Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiElection Protection
Election Day approaches, and with it a test of our election system's integrity. Who will be allowed to vote; who will be barred? Who will get paper ballots; who will use electronic voting machines? Will polls be open long enough to accommodate what is expected to be a historic turnout?
Veteran activist Harvey Wasserman has co-written four books on elections and voter rights. He says John Kerry won Ohio in 2004. Why look back? Wasserman is concerned about the attempt by the Ohio Republican Party, with help from the Bush White House, to challenge the registration of new Ohio voters:
"The GOP is trying to disenfranchise these 200,000 people by challenging their right to vote, asking the secretary of state here, Jennifer Brunner, to let the counties investigate and knock off the voter rolls, if they choose to, people who have minor discrepancies in their Social Security numbers or driver's license numbers. And the secretary of state has rightfully showed that many of these mistakes come from typographical errors when the numbers are entered in at the agencies."
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that only the U.S. Department of Justice can purge these new registrants from the voter rolls. Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner, of Ohio, and President Bush urged U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey to take action, potentially purging these 200,000 people. Advocates feared the homeless in Ohio would be disenfranchised because they lack a traditional address or identification (Wasserman notes that many of them may be veterans). U.S. District Judge Edmund Sargus ruled that Ohio counties must allow voters who list their addresses as park benches or other non-building locations.
Wasserman's two main concerns about the integrity of the election are mass disenfranchisement through computerized purging and the failures of electronic voting machines, which can skew vote tallies and cause impossibly long lines at polling places (as can the provision of too few voting machines, whether they work well or not). These issues are both coming to a head in Colorado. There, Secretary of State Mike Coffman, a Republican who is also running for Congress, has been sued by Common Cause, Mi Familia Vota and the Service Employees International Union for purging 30,000 voters within a 90-day window before an election. Six thousand seven hundred new registrants were purged for failing to check a box on the voter-registration form. Colorado has seen enthusiastic participation in early voting (some estimates nationally put the number of early voters at an astounding 10 million, with days to go), and also has seen many voters opt for mail-in ballots. However, more than 11,000 voters in Denver did not receive their mail-in ballots because of a mistake made by Sequoia Voting Systems, the company that was supposed to have delivered 21,000 ballots to a Denver mail-processing facility on Oct. 16. Election officials promise the ballots will be delivered.
Brad Friedman of BradBlog.com told me: "Sequoia is one of the big-four voting-machine companies. Of course, they have failed in state after state." Friedman also reports on "vote flipping," a problem with electronic, touch-screen voting machines. "It's West Virginia, it's Tennessee, it's Texas, Missouri, Nevada ... people go in and vote for a Democratic straight-party ticket or for Barack Obama, and the vote flips to a Republican or some other candidate." The companies claim the machines can be calibrated to work properly. Friedman disagrees: "These machines need to be pulled out, because even when they work, the problem is that there is absolutely no way to ever verify that any vote ever cast on a touch-screen machine like this has been recorded as per the voter's intent."
In response to video of Georgia early voters waiting eight hours, Friedman blogged: "Thank you to those voters who were willing to hang in there! Shame on you to those officials who set up this system that can't even accommodate the limited numbers of early voters! God save us all next Tuesday. Stay strong and brave people!"
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People has sued Virginia's Democratic governor, Tim Kaine, on the grounds that he is unprepared to deal with a massive onslaught of voters there Nov. 4. Virginia is not among the 31 states with early voting.
Thousands of lawyers and citizen-activists will be monitoring the polling places on Election Day. People are posting videos of election problems at videothevote.org. When you go to cast your vote, take a friend or neighbor, take your ID and take a camera as well. Election protection is everyone's job.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.
70 Comments so far
Show AllIt is a shame that the country that is selling "Democracy" to other countries at gunpoint cannot ensure its own people one of the fundamentals of democracy, i.e. fair elections. In my country in Europe, not a single one of the voting problems I read on this website has ever occurred in the 25+ years that I am eligible to vote. Shame on you, Americans! Shame on you!
There's another pertinent article at Online Journal today by Reza Fiyouzat:
"Vote 3rd Party or Boycott the Elections".
.
Voting for McCain or Obama will be a vote for politics as usual, according to Nader.
"Both major parties are very clever," Nader said. "They don't like competition. If they were businesses in the marketplace, they would be indicted for violation of the antitrust laws."
If people want someone who will sit in Washington, then they should vote for McCain or Obama, but if they want someone who has demonstrated over 40 years of volunteering for the American people, they should vote for him and his running mate Matt Gonzalez, Nader said.
"With Obama and McCain you get what you pay for," Nader said. "With us you get what you vote for."
.
.
Ralph Nader is a Champion.
Always has been for the people.
He never holds back. He tells it like it is.
An American Hero. A excellent Public Citizen.
A toast to Ralph. Long may he live in hearts and minds.
.
"It is not the people who vote that choose their leaders, it is the people who count the votes." Joseph Stalin
"You say a lie enough times it eventually becomes the truth." Goebbels (sp.)(Nazi Information Specialist)
When "Operation Paperclip" was implemented by the U.S. Government to hire Nazi Scientists, Psychologists, and Intelligence Officers after the War instead of bringing them to trial for "Crimes Against Humanity", a deicision was made to seek a "New World Order".
Amy Goodman saw, first hand, what happens when a "Police State" takes over to control civil disobedience. The National Media did not respond to the "Loss of Freedom of Press".
Disenfranchisement of hundreds of thousands of people is nothing compared to the, almost, 8 million electronic votes purged from the system in 2004 (Election Data Services analysis of the 2004 election). The U.S. Congresses have not responded to the Loss of the Right To Vote in the past 8 years.
We just saw the greatest "Theft" in World History and that was done with the collaboration and support of the U.S. Congress.
As George W. Bush said when he was reelected, "You liked what you had the past four years, wait till you see the next four years." 22% of the American People are happy with the past four years. That means that 66 million people have made money and want that to continue.
If only the American People knew the truth.
Obama Ohio Video Get Out The Vote
http://www.wilypython.net/Obama%20Ohio%20Video%2010302008.asp
When will someone say "Take to the streets!"?
It wasn't an election; it was an auction.
The winner: President Goldman Sachs, er, I mean--oops!---Obama. Sorry.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
War? We need Ralph Nader; When Nam was an inferno and flesh it's fuel this great American fought heroically against colored toilet paper. We need his foreign policy acumen, his sensitivity to human suffering in these terrible times.
Obama at long last.
Bring it on Obama haters; As a whole you've been ugly, been the vast bullying majority on CD, been full of invective and bile and with no alternative; yeah, lesserevil yourselves into a voting booth on Tuesday. Vote for that corpse Ralph, or McCain like some of you have declared you would. Big deal.
Now it's my turn, ctrl-z's, ezeflyers: That's right- It is Obama or McCain-and it is Obama who time will prove a decent man. And it is Obama who has inspired millions, and had he not, we would be looking down the barrel of four more years of Republican Rape. Oh I forgot, I learned on CD there is no difference. Like Gore and Bush are the same.
Obama
Yes, Sweet Yes.
"we would be looking down the barrel of four more years of Republican Rape."
You left out YOUR Bush-accomplice Dems who have been complicit with and enabling every step of the way with the Repugs since 2000. You should have written:
"Republican ***AND*** Democratic Rape."
But because of your D partisan blinders and Denial, you didn't do that.
Your beloved faux Dems have helped:
Give up 2 illegal wars/occupations, they have already approved an attack on Iran.
Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court
Torture
Illegal Spying
The USAPATRIOT ACT which shreds the US Constitution
FISA
The $850 BILLION Wall Street Bailout which your lord and saviour Obama actively worked for and voted YES for.
Just like the Repugs.
Of course, this short list doesn't even begin to cover most of it.
What is the list that the faux Dems have done of a positive nature?
Well, they gave us some "window dressing" of a little higher minimum wage spread over many years.
All of the above was done with the help of your Bush-accomplice Dems. That's the reality.
When are you going to come out of your Denial and realize who and what these people really are (including Obama), as opposed to what you want them to be?
I always go for the VOTING RECORD. I see you did not say one word about Obama's Bush-accomplice VOTING RECORD. That's typical of Obama supporters. All you and others are going on is some "hope" and "change" pabulum when his VOTING RECORD should be your #1 criteria for choosing a candidate, NOT EMOTION and wish, wish, wish, hope, hope, hope. That has as much effect as prayer.
And frankly there is NOTHING in Walk on Water Obama's VOTING RECORD which speaks to "change" or "hope."
Nader/Gonzalez
Cindy Sheehan to replace that despicable Bush-accomplice Pelosi.
It's not your business, but since you ran your mouth into this neighborhood, my Lord and Saviour is Jesus Christ.
Obama is a politician.
Unlike Useless Nader, and better by far than McCain.
Vote for who you like.
I already have.
What Do They Have to Do to Lose Your Vote?
The Trail of Broken Promises
By MATT GONZALEZ
Excerpt:
"Watching the Democrats in the final weeks of the presidential election has been a lesson in revisionist history. While they lament the terrible crimes perpetrated against the American people by George Bush and vow to keep fighting for our rights, they conveniently gloss over the fact that they have no standing to make such claims. Indeed, the Democrats, including Senator Barack Obama, have actually voted with President Bush’s agenda, making them complicit in his acts, not valiant opponents defending our liberties....On the street when I am approached by an Obama/Biden volunteer or someone who tells me they’re voting for Obama, I usually ask “What about the FISA vote?” And each time I hear in return “What’s that?” Or if I say, “You know he supports the death penalty,” I usually hear in response, “No he doesn’t.” At what point will there be intellectual honesty about what is happening? People are voting for Obama because they find him to be an engaging public speaker and like his message regardless of his history of being part of the very problem he professes to want to fix. Most people don’t want the actual facts to interfere with the desperate hope that he is everything they want him to be. Do you really want to vote for someone who has already voted to take away your civil liberties because of some vague wish that he’ll act differently as president? Obama himself, speaking of Sen. Hillary Clinton, made a remark that could just as easily apply to him, and, unwittingly makes the case for why no one should vote for him: “We can’t afford a president whose positions change with the politics of the moment. We need a president who knows that being ready on day one means getting it right from day one.” (Salem, OR, 3/21/08). If voting for war appropriations and taking away civil liberties was bringing us closer to a more democratic and egalitarian society, well, I would advocate it. But it isn’t doing that. What is your breaking point? At what point do you decide that you’ve had enough? What do they have to do to lose your vote?"
To read the entire article:
http://www.counterpunch.org/gonzalez10292008.html
[Sam's Editorial: Right-on Matt. I've already voted for you and Ralph.]
Facts are apparently irrelevant to you.
Obama has you conned.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
Worried about who gets to drive the empire steamroller next? The Demoks rode shotgun during the Repuks' steamrollin rampage. Vote for one and you vote for both. They are partners after all. With the speculators' bailout they proved it once again. Or you can vote third party, and help shut down K St and ban corporate personhood, slash healthcare costs in half, nationalize the banks, end the imperial project, spoil the propaganda, and implement social democracy. With YOUR help, it's inevitable.
Defeat the Elites!
Defeat the Elites!
Defeat the Elites!
"Defeat the Elites!"
How, exactly?
So many folks on here bashing McCain (which I can understand) but even Obama. Sure we don't have an ideal from the main stage. Sure we could have much better. Hey, I'd much rather have Kucinich, for one. But we don't have him.
But for those of you who are voting for Nader or McKinney, what is your strategy? How do you see your vote making a lasting change? Is your vote merely symbolic? Is it a way to give the big FU to the status quo - and if so, does the status quo really care?
Nader ran in what . . . ? '96, 00, 04(?) and now 08? Has the movement picked up steam? Do you see a critical mass or tipping point in Nader votes before our environment and infrastructure get completely screwed?
Furthermore, if ALL Nader or McKinney folks (or whomever it is you support) ABSOLUTELY had to vote for either McCain or Obama, I'm going to make a pretty confident guess that these voters would vote for Obama. And since those votes are instead going toward Nader and McKinney, they're giving McCain that much more of an advantage. There's even this paranoid part of me that wonders if the Republicans co-opted Nader. Hell, they've stolen two elections (and, as Amy Goodman writes, they're at it again). It wouldn't suprize me that they would be capable of this stroke of evil genius.
But let's assume the likely that Nader and McKinney are honest. Still, it's not the candidate. It's the system that's broken. So if Nader and McKinney were elected into a broken system, wouldn't the pressures be too great for them, just as they have been for Obama?
At least with Obama, we can assume we have a candidate who's trying to work within a broken system. I remember hearing Obama saying during his acceptance speech that he could not make the positive change without the citizenry. Was this a way of him saying that the system is too powerful and too corrupt for one leader to change if the citizenry is apathetic and doesn't hold his feet to the fire. Who knows?
But can you honestly say that it doesn't matter to you whether Obama or McCain wins (even with Palin?)
****
PS. Don't ask me what the differences between Obama and McCain are. I assume all CD readers are media savy enough to have watched the debates and have heard the arguments (as bland as they may have been at times). If you have looked at both candidates records and watched the debates and can honestly tell me you see NO difference, there's not much I do to convince you.
"There's even this paranoid part of me that wonders if the Republicans co-opted Nader."
Well let's get it straight. It's okay to be paranoid but be paranoid in the correct direction.
If the Repugs co-opted anybody it's Obama and your beloved Dems since Obama has done the work of the Repugs, Bush, Cheney, Rove et al since he's been in the senate (see his VOTING RECORD).
His health care is a joke. You get to buy the insurance congress has. Oh that's real health care!
I don't know why you are concerned about Nader (since you are not voting for him). Nader has not required your faux Dems to work with the Repugs since 2000. He did not require your Dems to give Bush/Cheney/Rove et al anything they wanted. Nader did not vote for 2 wars/occupations. He did not vote for the USAPATRIOT ACT. NONE of this stuff. He did not force your Dems to work with and for the Repugs and Bush.
And if I had to vote for Obama or McCain I wouldn't vote at all. Period. I can't stand either one of them. I've already voted for Nader/Gonzalez.
We got in the rut we're in by suckers going along with this supposed "lesser of two evils" bull shit one voting cycle after the other. Every presidential voting cycle we hear, "it's not the right time for a 3rd party candidate." It will NEVER be the right time for 3rd party candidates according to status quo Dem kool-aid drinkers who like to pretend they are "progressives." If they were true progressives, they would NOT be voting for neocon Repug Obama and wouldn't even consider it. Over and over again, they refuse to vote for their best interest/"progressive" politics. They vote for pro-war, corporatist politics and then live with their false-hope and Denial and then they wonder why nothing changes despite all the excuses and apologies they make for their useless and worthless Bush-accomplice faux Dem politicians. Pathetic.
The most recent example of this was when the Dem kool-aid drinkers had this long list of what they claimed their faux Dems were supposedly going to do against Bush after the 2006 "election" when the faux Dems became the majority in congress. Impeachment was included in their list even though Bush-accomplice Pelosi had said well before the "election" that "impeachment is off the table." She said it at least twice. These pathetic Dem kool-aid drinkers said "oh she's not serious. She's just saying that to fool the Repugs. She's just playing the game." Uh huh. Some of us knew Pelosi was absolutely serious. Well, in the end NONE of the things on the Dem kool-aid drinkers' wishful-thinking list was ever done by their Bush-accomplice faux Dems, including impeachment. So what did the Dem kool-aid drinkers' wishful-thinking, Denial, false hope and delusional thinking accomplish for them in the end when things are worse now than they were before 2006?
I see a repeat of this situation with their lord and savior Obama (whom they've put all this wishful-thinking "hope" in), should he be selected by the vote-flipping, easily-hackable Repug owned and controlled electronic voting machines.
And the faux Dems in congress, according to this article, are speaking about "no significant changes":
One week until the US elections
October 28, 2008
One week before Election Day, Democratic Party leaders are already issuing excuses as to why a lopsided Obama victory should not be interpreted as a mandate for a significant change of policy, and why...
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/pers-o28.shtml
I still haven't heard a strategy from you all on how you plan to affect the change you want - how you're going to sway the masses.
Vitriolic speech aint going to win anyone over.
The Democrats aren't "mine" and Obama isn't my beloved saviour. To be honest, I think the Democratic party has been compromised by Republicans, but that's not so much paranoia as closer to fact, so I don't include it in the paranoid category.
There are many who vote for Obama because they think it is the best strategy - not because they are starry-eyed "kool-aid" drinkers. Again, your disrespecting the intelligence of Obama voters and the variety of reasons they would vote for him won't ever win converts.
I voted for a third-party candidate back in '96, when our government, as deeply flawed as it was, was much more sane and led by a Democrat president. I'm hoping that Obama will bring us a measure of sanity so that we may again feel more confident voting third party. Let me emphasize that I for one don't feel that there has NEVER been a time to vote third party - just not with W. or McCain running.
But again, if you can see NO difference between the Clinton and Bush presidencies and the political and social climate surrounding them, I suppose this argument is lost on you.
As far as impeachment being taken off the table, I think you underestimate how dastardly the Bush Administration can be. We don't know what would have happened, had impeachment proceedings been undertaken. A war with Iran? - a reason to impose martial law. Hell, I would have loved impeachment, but at the same time, there's more going on than we can know.
silvacine wrote "We don't know what would have happened, had impeachment proceedings been undertaken. A war with Iran? - a reason to impose martial law. Hell, I would have loved impeachment, but at the same time, there's more going on than we can know."
You're recommending (or justifying) cowardice as a defense against Bush's aggressions. That's not an effective response.
Voting OBAMA is the strategy of the New World Order.
Mister Chips:your answer sounds fishy to me.
That's because you have not been paying attention to many of the other posts on this site and may or may not have investigated the neoliberal component of globalism. It appears to me that Obama is the annointed one to move the globalist/corporatist agenda forward. Repeating again, Barack, Michelle, and Joe Biden are heavily tied to the Council on Foreign Relations, not a friend of democratic principles, but an agent of global, corporate, militaristic control--i.e. New World Order.
The way it works is that the "strategy" comes from the candidate. So in my case it's not MY strategy, it's Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez/Cindy Sheehan's strategy which I like. I'm not on the ballot to have a "strategy," but if I were on the ballot, my strategy would look a lot like Nader's strategy which is here:
http://www.votenader.org/issues/
There's more going on than we can know? That just sounds like a damn excuse for a piss-poor Bush enabler.
As for impeachment, one either upholds the US Constitution or one doesn't. Period. I put nothing past the Bush regime; however, one must uphold the US Constitution regardless, rather than living in FEAR of what the Bush regime might do. The reason impeachment has been "off the table" is because the Bush-accomplice faux Dems WOULD HAVE IMPLICATED THEMSELVES AS CRIMINALS AS WELL ALONG WITH THE BUSH REGIME in any impeachment hearings. That's why it's off the table and has been. That should be as clear as day to any thinking person at this point in time. As for Iran, the faux Dems have already given Bush the authority to attack Iran without first getting congressional approval. They did that many months ago. If they hadn't given this authority to Bush, then they could have tried to stop him from going to war with anyone before getting congressional approval. But once again, they served as Bush's accomplices. So now, you'll need an excuse for that as well. Don't you get tired of making excuses and apologies for these faux Bush-accomplice Dems? It's gotta be a full-time job for you. How do you excuse the $850 BILLION bailout the Dems gave Bush?
Aha. But Cindy Shehan is different. She's running in one of the most liberal districts in the US. She has a much better chance of winning. Hell, I'd vote for her if I lived in San Francisco.
My whole point is that this type of thing can't work on the national level . . . yet.
3rd party candidates and true progressives have to rise from the local levels, then to the state levels and so on.
Otherwise, how are you going to get the bulk of Americans to buy it?
And if McCain is elected, we will drift further away from your ideal. Look at what happened after eight years of Bush. You'd think his mess would have emboldened the majority of Americans to all but overthrow the system, but it seems to have done the opposite. What do you expect to happen after eight years of McCain ~ and ~ God help us, Palin if McCain doesn't make it the full four years (we'd be lucky not to have witch burnings in the local town square)?
I get it - Democrats and Republicans are tied into this global corporate agenda. At least under Clinton, though, I didn't feel like we were on a suicide mission. And if both parties are virtually identical, why is one of them trying to steal the election . . . again?
But, ok. Vote for Nader for president. It's your right.
"And if both parties are virtually identical, why is one of them trying to steal the election . . . again?"
They are BOTH complicit in the stealing of the "elections." The faux Dems are complicit with their SILENCE and ENABLING, despite any theatre to the contrary they engage in. This interview will explain what I'm talking about:
Lawsuits, Machine Malfunctions and Missing Absentee Ballots Among Voting Rights Issues Facing Jittery Election
With the election less than a week away, the battle is on for voting rights. Early voters across the country are reporting long lines and problems with electronic voting machines. Republicans, meanwhile, continue to file lawsuits that could stop thousands from voting. We speak to Harvey Wasserman of Free Press and Brad Friedman of the Brad Blog.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/29/lawsuits_machine_malfunctions_and_missing_absentee
.
Nader said."Obama doesn't represent real change, This guy is the biggest con artist in our generation by far."
.
.
http://www.votenader.org/issues/
VOTE NADER 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…
single payer national health insurance:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Cut the huge, bloated, wasteful military budget:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
No to nuclear power, solar energy first:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Aggressive crackdown on corporate crime and corporate welfare:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Open up the Presidential debates:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Adopt a carbon pollution tax:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Reverse U.S. policy in the Middle East:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Impeach Bush/Cheney:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Repeal the Taft-Hartley anti-union law:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Adopt a Wall Street securities speculation tax:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Put an end to ballot access obstructionism:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
Work to end corporate personhood:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
.
Wow thats tough. When I cast my ballot, a hang around afterwards as an inside scutineer and I wait until the poll closes afterwhich I watch as the ballots are pulled out of the box and counted, each one presented for all to see. Whats it like voting and not knowing if it was even considered? And the scads of people who cannot vote? Shame.
These elections are somewhat boring. For one thing the length of the campaign is too long. Another thing is no one asks the candidates, especially the Rethuglicons, pertinent questions. We need more than two sides of the same coin parties. If 3rd party candidates were viable, I'd vote for Nader or McKinney. Unfortunately they're not, so I'll settle for Obama. He beats McInsane anyday (it doesn't take much to outshine McCain and Palin.....LOL)
.
Anyone who supports Barack Obama has to ask themselves the following questions.
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for wanting to raise the Pentagon budget?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for not supporting single-payer healthcare?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for voting for F.I.S.A?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for supporting Joe Lieberman?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for supporting the war in Iraq?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for wanting to escalate the war in Afghanistan?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for wanting to invade Pakistan?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for wanting to invade Iran?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for barely mentioning torture?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for not mentioning the poor and the working poor?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for supporting the $850 billion Wall Street bailout?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for not mentioning corporate welfare -- corporate welfare averaging BEFORE the $850 billion bailout $125 billion per year.
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for supporting companies like Wal-Mart's?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for taking millions of dollars from Corporate America?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for supporting Henry Paulson, the former head of Goldman-Sachs; or Robert Gates, the current Secretary of Defense?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for voting for the Patriot Act as well as the reauthorization of the Patriot Act?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for supporting the bankruptcy bill, a bill that punitively affects the average wage earner?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for supporting an increase in the US military presence throughout the world?
-- Why isn't Obama criticizing McCain for taking impeachment off the table?
The answer to ALL these questions is the same .. BECAUSE OBAMA IS DOING THE SAME THING!
.
Now why did you have to go and bring up all of that? (Just teasing you. I'm glad you did). You know that most Obama suckers don't give a damn about any of this stuff? All that matters to them is Obama's dreamland "hope and change" manure.
I heard some damn fool tell a talk show host tonight that she hopes (there's that "hope" again) that Obama will restore the US Constitution. Oh man. One wonders where some people come from! Pssssssssssst: Hey, get a clue, he's already voted to SHRED the Fourth Amendment with his FISA vote. (Oh, there goes Sam again talking about that damn Bush-accomplice Obama VOTING RECORD...who gives a fuk about Obama's VOTING RECORD. He talks about simplistic "change" and "hope"...that's all that matters to most of us Dem kool-aid drinkers.) So you really think Obama's going to restore something that he's already voted "yay" to shred?
I swear, there has got to be something in most people's water.
What pertinent questions has Obama answered???
.
" What did you learn today?
Did you learn how to believe? or...Did you learn how to think?"
~ Seventeen Traditions ~ by Ralph Nader
.
Quiz:
Republicans stole the election in 2000, but...
Between 2000 and 2004, Democrats did almost nothing to make sure every vote counts, or almost every vote counts, or at least enough votes count so Republicans can't steal the election beyond a three percent margin, or a five percent margin, so...
Republicans stole the election in 2004, but...
Between 2004 and 2008, Democrats did almost nothing to make sure every vote counts, or almost every vote counts, or at least enough votes count so Republicans can't steal the election beyond a three percent margin, or a five percent margin, so...
Republicans stole the election in 2008, but...
Between 2008 and 2012, Democrats did almost nothing to make sure every vote counts, or almost every vote counts, or at least enough votes count so Republicans can't steal the election beyond a three percent margin, or a five percent margin, and now...
Here's the quiz!
Which party will win the Presidential election in 2048?
[Hint: It's already in the bag.]
Jacob Freeze
"Progressive" radio show host, Ed Schultz (who has turned his show into a 3 hour advertisement for Obama), has been telling his audience not to worry about election fraud. His message is to VOTE in MASSIVE numbers to "OVERWHELM" the system.
How do you overwhelm an electronic voting machine when the tally can be so easily intercepted and manipulated?
"How do you overwhelm an electronic voting machine when the tally can be so easily intercepted and manipulated?"
You don't. But that's the same spew that I've heard repeatedly from so-called "liberals."
As you most likely know, the vote tally will be what they tell us it is, whether it's true or not. So this tough talk I've heard from some so-called "liberals" about "make them steal it" and "overwhelm the machines" is nonsense. You don't have to "overwhelm" the machines when they are already flipping votes from Obama to McCain!
More W.Va. voters say machines are switching votes
In six cases, Democratic votes flipped to GOP
http://www.wvgazette.com/News/200810180251
WVA Vote Flipping Caught on Tape!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Q9NSVUu8nk
Here's a video of a man speaking about his vote being flipped in West Virginia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NJO8RhRl2E
The manipulation/stealing is done ELECTRONICALLY and out-of-sight. The number of votes or people who voted or how they voted is moot with these vote-flipping, easily-hackable, Repug owned and controlled electronic voting machines (which belong in the trash!). The results will be what we are told they are. So when the corporate networks tell us the final vote tally, most people will assume that's the legitimate vote tally, when actually it may be nothing close to that. I'm not surprised Ed Schultz is spewing that garbage though.
Interesting interview:
Early Voting Sees Reports of Voter Intimidation, Machine Malfunctions
(Interview with Mark Crispin Miller begins after newscast)
"Early voting has begun, and problems are already emerging at the polls. In West Virginia, voters using touchscreen machines have claimed their votes were switched from Democrat to Republican. In North Carolina, a group of McCain supporters heckled a group of mostly black supporters of Barack Obama. In Ohio, Republicans are being accused of trying to scare newly registered voters by filing lawsuits that question their eligibility. We speak to NYU professor Mark Crispin Miller, author of Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy."
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/22/votes
If you are so contemptuous of anyone who attempts to get people out to vote in order to overwhelm the "system", because you believe there is no use, how do you explain 2006?
Well frankly I think the Bush-accomplice faux Dems were allowed to take the majority in congress in 2006 because the Repugs knew that NOTHING was going to change so why not let them have it. The Repugs were still in control. And the Repugs were correct. NOTHING has changed, for the positive, that is. The Bush-accomplice faux Dems didn't do a 180 after 2006, instead they continued to serve as an accomplice to Bush as they had been doing since 2000.
It's mainly the presidential "elections" that are stolen, not those mid-term things.
"How do you explain 2006?"
There are several possible explanations:
Before the election in 2006, voters were expressing a preference for a generic Democratic Congressional candidate that ran 15 percent ahead of Republicans.
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=706
So the Democrats managed to squeak out a small Congressional majority.
If Obama can beat McCain by 15 percent, he will probably be elected.
If not, not.
Jacob Freeze
If you know anything about human nature or reverse psychology, you know you have to give a little when they start believing they know what you're doing, just to make them relax and think they were just imagining things. That's what happened in 2006. They could "allow" the dems to become the majority, at least in the house. You notice the majority in the Senate isn't all that much, and between the repugs and bush, the dems couldn't do much, except for piddling things the repugs and bush decided they'd let by.
We'll see in this election, won't we?
The most outrageous thing about this whole affair is the fact that we have let our voting process be controlled and managed by private companies, most of whom are overt supporters of the Republican party. These private companies can do anything they want with our votes. They can collect them any way they choose, and regardless of the way you cast your vote, be it a touch-screen or otherwise, once you have voted you have NO IDEA whether or not it will be counted! Your ballot could end up in a cardboard box in a Ryder truck, and how are you going to know?
We need to return the ownership of our voting process to the people, and that means the government. Any voting machines used should be operated with strictly open-source software. Every polling place should have fail-safe vote-count verification. I don't know how that would be accomplished - but there must be a way!
BellingtonTheCat says "We need to return the ownership of our voting process to the people, and that means the government."
I ask, "What planet have you been living on?
The people haven't been the government at least since Reagan. But the last eight years have made the fact crystal clear to most of us who aren't conservative or filthy rich. You think "our government" doesn't know what's going on with the the voting?
"Veteran activist Harvey Wasserman has co-written four books on elections and voter rights. He says John Kerry won Ohio in 2004. Why look back? Wasserman is concerned about the attempt by the Ohio Republican Party, with help from the Bush White House, to challenge the registration of new Ohio voters:"
Indeed.
I remind alert readers that the Libertarians and the Greens challenged the 2004 fraud in Ohio. Democrats, from whom the election was stolen, did not. We should ask ourselves why.
"I remind alert readers that the Libertarians and the Greens challenged the 2004 fraud in Ohio. Democrats, from whom the election was stolen, did not. We should ask ourselves why."
Good question. I hope we don't answer ourselves without the facts.
"It is not true that it's one damn thing after another - it's one damn thing over and over." Edna St. Vincent Millay
Don't worry, there are actually international election observers in the US..;-).
http://www.osce.org/odihr/item_12_34038.html
Contrary to what I would have assumed, the US administration did invite the OSCE to send a team (a government has to invite observers, you see)- far too small to really observe, but at least something. The OSCE are seasoned election observers, at least their people are pros.
A full-fledged election observation exercise would have to involve the UN as well, of course. Too late for that.
"Election Day approaches, and with it a test of our election system's integrity. Who will be allowed to vote; who will be barred?"
There are more fundamental exclusionary, discriminatory and disenfranchising processes at work that cause exponentially more "voter fraud" than what your post focuses upon.
In a system designed to prohibit real choice, The only voting IS fraudulent voting.
The test of the election system's integrity comes long before validation day on Nov 4... and you know that, Amy. You've experienced it directly.
Enthusiasm is now the key to getting out our vote. We need to make sure that our enthusiasm for Obama and change is infectious. An enthusiasm that lasts all the way to his inauguration
Now is the time: Tell your friends to tell their friends to tell their friends to tell their friends….
Enthusiasm? For a pro-war pro-nuclear pro-corporate anti-democracy do nothing in the Senate right-wing slick politician: Obama??? No thank you! Electoral integrity is a moot point when only two parties are "allowed" to debate, discuss, and garner votes. I suggest voter suppression begins THERE, not at the ballot box. As for me, I'm reading Dennis Lippen's excellent "Savage Mules: The Democrats And Endless Wars" & trying to figure out how to deprogram "Democrats".
Assuming that it is true, every accusation that you have made toward Obama is even more true of McCain.
You and your fellow republican trolls need more deprogramming than any group of Democrats.
q
Spoken like a Rove troll.
Clearly, you're trying to get your lord and savior Obama in there so he can continue to do the work of Karl Rove, Bush and Cheney, as his Bush-accomplice VOTING RECORD shows.
Not a word in your comments about Obama's VOTING RECORD. Imagine that.
Also, don't you KNOW Obama's VOTING RECORD? You must not, otherwise you would not have written "Assuming that is all true..." Well don't you know? You mean you vote for people where you don't know their VOTING RECORD or what they've said (outside of "feel good" emotional speeches)?
How intelligent is THAT?
Or did you just allow yourself to be bamboozled with his "hope and change" PR slogan?
Another lie of omission from an Obama supporter. Ever heard of the ELECTORAL COLLEGE, quickstepper?
ANY PROGRESSIVE WHO LIVES IN A "SAFE STATE" FOR EITHER THE DEMOCRATS OR THE REPUBLICANS SHOULD FEEL FREE TO VOTE FOR NADER OR McKINNEY, IF ONLY TO SEND THE MESSAGE THAT WE DO HAVE SOMEWHERE ELSE TO GO AND THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE TO EARN OUR VOTES INSTEAD JUST TRYING TO BULLY US INTO VOTING FOR THEM.
Forget this "safe state" nonsense. Vote your conscience and principles REGARDLESS of where you live. Stop this kowtowing to the Bush-accomplice DEAD Democratic Party. Based on their Bush-accomplice performance since 2000 where they have in so many words told us to fuk off, they deserve NOTHING in this "election."
Correct. "Safe" is not an operative word in these times.
bongofury says "There hasn't been an honest election in 12 years here in Amerikkka."
And goes on to question why the dems haven't been raising hell about any of it. The dems have done their own underhanded election things, if not to the extent the repugs have gone.
In my entire life, every time something happens or doesn't happen, everyone yells "The Government needs to fix this!"
Well I say it's way past time the people stand up for themselves and find the way to get government and the political parties the hell out of the peoples' voting process that puts the politicians in office!
Works for me.
Like Obama said last night:
"Power concedes nothing without a fight".
This is true.
I wonder if he knows that many of us who voted for him will be fighting his own power base.
"It is not true that it's one damn thing after another - it's one damn thing over and over." Edna St. Vincent Millay
Yawn... The Big Bad Greens are helping the Republicans out. Don't these apologists for the Democratic Party machine ever get tired of it? In fact, it is the Democratic Party that is helping the Republicans out, and in more ways than I can actually even count.
Well put!
Diebold... maker of ATM's for Bank of American Monopoly.
'Let us take your money, and your vote!'
Just saw Brad Friedman's movie about vote rigging and Clint Curtis, and the Murder of the person investigating the Florida Vote and Tom Feeney.
LINK TV ROCKS
Love
Zero
Who cares if the vote is STILL RIGGED? There hasn't been an honest election in 12 years here in Amerikkka. So what if McShame and Pal Palin Win? The nation will be no better off with Oh'Bumma except, Maybe, in the short run. The Democritters have never complained about the stolen election of 2000 nor the stolen election of 2004. Obama has spit on the rule of law and wiped his ass with constitution by signing the FISA "get out of jail free" bill. Gee! Just like GW Bush would do. I heard his eloquent speech about why passing this bill was a very bad idea and he was right on! That was before he won the nomination. I voted for him in the primary and he spit on me and every person who voted for him by signing that FISA bill. I could never vote for someone like that. How can you? Oh, I know, the same way people could vote for Hillary in the primary and McCain in the general election. They are STUPID! The only way for the people to have a say in government again is to destroy the Democratic Party. It is their job to keep any other party that really represents the People from forming. It's the Republican party that works to destroy democracy and maximize profits. And the stupid democrats fall for it every time! Rigged election? Tell me something I don't know. When the people get hungry enough and cold enough and sick enough they will revolt and take this country back from the "New Age Nazis". Until that happens we are all blowing into the wind.
And still, in spite of all your fine observations (and in my opinion, correct on each issue), many will still vote for the 'lesser of two evils.'
This 'choice' will continue until we, the people, stop allowing it to happen. The change can occur in many ways, but to be truly successful, it would have to be non-violent. But the starting point is when a majority of people vote for a third party, doesn't matter which one (well, if you were going to vote Nazi White Supremacist Party, I'd rather you don't think that Nader would be your second choice).
If you don't vote third party this year, with a candidate like Nader to represent your voice, then I can't see an election in the next 20 years (most likely without a 'Nader') that would be a challenge to the corporate elite and their protectors (congress).
Why do glitches in the machines tend to always err on the side of the Republicans?
Odd, ain't it?
"It is not true that it's one damn thing after another - it's one damn thing over and over." Edna St. Vincent Millay
yes, with slight exception: some flipping recently when someone hit Obama, it flipped to McKinney, which helps Republicans indirectly. Old tricks reused, upgraded.......
And I ask the same question asked on the show, DemocracyNow when the guests were discussing what went into this article, why isn't the Democratic Party "screaming" about this? Why have they not been dealing with it well for years? (Great exceptions noted, like the Sec'y of State in OH)
A more likely explanation is that the Dem leadership and donors are heavily invested in white privilege. They really don't want to win with "those" votes.
That is not your best answer, I hope, is it? Who are "those" votes? Those people without white privilege have been voting Dems in heavy numbers. Do you really think Dem party wants to lose so badly and have Republicans win?
The explanation I hear a lot is that the party muck-a-mucks think that if they talk about electoral fraud, the voters will shy away in discouragement. I find this thinking hard to get my head around. Knowing all this was going on never stopped ME from voting - why would it stop anybody else?
The long waits in Georgia have been caused primarily by system failures (100% of Georgia precincts use Diebold's automatic vote-stealing system).
The federal courts would not allow the republican Secretary of State to purge more than 50,000 voters so she's apparently decided to frustrate voters in another manner.
q