving up the Florida Primary date to January 29th.

Too bad she and the Herald should've been writing about this subject contemporaneously, months ago, especially in the days leading up to the January 29th non-vote.

You know, like political reporters from the Orlando Sentinel, St. Petersburg Times and Tampa Tribune did in their papers and later on their political blogs, Central Florida Political Pulse and The Buzz.

Anyone who's been following the issue on South Beach Hoosier would already know that.

Reinhard never quite explains why the Herald slept on that story, does she?

The story that Adam Smith of the St. Pete Times has been all over from the beginning.

She never even attempts to explain why the Herald lumbered on like a zombie, even as other
media in the state were reporting important contextual facts to their readers, so caught up were Reinhard and her Herald colleagues in the horse race, and their all-too-predictable reporting of same.

Did you happen to notice what two names she specifically doesn't mention in her column?

Only the two leading Democrats in the Florida legislature: Senate Minority Leader Steve Geller and House Minority Leader Dan Gelber.

I'd love to have the list of the attorneys whose opinions and counsel the Florida Democratic Party relied upon on in pushing this through.

There's a new question for all the South Florida TV reporters, who keep going round-and-round in circles on the issue of a vote re-do, almost to banal lengths.

"Senator Geller, Representaive Gelber, can you please tell us the names of the lawyers who told you that you would ultimately prevail?"