SO MUCH FOR “PARTY DISCIPLINE”
Even if Hillary Clinton had wrapped up the Democratic party nomination for president on Super Tuesday in early February as most expected her to do, the problem of what to do with Florida and Michigan delegates would have remained.
That’s because the Democratic National Committee, in what might be termed a fit of pique, took away all of those states’ delegates as a result of their violation of primary scheduling rules (while also preventing candidates from campaigning in those states). At the time this occurred, I couldn’t have been the only observer who wondered how a national party could disenfranchise two of the biggest states in the union and not suffer untoward consequences. At the very least, by denying the delegate’s credentials from those two states - states that have proven competitive in most national elections - the DNC risked losing the presidential election because of their slavish adherence to rules designed to enforce party discipline.
Contrast the behavior of the Democratic National Committee with their counterparts at the RNC. The Republicans, also seeking to get control of the primary process, took away half the delegates from Florida, Michigan, South Carolina, Wyoming, and New Hampshire - also as a result of their violations of primary scheduling rules. They also allowed full participation by all candidates in those primaries.
As a result, while there was some grumbling and even some legal challenges, the primaries went forward on the Republican side with little or no backlash. (Note: There may yet be a blow up on this issue for Republicans. But it probably won’t rise to the level of what the Democrats are going through.)
Now the Democrats are in a pickle of their own making. With Hillary Clinton desperate for delegates and the Michigan and Florida state parties still seething, a push is now underway to either seat delegates who were chosen during the illegal primaries by forcing a showdown at the convention with the credentials committee or hold some kind of “re-vote” with the blessing of the DNC that would allow full delegate participation in the convention from those two states.
Howard Dean will not bend the party rules to grandfather in the disputed delegates from Michigan and Florida, the Democratic party chairman said in a statement today.
Instead, he put the state parties on notice: either they can wait and allow the credentials committee to decide whether to seat their delegates, or submit to a re-vote sanctioned under DNC rules. “We look forward to receiving their proposals should they decide to submit new delegate selection plans and will review those plans at that time,” he said in the statement.
“Everyone seems to be asking what the DNC will do,” a Democrat close to Dean said. “But the question is: what will the state parties do.”
Dean’s statement implies that he has no intention of changing the rules to accommodate any solution proposed by the candidates or the state parties. There has been some suggestion that the two remaining presidential candidates might try to broker a deal among themselves. His line in the sand narrows the options for Hillary Clinton’s campaign because it is unlikely that a credentials committee would endorse a delegation congenial to her mathematical interests.
In other words, the ruling last November that disenfranchised Michigan and Florida really doesn’t count. If the two states want representation at the convention, all they have to do is submit a plan to the DNC on how they wish to choose the delegates and they will sanction it.
So much for party discipline.
Dean’s blunder has the potential of leaving a trail of blood all the way from Denver to the November election. By placing the burden of holding a nominating contest on the state parties, he effectively washes the DNC’s hands of any responsibility for maintaining discipline in the face of rank defiance by local entities.
Why not stick to your guns and enforce the original decision? And if that decision was wrong - and supporters of both candidates believe it was - Dean should resign and allow his successor to clean up the mess. Paying for do-over primaries in both states would be an expensive proposition. A primary in Michigan would cost taxpayers in that cash-strapped state $10-12 million - a not inconsiderable sum even if the candidates were to pay for the two primaries as some have suggested. (The cost of a do-over primary in Florida is estimated at $15 million.)
Then there are the organization challenges of staffing the polling places, polling machine maintenance, absentee ballots, and setting up the whole infrastructure necessary to hold the contests. Could all of that be done in just a few months?
Florida would appear to be hesitant:
Karen Thurman, the chair of the Florida Democratic Party, issued a statement late Wednesday that seemed to discount the possibility of a second primary.
“It is important also that we are clear about one issue. At this time, no suggested alternative process has been able to meet three specific and necessary requirements: the full participation from both candidates, a guaranteed commitment of the millions of dollars it will cost to conduct the event and a detailed election plan that would enfranchise all Florida Democrats, including our military service members serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere.”
“The Florida Democratic Party cannot consider any alternative that does not meet these requirements. Indeed, it is very possible that no satisfactory alternative plan will emerge, in which case Florida Democrats will remain committed to seating the delegates allocated by the January 29th primary.”
Granholm seems to have ruled out a primary altogether:
Granholm made it clear her first choice would be to find a way to seat the delegates from the January 15 Michigan primary, but acknowledged the fact that Barack Obama was not on the ballot creates a fairness issue.
“It could not be a primary because a primary is publicly paid for, and the taxpayers would not spend any more tax dollars on a primary. So if there’s anything it would have to be a caucus, but we’d have to have a way to pay for it without taxpayer dollars.â€
What an unholy mess.
The Michigan Democratic party is up for a do-over primary but the governor won’t allow it. The Florida Democrats want the result of their original primary accepted and can see no alternative primary or caucus scenario.
Can you say “trainwreck?”
Dean’s “solution” is useless. No money - no primary. And it is apparent that Florida Democrats have dug in their heels and want their $15 million primary results validated.
If this is a game of chicken between the national and state parties, Denver would seem to be where the two sides will collide. If the national party prevails in the credentials committee (which is almost guaranteed), they will make 6 million Democratic voters in Florida and Michigan very unhappy. If Clinton were to somehow win the day and have those delegates seated, how many millions of unhappy Obama supporters will there be?
A Hobbesian choice to be sure. And one for which Howard Dean is completely responsible.
UPDATE
Howard Dean sums up the Democrats problem in one quote from this morning’s GMA:
“They have to be seated within the rules,” Dean said on “GMA.” “What you cannot do is change the rules in the middle of the contest.”
Of course they’re trying to change the rules in the middle of the race. That’s because the DNC ruled originally that the states were ineligible! And if they can’t change that rule why are we even bothering with all of this?
Howard Dean is a dunce, don’t you think?
Analysis: Why Hillary Won…
Senator Hillary Clinton pulled out victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island tonight showing the sam…
Trackback by Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator — 3/6/2008 @ 9:40 am
Rick,
It’s worse than that.
After FL & MI moved their primaries, NH and SC moved theirs, and IA moved its caucus. Those three states also violated DNC rules — and lost no delegates at all. And while the DNC rules allow for zeroing the delegates as a sanction, the standard sanction stated in the DNC rules is the loss of half the delegates, just like the RNC rules. So Clinton will have plenty of reason to question whether the rules are being equally and fairly applied.
Comment by Karl — 3/6/2008 @ 9:55 am
[...] The Article [...]
Pingback by SO MUCH FOR “PARTY DISCIPLINE†: BigMouthFrog — 3/6/2008 @ 10:03 am
The mess created by Howard “Aaaaaaaarrrghhhh!” Dean is sure to result in a bad collective case of DDS (Dean Derangement Syndrome) among various Democratic factions.
Furthermore, if we thought the 2000 post-election looniness was bad, just imagine what will happen if the Clintonoids and Obamatrons don’t get “satisfaction.” People are literally going to get hurt in the ensuing civil war.
Gee, the way things are going, the Donks will soon have their very own “Dolchstosslegende.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolchstosslegende
Comment by MarkJ — 3/6/2008 @ 10:25 am
The Supervisor of Elections in my Florida county is throwing a fit. He says another primary would cost his office more than a million dollars - and that’s just one county. Our local superdelegate, an African-American congresswoman who supports Hillary, wants the original votes counted. Our county is one of the few that went strongly for Obama - a fairly large number of African Americans and a large number of young people - so local polls show the idea of a revote is popular.
The Dems did something similar 40-years ago when they threw out the delegations of Southern states that weren’t liberal enough for the powers that were. That was one of the acts that pushed the South into the Republican party.
Comment by Juan Paxety — 3/6/2008 @ 11:02 am
This is why hillary is my choice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCG5Tp4ZwZI
Comment by max — 3/6/2008 @ 11:37 am
“Of course they’re trying to change the rules in the middle of the race. That’s because the DNC ruled originally that the states were ineligible! And if they can’t change that rule why are we even bothering with all of this?
Howard Dean is a dunce, don’t you think?”
Dean is a dunce, but not for the MI/FL situation. The DNC is following the rules to the letter, and should be applauded for it. Dean is saying that the rules will be enforced. The rules relating to primary schedules, demanding that MI and FL delegates not be seated, is to be followed. The rules then allow for an “appeal” process, to see if anything can be done to seat the delegates. Dean is asking for MI and FL to submit plans to bring those states back within the party guidelines, and thus seat their people, according to the rules. Nobody is doing anything funny with the rules, except for the D parties in MI and FL, who broke them, and are now attempting to fix the situation.
I’m no expert, but if I had to choose whether to be the DNC or the RNC this cycle, I think I would have to go with the DNC (see: fundraising, voter turnout, candidates’ voter-appeal, not scandal-ridden, non-cheerleading for unpopular/unsuccessful Iraq debacle, etc)
Comment by Dean — 3/6/2008 @ 11:47 am
Hillary C. claims that she “won” Florida ? How is that ? Obama was not even on the ballot. That woman will stop at nothing in her lies.
Um…Obama was on the FLorida ballot but not Michigan’s.
Ed
Comment by Helene — 3/6/2008 @ 11:51 am
I have a difficult time having sympathy for the Governor’s of Florida and Michigan that want to now influence the outcome of the democratic primary system. These rules were set out in advance and the leaders of these states decided to violate those rules knowing full well that it would result in penalties. Party primaries are not under the direct supervision of the individual states, but the parties. For those people in Florida and Michigan that feel they are not being fairly treated, welcome to the world of the independent voter. Independents don’t have a say in most of the primaries and caucuses. So, if you want to blame someone, blame your governors for disregarding both the Republican and Democratic leadership who rightfully set the rules for their own parties. Changing the rules at this point would, in my opinion, be considered unfair and would result in my vote going to Ralph Nader.
Comment by Ed Hollis — 3/6/2008 @ 11:52 am
Dean, you’re not quite correct. In Florida, the State Legislature changed the primary date - not the parties. The parties were stuck in the middle - as were the voters.
But didn’t Florida Dems and Republicans welcome the primary date? I seem to recall a meeting of the Florida Democratic Committee that voted not to try and move the date which is why they got the death sentence from the national party.
Ed
Comment by Juan Paxety — 3/6/2008 @ 11:56 am
The DNC and State Parties made this mess, nothing to do with voters. So the only solution here is to seat all the delegates but fire H Dean and the State Party’s responsibles.
Comment by Wiffy — 3/6/2008 @ 11:56 am
Dean is asking for MI and FL to submit plans to bring those states back within the party guidelines, and thus seat their people, according to the rules. Nobody is doing anything funny with the rules, except for the D parties in MI and FL, who broke them, and are now attempting to fix the situation.
Wrong, Deano.
Party rules on “appeals” are quite specific - only to the credentials committee or, failing that, the floor of the convention if they can get two states to second the motion on a debate of the issue. There is no “appeal” to the national party either two states can make unless they made a “good faith effort” to get the dates changed by the legislature - something neither state is claiming.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/3e5b3bfa1c1718d07f_6rm6bhyc4.pdf
Page 12-15 I believe.
Comment by Rick Moran — 3/6/2008 @ 12:01 pm
My error Dean, sorry.
Technically they could be in compliance with the rules IF they held their primary before June 6. But it kind of defeats the purpose of the sanctions anyway.
Comment by Rick Moran — 3/6/2008 @ 12:02 pm
The DNC, all Democrats, the media, and the general public should be absolutely disgusted about Hillary Clinton attempts to break the DNC’s own rules and get Florida and Michigan delegates seated. Little kids on the backyard baseball field know how to follow their own rules better than does Hillary Clinton.
Her “win at all costs” attitude, sacrificing truth, integrity, honor, and her own party’s rules is the exactly the type of Washington thinking that got us into the trouble we’re in today, and exactly the type of questionable character that America does not want to see in our next president.
Comment by Tim — 3/6/2008 @ 12:06 pm
This whole thing is ridiculous. It is the two states’ fault that they moved their primaries and they should suffer the consequences. In Michigan Obama wasn’t even on the ballot so how would that be fair to seat those delagates. Obama didn’t even go to Florida to campaign because that was the deal between him and Hillary so how in the world would that be fair. I think the only 2 logical solutions are to either not seat the delegates and make their votes NOT COUNT or split the delegates in half for each nominee. Re-voting and all that jazz would just cost to much money at this point. I see those two solutions as the only thing to do.
Comment by Juan — 3/6/2008 @ 12:28 pm
“I’m no expert, but if I had to choose whether to be the DNC or the RNC this cycle, I think I would have to go with the DNC (see: fundraising, voter turnout, candidates’ voter-appeal, not scandal-ridden, non-cheerleading for unpopular/unsuccessful Iraq debacle, etc)”
Fundraising: Every dollar a Dem raises goes right out the door to attack and damage and the other Dem in the race. They are using their money adantage in a way that is beneficial to McCain. The RNC is out fundraising the DNC and Repubs have always raised large sums of money for 527s. Add to that the public financing pledge of Obama, and I don’t think there is the large fundraising gap everyone perceives. Besides, McCain can collect every penny he raises between now and June (at least) while the Dems are still spending their money attacking each other.
Voter Turnout: Dems historically have higher turnout in their primary contests than the Repubs. Add to that the fact that significant numbers of Repubs have been viting in Dem primaries for whatever reason (most of whom will not vote Dem in Nov) and the voter-turnout “gap” is not nearly as pronounced as people claim. It is there and it is something that has to be overcome, but its not as insurmountable as most would be lead to believe.
Voter Appeal: Both Obama and Clinton have higher unfavorables than McCain and on a question of who would definatly vote for/not vote for a candidate, Obama (as of late Feb) had a -9, Clinton had a -14, and McCain had a +1. More people said they would definatly vote for McCain than those that said they would definatly not vote for him. The Dems were both beat by their own detractors. Additionally, as the long primary draws out, the unfavorables of Obama/Clinton will continue to rise while McCain is free to work on improving his favorables.
Not-Scandal Ridden: Okay, you are a kool-aid drinker. Obama has more skeletons in his closet than he knows what to do with and I suspect many of them are going to begin to see the light of day. Just keep these names in mind: REZKO, AUCHI, AIHAM ALSAMMARAE. Clinton has plenty to hide too, inlcuding the foreign business deals Slick Willy has been engaged in and the fact that some of that money found its way into Hillary’s war chest. The tax returns, foreign investors in the Clinton Library, ect, ect, ect, ect, ect. More than anything, the Rezko trial is going to show the country what true blue Dem politics is like in its capital, Chicago.
Non-cheerleading for Iraq: This is a simple minded and misguided perception of the situation. First and foremost, Americans do not like to lose. If they have a choice between sticking with a startegy that is leading to success (which the surge undeniably is) or surrending our victories and achievements for no reason other than poltics, the people will choose the former over the latter. Additionally, recent polling has shown that over 50% of the country says we should not pull our troops out of Iraq if progress is being made, which it is. Once the debate begins, most Americans will be for vicotry, not surrender. This is disheartening and unacceptable to Dems because they have allowed Pelosi and the anti-war loons to hijack their party, wedding the Democratic party to surrender and defeatism. We can make that case and we will make it very successfully.
If I was you, I would be worrying about my own party. The Dems are in the process of grasping defeat from the jaws of victory. It was their year and they had no reason not to win. Now, they will be lucky to pull their party together in a way that can make for real comepetition in November. The only hope for Dems is a Clinton/Obama ticket, and I can tell you, I just do not see him taking that position for numerous reasons. Other than that, Obama people better pray for an Obama win in Pennsylvania, because that is the only the way the nomination process does not end in dissapointment for 50% of the party. Have fun and good luck with all of that!
Comment by Joe — 3/6/2008 @ 12:29 pm
Howard Dean is not a “dunce.” He’s being smart. He made the original decision to play by the rules, and now he’s making sure the D’s don’t lose the presidential race because of it. If you ask me, it’s Michigan and Florida that made the mistake. Their selfishness could cost the D’s the presidentail race. I bet they didn’t think of the fact that they may help the R’s. I’m glad Dean is allowing talks to go on, and I hope they choose to stick with their original decision.
Comment by Drew Domalick — 3/6/2008 @ 12:45 pm
Does it not seem obvious that the poor, disenfranchised voters’ quarrle is with their own stupid state parties who, after being warned, went ahead and broke an, admittedly absurd DNC rule. And now, they want to whine?? Let me see, I’m a former Hillary supporter, now just a simple-minded Obama supporter, but … A Republican governor who’s hoping for a beatable Hillary for McCain and a Democratic Hillary-supporter are now beating their chests, trying to protect the voters from the naughty party people?? Does anybody but me see this as the most disgusting move since the “stolen” election? And, pleeze … no more weeping and whining from Hillary-supporters crying that it’s “our turn” (huh?)
Comment by Pica — 3/6/2008 @ 12:51 pm
Both states were warned in advance, thus they have no room to argue now. It is the government of each of those two states that owes an answer to its’ citizens. Under no circumstances should the rules be changed for the benefit of either state. Furthermore, when Florida learns (if ever) how to run an election, then and only then should we listen to them at all. Hanging chads, butterfly ballots, failure to count votes and now this. If they can’t get it straight perhaps they should have no right to vote until they prove themselves competent.
Comment by David Mann — 3/6/2008 @ 1:15 pm
dean is such a dunce he trounced the GOP with his last election strategy… how does that taste?
Comment by ibfamous — 3/6/2008 @ 3:59 pm
Why not just have George Soros pay for the new Democrat primaries in Florida and Michigan?
Comment by Michael — 3/6/2008 @ 7:58 pm
Primary rules need to be written into the Constitution.
Comment by Mark K — 3/7/2008 @ 9:38 am
[...] Super delegates will determine the next nominee of the Democrats, and a happy ending for the Party looks unlikely. Mathematically, the Democratic Party is nearly locked in to Barack Obama entering the convention with a significant delegate lead. Taking the nomination away from him via the super delegate mechanism would alienate the Party’s African-American base and potentially turn off a swath of the younger generation enthusiasts for Obama’s multi-cultural charisma. Yet there are signs that the Obama bubble may be bursting, his support peaking, while serious press scrutiny is beginning to fire buyer’s remorse in certain quarters. The potentially seriously embarrassing Rezko trial gathers steam in a Chicago federal court and will build as the weeks unfold. The Party may very well find itself nominating the weaker candidate in Denver, even as Hillary Clinton’s popular support within the Party rises. But unless Hillary Clinton is able to win over large numbers of super delegates (in the process infuriating many Obama enthusiasts, including many African-Americans), she cannot win the nomination. Obama will enter the convention with more delegates than she has. Fear of the inevitable backlash, should Party insiders be perceived to be stealing the nomination from the front-runner who is also the first serious black contender, could be a trump card in Obama’s hands. Genuine tragedy — protagonists undone by their flaws — rarely is found in the news. Tornadoes may be devastating, but usually they are not tragic. The story arc of this year’s Democratic Party nomination is heading in a Sophoclean direction. The Party’s predicament is anchored in its own hubris and that of its major power players. Barack Obama has been able to accumulate more delegates, and will continue to hold his own, even as momentum shifts to Hillary Clinton, thanks to the often convoluted weighting process used by the Democratic Party, which this year has disproportionately rewarded Barack Obama for his big victories in small states and in majority African-American congressional districts. Team Obama’s organizing and going after the caucus states was a brilliant exploitation of the wave of idealistic enthusiasm his campaign rode. Hillary Clinton’s own hubris led her to believe in her own inevitability and devote insufficient resources to the caucus states. Obama is richer in delegates than in popular support Obama enjoys his lead in delegates for one main reason: black majority congressional districts. Democrats are proportional so long as losing candidate gets 25% of the vote. But in black majority districts,  Obama is winning north of 80%, so he gets them all. He also has big (2 to 1) leads in many low-turnout caucus states. His delegate lead among elected delegates is a much bigger percentage margin (6%) than his lead in the popular vote (2%). If you throw in Florida, his vote lead is 1%. It is surprising that Hllary Clinton has not made more of an issue of this yet – since the popular vote is all but even. Super delegates continue to move toward him, suggesting that many had committed to do it after March 4, expecting his victory march to continue and did not change their minds despite his defeat in 3 of 4 contests that day.  Florida and Michigan Even if Hillary Clinton were to get her way and have the existing Michigan and Florida delegations seated (something very unlikely to happen, since Obama was not even on the ballot in Michigan owing to his earlier fidelity to Party discipline), Obama would still have a lead in pledged (elected) delegates. Reader Otis A. Glazebrook, IV sent the following calculation: If Michigan and Florida delegates are seated, the total needed to nominate would be 2,195 because the Delegate total would increase by 341 to 4,389 Total Delegates. Florida: If the 185 Florida Delegates were seated “as-is”: Obama @ 1,366 + 67 = 1,433 Delegates Clinton @ 1,222 + 105 = 1,327 Delegates Obama leads by 105 PLEDGED Delegates. Michigan: For the sake of argument let’s assign Michigan’s 156 delegates according to the percentages as they were determined on election day: Clinton won 56% of the vote or 87.4 Delegates. It does not seem unreasonable to me to award Obama the Uncommitted 31% and the Undecided 9% or 62.4 Delegates. (Edwards has 13% or 20.3 Pledged Delegates) Obama @ 1,433 + 62 = 1,495 Pledged Delegates Clinton @ 1,327 + 87 = 1,414 Pledged Delegates Obama still leads by 81 Pledged Delegates! Obama certainly would not agree to seat the current Florida and Michigan delegates (particularly since he was not even on the ballot), of course. It doesn’t matter if he would still be ahead because seating them would buttress Hillary’s big state argument and could sway the super delegates. This race is all about super delegates now, regardless of what happens in Florida and Michigan . As Rick Moran has pointed out: someone has to pay for new primaries or caucuses ($15-20 million for a primary in Florida, and almost as much in cash-strapped Michigan ) and it isn’t going to be the taxpayers in those two states. Michigan’s Governor Granholm is ruling out a primary unless its 100% funded by someone else. The Florida Democrats can’t see any scenario where a caucus or primary can be held, though the Republican governor made encouraging noises about holding another primary vote so his state’s Democratic primnary voters wouldn’t be disenfranchised, only to back away when the subject of the state paying for the election was raised. The pressure will build, and the Party may well cave. The Democrats, currently far ahead of the GOP in donations, have the money to pay for both states’ elections. The new election route is one way to partially placate Hillary, but given proportional rules, she still will not catch up. So it will come down in Denver to the Party’s super delegates, a mechanism reeking of rule by elites, adopted by the party which proclaims its devotion to the common man and woman, and which has made huge amounts of noise about making every vote count. Thanks to its convoluted primary process, with proportional arrangements frustrating the desire to have a decisive winner to allow the party to get on with hammering the GOP nominee, the edge in pledged delegates that belongs to Barack Obama will be difficult to overcome among the super delegates, who have been breaking his way since the first Super Tuesday. Will the political party which depends on blacks voting for it by a 9 to 1 ratio be able to deny its backing for the nation’s highest office to a black man who holds the pledged delegate lead? Will this be so even if the shine on his vague promises gets tarnished and his involvement in ordinary Chicago machine politics becomes clear over the course of the Rezko trial? Will this be so if by the summer it is clear that Clinton would be a stronger general election candidate, running better in more of the contested states than Obama (Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Jersey, and in western states with high percentages of Hispanics)?  The tragic flaw of the Democratic Party is the hubris that allows it to style itself as the only force interested in the welfare of minorities and the poor, and the only party committed to real democracy. It is not accustomed to its own internal processes being subjected to much critical media scrutiny. But Denver promises to be the greatest political media spectacle since the Democrats’ Chicago convention in 1968. The two candidates are very close in the popular vote and in the delegate race. It would be foolish for either not to go after the nomination prize until mathematically eliminated. The ambition that drives both nominees pretty much ensures that this will happen. It could well end up tearing apart the Party. [...]
Pingback by The Tragedy of the Democratic Party « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian — 3/7/2008 @ 11:06 am
If the states are not allowed a say in terms of delegates at the convention then those states should just leave those candidates names off their general election ballot.
Comment by David — 3/7/2008 @ 6:59 pm
[...] Update - Rick Moran looks at both the Florida a Michigan primaries. [...]
Pingback by Orange Park Journal.com — 3/7/2008 @ 7:48 pm
[...] Update - Rick Moran looks at both the Florida a Michigan primaries. [...]
Pingback by Will taxpayers bail out the Democrat primary mess? : Mandarin Journal.com — 3/7/2008 @ 7:49 pm
[...] Update - Rick Moran looks at both the Florida a Michigan primaries. [...]
Pingback by Will taxpayers bail out the Democrat primary mess? : SanMarcoJournal.com — 3/7/2008 @ 7:53 pm