So undoubtedly you have heard the new media hurricane of speculation surrounding the role of super delegates and their nefarious potential to overtake the popular will of the people and potentially select a candidate who isn’t Barack Obama to the nomination. Today the New York Times even has a piece on how Al Gore and other “superdelegates” are struggling with their role in the process and rapidly attempting to find a place of harmony for the party.

To all of this I say, bah humbug, and I urge everyone else to do the same.

I understand the plight of the Democratic party and the very liberal elements of the media (I am looking at you MSNBC) who are so caught up in the new frenzy to throw party rules to the wind and find a way to get a nominee ASAP. These people want to raise the eventual nominees chances of winning back the White House. At the end of the day though I don’t feel the least bit sorry for them.

In case you haven’t noticed the way both parties, but especially Democrats, elect their nominee is as backward as the cast of characters on Carnival. Their attempt to marginalize the popular vote by breaking up delegates, avoiding winner-take-all scenarios and giving weighted power to a group of current and former elected officials and DNC members has come back to bite them on the butt. Let’s not be coy here, this system sucks and it has sucked for decades and it only slightly sucks less than the three other major nominating system’s our nation’s parties have had in their past.

Remember folks that in the very beginning citizens did not vote for George Washington, they were not allowed to, likewise party nominee’s have rarely if ever truly been the choice of the people at large. Whether they were selected by Congress with the help of state representatives, party bosses, delegate conventions or state primaries the individual people of this nation have rarely had much of a say in things.

For the Democratic Party to now look at changing rules mid-game is a sign of just how desperate they are to win. No one forced the DNC to put Iowa and New Hampshire first, strip the delegates of two influential general election states or decide that the person who is the clear popular choice of a state’s people has about the same delegate count when the voting is over as the person who was not. No one forced these state parties to adopt caucuses that disenfranchise party members or to let people who are not affiliated with the party vote in their primaries.

In short, the system is flawed but it has been flawed for a very long time. A brokered convention with a knock-down-drag-out fight might damage the party but it might also be the only way of drumming home the reality that the system needs to be changed. Not updated or tampered with but repealed wholly and decisively and replaced with a system where people, not delegates or superdelegates or mathematical equations chose the nominee.

To the DNC you chose this crazy system, to the candidates you chose to run knowing it was broken and to the media pundits and hosts who clearly have picked their favorites I have news for you. A real brokered convention would probably create far better ratings than the Democratic love-fest I see on television every night. In short you would make more money, have more viewers and actually get to cover a race for once instead of declaring a winner after Iowa and New Hampshire.