I recently wrote an article here saying that I did not believe that if elected, Debra Bowen, the Democratic candidate for California Secretary of State, would decertify the Diebold voting machines that do not comply with California law. This is not to say that Bowen doesn’t understand the problem and doesn’t want to decertify voting machines that are vulnerable to hackers, just that I don’t believe that the Democratic Party leadership will permit this to happen.
Let’s look back at the election of 2000. Democrat Maxine Waters is one of the toughest, fiercest fighters for civil rights this country has. When voters were disenfranchised in Florida, Maxine stood up with the entire Congressional Black Caucus and practically begged Al Gore and the Democratic Senators, who at that time held a majority of seats, to sign their petition not to certify the fraudulent Florida electoral votes. One of the saddest things I’ve ever seen in my life was watching Maxine almost reduced to tears on C-Span, as not even one Democratic Senator stepped forward to support fellow Democrats and prevent Bush from taking office.
Another Democrat was almost reduced to tears years later in retelling the story. California Senator Barbara Boxer wanted desperately to sign that petition. But Al Gore and the Democratic Party leadership would not allow it. And they had the power to keep Democratic Senators from helping fellow Democrats. They’ve rarely used that power to keep Democrats from voting with the Republicans for things that the Democratic Party supposedly does not support, only to keep Democrats from opposing the Republicans.
And then in 2004 a lot more Democrats were crying their hearts out when John Kerry broke his campaign promises. Despite his lackluster showing in the debates and his refusal to come out against the Iraq war, a no-brainer for a former Viet Nam protester, people campaigned for, donated money to, and supported Kerry because he promised not to concede until every vote was counted. I think that he had to concede because he knew that if the votes were counted properly, he would have won, and the fix was in to give Bush another term in office. Once again the Democrat Party leadership made many Democrats cry.
So when I say that I believe that Debra Bowen, if elected, will not decertify Diebold voting machines, I’m not saying that Bowen will be happy about it. Most likely Bowen will be crying right along with all the other Democrats in California who have pinned their hopes on this brave election reform activist. But in accepting the Democratic Party nomination, Bowen has become beholden to the Democratic Party leadership. That leadership thinks that election reform activists like Bowen are wackos and conspiracy theorists. The Democratic Party leadership will never permit Bowen to decertify Diebold because the party leadership wants corporations and big money to continue to control elections. Bowen got the Democratic Party endorsement because most California Democrats support Bowen. But once that endorsement was accepted, Bowen agreed to let the Democratic Party pour money into Bowen’s campaign, and that means that Bowen will owe them big time once elected.
In choosing to vote for the Green Party candidate for California Secretary of State, Forrest Hill, I am not saying that I have anything against Debra Bowen, or that I don’t think Bowen is sincere. I’m just saving myself a lot of tears. I don’t think that Hill will win, but I’m not going to cry about it because I’m expecting it. If I were to vote for Bowen, however, when Bowen takes office and the Democratic Party leadership forces Bowen to keep the Diebold machines in California, I’d be one of the many people angry about it. The Democratic Party has a lot of power, and it would be very nice if someday it decided to use it to oppose the Republicans instead of to make Democrats cry. There’s something heart wrenching about seeing decent, honest, sincere Democratic officeholders, candidates, and voters, stabbed in the back by their own party leadership over and over and over again, year after year, and still keep coming back for more. It’s enough to make a grown man cry.
Editor's note. Send a message to the Senate Dem Leaders who make Democrats cry. Help Throw Joe Lieberman out. Support Ned Lamont in the CT primary.Let the republicrat senators know they won't hold their jobs if they don't DO their jobs and represent the people who elected them.
Unfortunately, whoever controls the voting machines, controls the elections.
Right now it is the Republicans who control something like 80% or more of the voting machine vendors. So if a Democrat wants to get elected, they have to appease the Republicans, not their constituents.
The question is not why asking people nicely to give up their power doesn't usually work, but why Democrats prefer having Republicans control both election systems, and through that, the Democratic Party leadership. When you send them a message, you're asking them to throw themselves out, so don't be too perplexed if they don't.
Ned Lamont may be the better candidate, but as far as the Democratic Party leadership is concerned, Lieberman has more money, more name recognition, and a rock-solid record of voting with the Republicans, exactly the way the Democratic Party leadership wants him to.
Bill Kristol, a neo-conservative member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) said on national TV that the Democrats are going to win in November, and that it would be the best thing for the Republicans. I interpreted that to mean that it would restore people's faith in the election process when Democrats win, and make them think that if they just work hard enough, campaign hard enough, and donate enough money, they'll be able to win in 2008 also. But if PNAC has ordered Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia, and other voting machine vendors to rig the elections to ensure that Democrats win in November, they'll be able to order them to rig the elections so that Republicans win in 2008.
With electronic voting machines, optical scanners, and central tabulators (computers) counting the votes by means of secret proprietary software that nobody is allowed to examine, there is absolutely no way to prove that an election wasn't rigged. You might think from the outcome that it wasn't, but any computer professional can tell you that there is no way to prove it.
Electronic voting machines depend on the programs that run them, and it is child's play for a programmer, particularly a programmer like the ones who ran Diebold back when their programs were written, people who had previous convictions for sophisticated computer fraud and embezzlement, to write programs that have back doors that they can use at any time to have any election come out the way they want it without any trace being visible to auditors.
If the Republicans REALLY want to restore people's faith in the system, they might even allow the Democrats to get rid of people like Lieberman and Feinstein, at least until they can find suitable replacements. Wealthy, older people aren't always averse to retiring while their profits are intact, particularly if it is a favor to their corporate owners.
Fascists may be evil, but that doesn't mean they're stupid. They see the polls. They know that people want change. So they may have decided to give people something that would, to all intents and purposes, appear to be a positive change. At least until they rig the subsequent election. Without honest, open elections, even when you win, you lose. You may win an election when those who control the voting machines allow you to, but you lose democracy by letting private corporations control elections and choose who wins and who loses. Particularly when their agents come around to explain to you that you didn't really win, you only won because they rigged the machines to let you win, and that they now want payment for their service, or else you'll never win again.
by
Mark E. Smith (20 articles, 28 quicklinks, 68 diaries, 812 comments)
on Monday, May 8, 2006 at 12:49:04 PM
I left the democratic party after a forty year memebership. I did so after the 2000 election debacle but the Clinton years contributed greatly to my decision.
I would say that this statement, from a Senator with whom I generally agree, frankly sickens me:
"Another Democrat was almost reduced to tears years later in retelling the story. California Senator Barbara Boxer wanted desperately to sign that petition. But Al Gore and the Democratic Party leadership would not allow it. And they had the power to keep Democratic Senators from helping fellow Democrats. They’ve rarely used that power to keep Democrats from voting with the Republicans for things that the Democratic Party supposedly does not support, only to keep Democrats from opposing the Republicans"
What a cowardly statement, especially from one whose seat is secure! I do not see how Al Gore contributed to this decision as he never was in the inner circle of the democratic leadership and his inclusion, sans attribution makes me wonder....Similarly Nancy Pelosi's leadership ( or lack thereof) has shocked and saddened me as well. She works only to ensure her power base and does nothing to adress the issues so important to our continued liberty.
I quibble with your inclusion of Dianne Feinstein in the same sentence as Joe Lieberman and any quick google of her voting record will prove that point.
Those progressives ( gosh I hate that sell out term!) who still believe that a democratic victory will assure the ascendency of moderate politics are simply self deluded.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2388 comments)
on Tuesday, May 9, 2006 at 7:18:58 AM
