I know it doesn't make much sense, given how the Republicans seem to be imploding every day in new scandals and corruptions and reckless policies -- and with the Administration's approval numbers about to head into the 20s -- but I can't shake the fear that somehow Bush&Co. will keep both houses of Congress in the November election.
This anxiety was heightened the other day when, in a local supermarket, I ran into Stephen Rosenfeld, one of the key electoral-integrity activists in this country.
Since he had been examining electoral chicanery in the 2004 balloting for more than a year-and-a-half, I asked Rosenfeld if he was close to finishing up his research.
My simple question released a torrent of information from him about how the Republicans were able to steal the election in Ohio, and thus the Electoral College vote that elongated the HardRight's hold on power, with Bush as their frontman.
Customers who were reaching around us to get to the bread and cookies were party to the rush of facts about how and why pundits are not now analyzing the presidency of John Kerry -- but I don't want to diminish Rosenfeld's thunder by listing the details here, since he (with co-author Bob Fitrakis) has a book on the subject coming out in the Fall.
Suffice it to say that the information he laid on me, along with what has been picked up from other electoral-fraud experts -- Mark Crispin Miller, Ernest Partridge, Steven Freeman, Bob Fitrakis, Harvey Wasserman, Brad Friedman, Alastair Thompson, Bev Harris, John Conyers, et al. -- makes it clear that Kerry was robbed. In some states, it's likely that the Republican vote-counting corporations massaged the numbers to create a Bush "victory." But it's equally clear that, in key locales around the country, the GOP might not have needed to fiddle with the computer software since enough votes were stolen from the Democrats by other slimy methods.
HOW TO HIJACK AN ELECTION
As many have noted, the Bush campaign was aided enormously in this thievery because their campaign co-chairs in key states were also the Secretaries of State -- that is, the officials in charge of conducting elections and certifying the vote results: Katherine Harris in Florida in 2000 (with brother Gov. Jeb Bush overseeing her work), and, in 2004, Kenneth Blackwell in Ohio, Terry Lind in Michigan, Matt Blunt in Missouri, Glenda Hood in Florida, et al.
It has been widely documented that nefarious techniques were employed in key states to aid Bush's "victory," such as: removing hundreds of thousands of likely Democratic voters from the voting rolls; rejiggering the precincts so that when those voters went to their usual polling place, they were told they had to go vote elsewhere and when they got to the new place, they had to vote by Provisional Ballots (in Ohio, thousands of those ballots apparently are still uncounted!); making sure the voting machines in heavily Democratic wards were out of commission or malfunctioning or too few in number for the crowds who wanted to vote, thus forcing working-class citizens to stand in line for many hours, with the result that many gave up and went back to their jobs; thousands of unstamped ballots that were moved around to various precincts; locked warehouses in which various electoral irregularities were carried out; dirty tricks to keep likely Democratic voters from showing up (supplying them with the wrong voting date, telling them that anybody with unpaid parking tickets would be arrested at the polls, that sort of thing); not always catching that e-votes for Kerry automatically, either deliberately or because of technical malfunctions, were being switched into the Bush column, etc. etc.
With several hundred thousand voters kept from casting their ballots in Ohio, for example, the ultimate conclusion is that Kerry would have won that key state, and other close states, had the election been conducted honestly, absent the dirty tricks and fraud. But, of course, before any serious recounting could take place, Kerry, despite his promise to fight, quickly threw in the towel, as had Al Gore four years earlier, which haste and timidity permitted Bush&Co. to continue on their corrupt, incompetent, deadly ways.
These were shameful, cowardly Dem retreats by the candidates in the face of fire. Only now are Gore and Kerry starting to behave and speak out the way they should have during their campaigns, at least about the environment and civil liberties and the war in Iraq, leading one to believe that those two are readying themselves for another go in 2008.
TIMID DEMS ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL
And where were the rest of the Democrats during all this electoral thievery? Lost and asleep at the wheel, as usual.
One can't escape the conclusion that the Democrats in general still don't know how to respond to cutthroat aggressiveness and criminality on the part of the Republicans. The Dems never knew what hit them in Florida in 2000, in Ohio in 2004 and don't really have their oppositional act together now in 2006, with the midterm election just six months away.
On occasion the Democrats display a bit more starch in their spines, but in general liberals remain locked in a more naive frame of mind, from an earlier era, when elections, no matter what their deficiencies, were more or less on the up-and-up and fair-mindedness was the operational mode for politicians: Elections were held and the declared winners got to rule, but they governed by taking into account the legitimacy of the opposition minority. Those days are long gone, thanks to Rove's bullyboy tactics.
The Democrats just don't want to deal with, or don't know how to deal with, the reality that in the Bush/Cheney/Rove era the Republican leadership has a singular goal in mind -- to win, by whatever means necessary -- and that it has a meticulously worked-out system for victory that violates every rule and tradition set up in years past. The lasting legacy of Karl Rove.
Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught at universities in California and Washington, worked for two decades as a writer-editor at the San Francisco Chronicle, and currently serves as co-editor of The Crisis Papers (www.crisispapers.org).
Excellent piece. Particularly the part about demanding leadership from the Dems as opposed to offering blind alliance.
We don't know yet if the Dems are up to it, but this fall should represent the Grand Test, determining whether they're worthy of progressive support. If not, a true opposition party emerges.
by
Jim Prues (15 articles, 33 quicklinks, 10 diaries, 73 comments)
on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 at 7:27:07 PM
The Democrats have failed every test for a decade or more. Clinton, that sacred cow for loyal democrats everywhere, threw thousands off welfare without job training or placement assistance, or even child care credits. He brought us NAFTA, CAFTA and GATT, making him just another republican.
The litany of failures by Democrats to oppose Bush for almost six years now should be very clear to everyone by now yet you demand another litmus test, what is it going to take, a house falling on you?
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 at 7:22:02 AM
There is a portion of the female anatomy between the anus and the vulva that old Yankees used to call the TAINT. “It taint one and it taint the other”. In politics this position has been staked out by the Democratic Leadership Council. They advise Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the cowardly Democrats who did not stand up with Russ Feingold in his demand for an investigation of the administration lies. . . lies that allowed Bush to attack Iraq. They also opposed Russ’s desire for an outside investigator to oversee the ethics committees in both the House and Senate. They stand in opposition to the sixty four percent of Americans who want us to get out of Iraq immediately. When Nancy debated a republican who asked her if she wanted us to “cut and run”. She replied that she certainly did not and that she simply asked the Bush administration for an exit plan. The reason for the equivocation of these so-called Democrats is that the DLC is a gatekeeper for the corporation money that has been allocated for the “friendly opposition”.
There is nothing progressive about the Progressive Policy Institute. It is part and parcel of the Democratic Leadership Council. On just about every issue that has the American voter up in arms; they have a fall back position. They are funded by AT&T, Eastman Kodak, Prudential, Georgia Pacific, Chevron, Amoco, General Mills, Bradly, Gilman, Amertech, General Mills, Bank One, Citicorp, Dow, Dupont, GE, Health Insurance Foundation, Merril Lynch, Microsoft, Morgan Stanly, Occidental Petroleum, and Raytheon.
Democratic Leadership Council president Will Marshall in his “serving the Democratic Party” memo of January 1985 advocated the formation a “governing council” that would draft a “blueprint” for reforming the party. The new leadership should aim to create a distance from “the new bosses”--organized labor, feminists, and other progressive constituency groups. He has urged Democratic stalwarts to back away from a political agenda that addressed poverty, discrimination, and crime and join the traditional conservatives in opposing affirmative action and safety net programs, and job creation initiatives, stiffer sentences, an end to affirmative action as well as welfare benefits.
The leaders proposing to help the American people jump out of the frying pan into the fire are Hilary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, Nancy Pelosi, and all of the Democrats who want to keep us in Iraq and maintain our position as the only country out of three hundred and forty seven that does not have single payer health care.
The Republicans are going to be slaughtered in the coming election and I think that true progressives should turn their invective against the Democratic traitors who seek to benefit from this and let them know that we are sick of the phoney wrestling match that American politics has become. It is time that Americans join their Latino brothers and sisters to take to the streets.
John H. St.John st.johnj@cox.net
by
gramps (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 107 comments)
on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 at 11:02:43 AM
Remember, this is a two party country.
Is it in the constitution? No.
Is it in law? In many respects, yes.
Is it in the basic folkish understanding of the people as to how politics works? Unquestionably.
The GOP won the 2004 election.
Kerry may have lost some precincts in Ohio, that would have given him an electoral vote victory, but thankfully, that didn't happen either.
Note, I did not write that Bush won the 2004 election.
Statewide winning GOP candidates pretty much all ran better than Bush.
The GOP tide pulled Bush into the White House.
They remain strong enough to retain their control of the Congress in 06.
With or without Diebold.
The Democrats are losing because we are not organized and we are not coalescing around our key issues or key constituents: the cities, the near older suburbs and urban issues.
We are the majority, but we are not able to mobilize our vote.
It is time to stop obsessing about Diebold and past elections and to organize and win governorships and state legislative seats to build for 08, 10, 12 and beyond.
Robert Chapman
Lansing, New York
by
Robert Chapman (28 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 556 comments)
on Friday, May 12, 2006 at 8:12:56 PM
4 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
