 |
||
 |
|
|
Letter to Pelz
Mr. Pelz:
As a member of the more than 400,000 citizens in the State of Washington who voted for Hillary Clinton and who believed their votes were important in the process, we ask that you resign as Chair of the Washington State Democratic Party.
When we first started our long, hard work for a presidential nominee, you told us that, as Chair of the Washington State Democratic Party, you would remain neutral during the selection process because you represented all Democrats not just one nominee. As Chair of our party and a Superdelegate, we believed what you told us. It makes sense that as Chair you should remain neutral until Democratic voters in this country finished voting, made their decision, the process had run its course, and we had a nominee. You have failed over 400,000 people who voted for Hillary Clinton in the popular vote.
As I’m sure you are aware, the popular vote in this State was only a 3% difference between the candidates. Yet, the caucus process was so lopsided that it revealed how representation by election can be crushed by the controlling power of a small number of people. There are very few who feel the caucus process used in Washington is representative of the people of this State. The caucus process is antiquated, disenfranchising and downright chaotic.
Voters in our State are already angry about the caucus process and the lopsided impact it had on our primary results. Your endorsement at this point in the process sends a very loud “I don’t care about you” message to those voters. Your early endorsement only serves to further alienate Clinton supporters in this State. You many not need them to carry Obama here in Washington, but you will definitely need them to grow the Democratic Party.
As you so eloquently said in your letter, “I will be eternally grateful for Sen. Clinton’s appearance at our awards dinner last year, as she was warmly welcomed by Washington State Democrats, and for the time she has spent campaigning in Washington State. I have no doubt that Sen. Clinton would be a tough, thoughtful, intelligent, compassionate, and supremely-prepared President of the United States.” Obviously, the fact that she has all these wonderful attributes and has shown loyalty to Washington State means nothing to you. Dwight Pelz May 27, 2008 Page Two
For many of us, Senator Clinton’s campaign has special significance. Not only is she the most qualified and electable candidate, she is also a woman. We have watched with dismay as Mr. Obama has assumed “rock star status” with the media and many of the Democratic leadership where race was not an issue and perhaps an advantage.
While we applaud Barack Obama’s historical breakthrough (we’re not so sure about the rock star status), we note the difference in the treatment of Hillary Clinton. Can you tell me about Obama’s wardrobe and what his “mood” was for any given day? What would have happened if Bill or Chelsea Clinton said they had never been proud of this country in their adult life? Does she have too many masculine traits or does she have too many feminine traits? We continue to hope that women candidates will not be judged by the styles of their wardrobe or the traits of their gender but will be judged by their intellect, preparation and character.
Since you are so concerned with unifying our party, your resignation as Chair of the Washington State Democrats will go a long way towards mending fences within our party.
Sincerely,
Sharon Wilson, Chair South Sound for Hillary |
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|