The rules committee of the Democratic Party—Obama wins, Obama loses

By Mahmoud S. Audi, Ph.D.

I watched, on television, some during the day on Saturday, May 31, 2008, and the rest after midnight, most of the deliberations of the Rules and Bylaws committee of the Democratic Party. The issue was the resolution of the problem that was created by the Florida and Michigan Democrats when they decided to hold their primaries at times different from those the committee had assigned. The numerical results are already known and published in the newspapers, but what went on during the meeting was a demonstration that race matters.

The African-American supporters of Obama were passionate and poetic, when they questioned the supporters of Clinton. I could see their passions in the tones of their voices and the gestures of their hands and on their faces, and the near absence of civility in the words of some of them. Even the African-American supporters of Hillary were not passionate enough for her, because their real passions were with Obama. Some of the uncommitted super delegates are really committed; their passions gave their secret real status away; for possible political gains, they chose to claim they were uncommitted.

If I were an African-American I might have behaved in the same manner. It is their awareness of their history in the United States that made them who they are today. It is always there; their personal failures and triumphs, and their collective failures and triumphs are always there.

However, the members of the Rules and Bylaws Committee should have blinded theselves to the differences among them and behaved more, like fair arbitors, and behaved responsibly in their deliberation; they did not do that, and their bias was crystal clear. They are thirty bright and experienced individuals who ought to have worked for the common good of their party. But they failed. The supporters of Senator Hillary Clinton sounded more reasonable, more responsible and more respectful of their colleagues and of their witnesses. They were also passionate, but most of them did not show their feelings.

By the action of the committee, Obama won delegates who did not vote for him, because his supporters were louder, aggressive, and more passionate. However, he won votes, but he would lose the election; he will not become president.

If the Senator and his supporters had shown some magnanimity, he could have easily unified the party, and considerably advanced his chances to win the election in November 08. No one should have felt that the deliberations were unfair. This is what he should have done. He should have given all what Hillary’s camp had asked for. Had this happened, Obama would still have more committed delegates than her, but the uncommitted delegates would see in him the unifier they wanted, and would have given him their votes, and their support: a winning combination.

But now I believe that most of the uncommitted delegate would still commit to him, few will continue to fight. Political games will overwhelm the media and the count down will start and continue until McCain wins in November 08.