Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ;  (less...)
Add to My Group
June 4, 2006 at 08:26:18

View Ratings | Rate It

The False-Fake Debate over RFK Jr's Rolling Stone Article Started by Salon Ignores Democracy and What's Important

submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg
Tell A Friend

By Paul R. Lehto, Attorney at Law, Posted by Joan Brunwasser (about the submitter)     Page 1 of 4 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

For OpEdNews: Posted by Joan Brunwasser - Writer

Sources
Robert F. Kennedy Jr's Rolling Stone investigation into stolen election 2004, and
(criticizing Kennedy's Rolling Stone investigation)


The fight started in the Salon response linked above over the sufficiency of the evidence to prove a stolen election in 2004 that was amassed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a great disservice to democracy, because it fails to take the risks to democracy seriously. It's net effect is to say it's "ok go back to sleep, no need to be alarmed" while also suggesting we get together and deal with issues like voter suppression.

Though it seems that it's uncool to take something extremely seriously in this modern day, I believe We should all be earnest about defending democratic elections, like Salon's Farhad Manjoo used to be when he wrote election protection articles prior to Election 2004. That recited fact tells us especially strongly that it's ok to slumber away, RFK=no credibility here.


But there's a better way to understand this debate over the sufficiency of evidence, one that shows why 2004 is so important. Elections fundamentally shifted in the late 90s by the advent of electronic voting and that shift was increased greatly in 2002 with the passage of the Help America Vote Act and its $3.8 billion in funding for electronic voting machines to be installed around the country, with the HAVA addition of legal requirements that generally favor electronic voting.

Articles like Manjoo's, though probably well intended, are doing what Jon Stewart said CrossFire was doing when he went on CrossFire and said:

Please...
Stop.
Please.

You're h-u-r-t-i-n-g democracy. Please stop.

Stewart was both comical but deeply serious. Many agreed that the muckraking debate on crossfire was fake debate.

I'm no comedian so all I can do is be serious. To go with fake debate still alive on non-canceled shows, we've got fake elections designed to give out little or no evidence. Thus, we can always have a debate over the sufficiency of the evidence no matter whether the election was actually stolen, or not.

The very debatability of 2004 (when I assume Manjoo is totally right for the sake of argument) means that democracy is dying or dead. Mock me if you like at lehtolawyer@gmail.com, but it's time for all good men and women to come to the aid of their country. Seriously.

My name real name is below, and my cell phone number. You can have them -- the government certainly already does, along with all of my phone numbers dialed, and yours. At least if you call or write there's a thread of reasonable purpose to have my number.

THere's a late 1970s Supreme Court case that says just having the numbers but not listening doesn't require a warrant. Devotion to the "rule of law" won't save us by itself because legal rules are tiny rules with gaps and loopholes between them, so ultimately we must be able to, in a binding/serious way, ask ourselves:

Is collecting all phone numbers dialed for all Americans consistent with a decent vision of a free society?

Is funding electronic voting where votes are necessarily counted in invisibly using secret software consistent with a decent vision of a free society?

Is America's status as having the highest percentage of its population in prison in the entire world, consistent with a decent vision of a free society?

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Editor

 

Book Recommendations for " 2004 Election"
Change and Continuity in the 2004 and 2006 Elections
by Abramson P

$46.95
Lowest New Price $19.42

Number of pages: 324
Publisher: CQ Press

Presidential Elections 1789-2004

$47.00

Number of pages: 320
Publisher: CQ Press

The Elections Of 2004 (Elections of (Year))

$24.95
Lowest New Price $1.25

Number of pages: 213
Publisher: CQ Press

Air Wars: Television Advertising In Election Campaigns, 1952-2004, 4th Edition
by West D

$36.95
Lowest New Price $14.99

Number of pages: 177
Publisher: CQ Press

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
2 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

Hitting ALL the nails by Ginny in CO on Monday, Jun 5, 2006 at 2:37:25 PM
Linking to the question. by Ginny in CO on Monday, Jun 5, 2006 at 11:10:32 PM

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum