that 's what keeps me going.
But now, for those who thrive on gloom and doom it's your turn.
2006 and again in 2008.
Three essential reasons: (a) the GOP and the Bush junta simply cannot afford
to lose, (b) they can prevent their defeat no matter what the voters have to
say about it (as they have in the last three elections), and (c) apparently
the Democratic Party, the media, and law enforcement are unable and/or
unwilling to do anything about it.
A GOP win in 2006 and 2008 seems simply inevitable: as "inevitable" as LBJ 's
re-election, Nixon completing his second term, and the endurance of the
Soviet Union and apartheid South Africa. By this I mean that all this would
have come to pass but for some extraordinary and unforeseen developments.
Nothing less will budge the GOP from the White House and the Congress. After
all, their "private sector " supporters count and compile the votes with
secret software and do so with no official independent means of
validation. These facts about voting in the United States are publicly known
and undisputed. And yet, despite compelling and unrefuted evidence of voting
fraud, no one, except some determined citizen groups and a small minority of
members of Congress, appear to be bothered enough to take action.
So the GOP will win for "three essential reasons. " Let 's take them in order:
If the Democrats take control of just one house of Congress in 2006, they
will gain the powers of Congressional investigation the right to issue
subpoenas to witnesses and for essential documents, and the right to require
witnesses to testify under oath, which carries with it the threat of
criminal conviction for perjury. And be assured, that should the Democrats
take charge of congressional investigations, chaired by such prosecutorial
hawks as Henry Waxman, John Conyers and Patrick Leahy, the worm-cans would
To be sure, Congressional Democrats have recently held unofficial hearings
on the 2004 voting irregularities in Ohio, on The Downing Street Memos, on
media reform, and on the Plame-Wilson-CIA scandal. But these have all been
rather toothless affairs, boycotted by the Republicans, with all testimony
volunteered and none under oath. Official Congressional investigations would
be a whole 'nother story.
For there is good reason to suspect that the Bush Administration is less a
government than it is a crime syndicate, which, thanks to a compliant
Congress and Justice Department, has to date done its dirty work without
fear of investigation or prosecution. Among the possible crimes that are
crying for investigation: war profiteering, Congressional bribery and
corruption, election fraud, war crimes, and of course the "outing " of a
covert CIA operation -- and act which Bush's own father described as
Accordingly, the loss of either house of Congress would not merely send the
Busheviks back into private life: it might send many of them straight to
federal prison. And the prospects for the GOP malefactors would be still
worse if the Democrats reclaimed the White House in 2008, and with it the
criminal investigation and prosecution powers of the Justice Department.
Nor is the threat of criminal prosecution the only concern. In addition,
with a Democratic victory, the GOP oligarchs would have to give back
the keys to the federal candy store.
With a return to fiscal sanity, the super-wealthy might once again be
required to pay a fair share of federal taxes. Legislation might be passed
to cut back on corporate welfare, to further reform campaign financing, and
to reduce the influence of the lobbyists. Furthermore, the corporate foxes
would be chased out of the regulatory hen-houses the Environmental
Protection Agency, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade
Commission, etc.-- thus restoring to these agencies their intended function
of protecting the public interest.
In sum, from the point of view of the Republicans, continuing control of the
Congress in 2006 and of the White House in 2008 is not simply "desirable "
it is absolutely mandatory.
to say about it.
As things now stand, a Democratic win in 2006 is as likely as a vote for the
restoration of the Romanov dynasty in the Soviet "elections " of 1930. And
for the same reason: the party in power (more precisely its supporters in
private business) counts the votes.
Evidence is abundant and compelling that the presidential election of 2004
and key congressional races in 2002 were stolen, primarily through the use
of paperless "touch-screen " voting machines and the software that collected
and totaled ( "compiled ") incoming election returns. Though numerous private
individuals and public-interest groups
presented this evidence, it is only through their initiatives that the
issue remains alive. Because
expressed my suspicions repeatedly and at some length, I will not repeat