My family has been in Delaware since before the Revolution, and, frankly, the Democratic record here hasn’t been all that, until fairly recently. Historically, we were disorganized and segregationist. Our labor history is pitiful. And Delaware has usually had split houses and consensus/bipartisan political behavior.

From my POV, it wasn’t until the Republicans started feeling their “Back to the Medieval’ that the system broke down and party affiliation became a more critical issue. I’d like to see the Democrats respond to that by having reasonable positions and electable candidates instead of cherishing our ability to back-bite ourselves into another 20 years of Republican sweeps.

I knew it would happen sooner or later. We agree on something.

If Carper decided to help someone knock of Castle that help would take a couple of forms.

- Helping RAISE that person more money through the DCCC or even the DLC.

- Helping get more local and national exposure for the campaign.

- Not doing joint campaign appearances with Castle in the guise of some pork announcement.(yes, he did).

- Not scheduling AROUND Castle’s big days (Again, YES, he did)

- Not trading staff members back and forth with Castle. (Yes, he did.) AND

- Publicly taking Castle to task for his shitty voting record.

Other members of Congress shoveled out millions to help in more vulnerable races.

Delaware’s constitution expressly limits the registration process to voting eligibility purposes only. This limit excludes any authority for political affiliation tracking and substantive segregation thereby.

You can argue with me politically, but I am giving you a legal assessment based on fairly in-depth knowledge of Delaware jurisprudence and constitutional interpretation.

If the bill passes I absolutely will take it to the high court. Delaware has no obligation to interpret its constitution on the basis of federal law permissive to such limits based on our national constitution. The Supreme Court’s affirmations are based on federalism not political rights. At state level it is all about political/civil rights.

Where is the civil rights wing of the Democratic Party in Delaware? Come on, Jason. I am counting on you.

If our legislature should attempt to amend our state constitution to accommodate these purely political self-protection measures at the expense of civil rights I will no longer live in this state.

Read here :

http://www.downwithabsolutes.com/index.php/2007/05/17/what-the-hell-is-this-shit/

(You have to love Mike Matthews’, shall we say…..direct question style.)

Delaware’s constitution expressly limits the registration process to voting eligibility purposes only. This limit excludes any authority for political affiliation tracking and any segregation thereby.

You can argue with me politically, but I am giving you a legal assessment based on fairly in-depth knowledge of Delaware jurisprudence and constitutional interpretation.

If the bill passes I absolutely will take it to the high court. Delaware has no obligation to interpret its constitution on the basis of federal law permissive to such limits based on our national constitution. The Supreme Court’s affirmations are based on federalism not political rights. At state level it is all about political/civil rights.

Where is the civil rights wing of the Democratic Party in Delaware? Come on, Jason. I am counting on you.

If our legislature should attempt to amend our state constitution to accommodate these purely political self-protection measures at the expense of civil rights I will no longer live in this state.

Read here :

http://www.downwithabsolutes.com/index.php/2007/05/17/what-the-hell-is-this-shit/

(You have to love Mike Matthews’, shall we say…..direct question style.)

http://www.downwithabsolutes.com/index.php/2007/05/17/what-the-hell-is-this-shit/

(You have to love Mike Matthews’, shall we say…..direct question style.)

Delaware’s Supreme Court interprets our constitution as being limitations on powers not express grants of authority.

Delaware’s constitution expressly limits the registration process to voting eligibility purposes only. This limit excludes any authority for political affiliation tracking and any segregation thereby.

You can argue with me politically, but I am giving you a legal assessment based on fairly in-depth knowledge of Delaware jurisprudence and constitutional interpretation.

If the bill passes I absolutely will take it to the high court. Delaware has no obligation to interpret its constitution on the basis of federal law permissive to such limits based on our national constitution. The Supreme Court’s affirmations are based on federalism not political rights. At state level it is all about political/civil rights.

Where is the civil rights wing of the Democratic Party in Delaware? Come on, Jason. I am counting on you.

If our legislature should attempt to amend our state constitution to accommodate these purely political self-protection measures at the expense of civil rights I will no longer live in this state.

Most states abolished “fusion” candidacies over a century ago. Only six states other than Delaware still permit such practice. Moreover, the United States Supreme Court has upheld state laws prohibiting fusion candidacies.

This Bill would allow only members of a political party to seek that party’s nomination for an elected office in a primary or otherwise be nominated for office by that party. However, persons unaffiliated with any party still have the right to appear on the ballot as permitted by law.