Obama supporters pressed Dems to keep Colbert off ballot

I found this article on AmericaBlog.  It makes me furious.  Apparently Obama supporters were calling in to prevent Stephen Colbert off the Democratic ballot in South Carolina.  Colbert, who titled his campaign "The Hail to the Cheese Stephen Colbert Nacho Cheese Doritos' 2008 Presidential Campaign" was under fire for potentially violating election laws with his blatant announcement of who is endorsing him (even though no money changed hands) and was unable to place himself on the Republican ballot in S.C. because he was unable to cough up the $35,000 fee to get on the ballot and remain under the minimum spending amount before having to report his candidacy to the FEC.  He was polling at fifth place, higher than three of the other candidates, at about 2.3%.  The red quotes are from the linked CNN story about how the Obama campaign plotted to defray the democratic process.  I chose red because it's a very republicany thing that they did and couldn't find a font that was composed of gyrating elephants.  The blue is a segment of a speech from the Edwards campaign.  I chose blue because they prove to be actually democratic in action (and have a sense of humor).

Another Obama endorser who regularly appears at campaign events, state Rep. Bakari Sellers, also made phone calls to members of the party's executive council about Colbert, according to Sellers.

"I placed the calls as a concerned Democrat, realizing that we are a country in despair," Sellers told CNN. "It is not a time for games or to make a mockery of the process."

I beg to differ.  The process has already been made into a mockery.  First of all, the process was made into a mockery when Bush was allowed to serve his first term, and this was vindicated when the American dumbass people actually elected him to a second one.   The process is made a mockery when you don't know for whom you should vote because both candidates suck, and that is solely the fault of the Democrats.  I mean, come on.  Kerry?  Really?  That was the best you could do, when people were using the phrase "2004- Anybody but Bush" before a candidate had even been chosen?  Finally the process is made into a mockery when a person can be denied their right make a mockery of the process.  A person should not be denied a chance to become a candidate for president based on the political motivations of his opponents.  I thought the whole idea of a primary was for the people in a state to determine which candidate they wish to represent their party in the presidential elections.  Why are the people being denied their say by some pinhead-laden executive committee of the South Carolina Democratic Party?  Fuck you, South Carolina Democratic Party!  America was founded on principles whose logical extension leads us to the fact that Stephen Tiberius Colbert has the right to make a mockery of the democratic process in an effort to show us the absurdity inherent in said process.

Also, whose fault is it that we are a country in despair?  The democratic party has the power to do something about it but they refuse.  They were given a mandate by the masses in the 2006 elections but they do not even attempt to rein in the unchecked executive powers gained by the President after September 11.  Democrats can bitch and whine about the shape in which this country is in but they are equally responsible.  Iraq should have been ended a year ago.  Hillary, whom I am starting to despise as a manipulative opportunist who is only a pale, dickless shadow of her brilliant, albeit equally corrupt, husband.  Obama lost my respect when he started pandering to the evangelicals for votes, and strongly endorsed the ministry of an ex-gay in the process.  I was about ready to vote for Giuliani until he received Pat Robertson's endorsement.  I was ready to vote for Colbert just to show the process how much of a mockery it has made of itself!  It pains me to say this, but I am now throwing my support to John Edwards in 2008.  A spokesperson for the Edwards campaign actually tried to smear Colbert's name with the following speech:

"What is more troubling than his quest for a status his own mother won't grant him (favorite son) are his ties to the salty food industry.  As the candidate of Doritos, his hands are stained by corporate corruption and nacho cheese. John Edwards has never taken a dime from taco chip lobbyists and America deserves a President who isn't in the pocket of the snack food special interests."

Edwards seems to be having fun with the whole concept.  It's nice to see somebody who is secure enough in their own ability to win that he doesn't have to spend time unfairly limiting the competition.  I'm sure Obama can find lots of reasons why, say, Hillary shouldn't be allowed to run in South Carolina.  Wouldn't that just be dandy.  If you are unable to succeed on your own merit and despite all opposition, limit your opposition and lower the bar.  Congratulations!  You have validated your existence.

The CNN article goes on to point out that the Obama party might not have had the most sincere motives in attempting to have Colbert denied his spot on the ballot.

In other words, Obama knows that Colbert would split his vote and he wouldn't stand a chance of getting ahead of Hillary in the poles.  If Obama is so afraid of losing the liberal voters in South Carolina he shouldn't be courting the black homophobic vote in South Carolina.  He needs to make a decision on whether he wants the more enlightened younger crowd or if he wants to pull in votes from the fuckhead christians.  To paraphrase a disenfranchised Colbert, "Pick a side, Senator.  We're at war."