Mark Crispin Miller has a simply brilliant rebuttal of Salon’s so-called election fraud expert, Farhad Manjoo, and his recent scurrilous attack of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s article in Rolling Stone Magazine, Was the 2004 Election Stolen? Miller’s takedown of both Manjoo and Salon is posted at Huffington Post because Salon’s editor, Joan Walsh, refused to publish it.
A small, but telling excerpt:
In his dogged effort to explain away the massive evidence of fraud by the Republicans, Manjoo has based his case not on the facts but, finally, on denial — as he himself made very clear in his review of Fooled Again [Note: this is Miller’s book on the 2004 election]. “If you want to improve how Americans vote, here’s one piece of advice,” he wrote:
Don’t alienate half the country by arguing, as Miller does here, that the president and his followers — whom Miller labels “Busheviks” — think of their political enemies as “subhuman beings” and believe they must “slaughter” their opponents in the same way that religious fanatics slaughter their holy foes. Even if you believe this to be true, and even if it is in fact true, shut up about it; this sort of unhinged rhetoric can’t help, and can only hurt, our capacity to solve the problem of voting in America [emphasis added].
That an American reporter would make such a statement, and that any liberal magazine would publish it, suggests how thoroughly we have repressed all memory of what America was once supposed to mean. “Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day,” wrote Thomas Jefferson in 1816, in a spirit of scientific progress and republican self-liberation. “Even if it’s true, shut up about it,” Farhad Manjoo wrote in 2005, in the spirit of Bill O’Reilly. Luckily, Manjoo was not a major player when the colonies were trying to get their act together, or we’d all be subjects of the House of Windsor. Although they once were a minority, the first republicans did not “shut up,” but made their case until the people came around and finally took the crucial step toward liberty for all. In any case, Manjoo’s command is as illogical as it is craven, for there is no convincing evidence that “half the country” voted for Bush/Cheney’s re-election, nor is it clear how “shutting up” about the theocratic threat to our democracy could help “improve how Americans vote.” The assumption there is that the theocratic movement might somehow be lulled into allowing us to have a functioning democracy, if we’re very careful not to tell the truth about them, which will only make them mad. “Even if it’s true, shut up about it.” That is not the statement of “an open mind,” but a plea for willful ignorance and wishful thinking.
If that were just Farhad Manjoo’s position, Joan, I certainly would not have written you this letter. I write because that view of his, and yours, has paralyzed the whole political establishment, the press included; and Manjoo’s latest piece, and your defense of it, provide a fitting opportunity to point that out. If, as you say, you want to see the system fixed, you must admit that it needs fixing now — a great step forward that has just been taken by Bob Herbert of The New York Times as well as Robert Kennedy and other reputable people. It is past time to take that step, for there is every indication — as Salon should now be pointing out — that the Republicans are readier than ever to subvert the process once more on this next Election Day.
Hooray for Mark Crispin Miller! The NYU professor is a must read if you are not familiar with him. His website is at:
http://www.markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com/
I saw his (virtually) one man show “A Patriot Act” here in NYC and it was brilliant.
Supposedly the DNC, D-KOS, even the slimy DLC who are willing to support Joementum as an independent, all are in business to try to elect Democrats to public office. The way you get elected to public office is to get certified by the election authorities as having gotten the most votes. If the votes aren’t counted honestly by the electoral authorities then all the efforts to elect Dems might as well not have been made, right? Therefore, if the DNC, Markos, the DLC, Shrum, et al. were really serious about electing Dems you’d expect them to be up in arms about getting the electoral system fixed. This would be their #1 priority.
But, OTOH, if your business is collecting campaign contributions from people (like those of us here) who sincerely want Dems to get elected (or at least to vote out the Busheviks), you don’t really care whether the Dems win in the end or not. If OTH the DNC, Markos, Shrum, DLC, et al., didn’t really care if the Dems got elected or not then you would expect them not to be making much of an effort to fix the present electoral system.
Thus (unless there’s something wrong with my logic–is there?) the extent of efforts by the DNC, Markos, DLC, Shrum,…. to fix the electoral system is a definitive litmus test about whether or not they’re serious about voting out the Bushevisks. On the basis of their track record, it seems clear to me that the evidence supports the latter. I don’t mean there’s some giant conspiracy (maybe someone calls them up and blackmails based on NSA phone taps if they really get out of line), but maybe it’s sort of like pro wrestling where everyone knows it’s “kayfabe.”
I’m always suspect of CTs, but I can’t think of any rational explanation why the supposed anti-Bush forces aren’t making clean elections their #1 priority. Does anyone have a good explanation for why guys like Markos M or even Howard Dean or…. aren’t up in arms about the electoral system?
Neither fear nor stupidity seems like an adequate explanation. Anyone have a better theory than “kayfabe”?
I think you’ve hit on part of it. The other part seems to be a desire to be “mainstream” which seems to feel afraid to go to the dark side of even suspecting collusion and fraud from the other party. Which is absurd on the face of it when we see such idiocies like the Iran Contra affair going back way early to the Plame scandal today. And where in the hell do they think all those untold BILLIONS of taxpayer’s money went anyway? WE HAVE A MAFIA RUNNING THE COUNTRY! Why would they cavil about mere election fraud?
The people you mention are believers. They believe in The System. They simply are not ready to consider evidence that points to the devastating conclusion that The System is fundamentally rotten. They think that with the right strategy they can fix it, point it in the right direction, make it work.
They don’t get it.
Fitzmas!!!! What a joke.
Citizen Spook suggests the possibility that a runaway grand jury may have made a sealed indictment of old turd blossom. Any attorneys out there who can tell us if this is for real or not?
They sure as hell don’t care about indictments.
Now posted at the Big ORANGE
TAKE BACK AMERICA CONFERENCE – June 14, 2006
Remarks of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky
“…I apologize for not taking seriously enough the allegations that the 2004 election was stolen. After reading Bobby Kennedy’s article in Rolling Stone, “Was the 2004 Election Stolen?”, I am convinced that the only answer is yes. He documents how 357,000 Ohio voters, the vast majority Democrats, “were prevented from casting ballots or did not have their votes counted…more than enough to shift the results.” Watch for the DCCC to take some very public steps in the near future to ward off a repeat performance. In the meantime, there needs to be a citizens’ effort starting now to assess the machines, the ballots, the registration process within each and every election jurisdiction in each and every swing district and state, in the case of Senate races. Where the situation looks perilous, go to the media, raise a stink, demand changes. This is a great project for the many of you who have been diligently working to guarantee fair and accurate elections….”
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=2963
There’s a WHOLE BUNCH of apologies that will need to be made to a bunch of great progressives before this one is said and done.
Here’s a “Flash Slapdown” on the most recent scandal involving elections in America. It is in California. Due to the work of people like Brad Friedman, it’s getting the important attention it deserves…
( click pic below to view presentation — Flash 8 required )
Apoloigies are necessary to many in this country.
NYT
reminds me of Kos and the late, great, Armando.
link
hadn’t made it through MCM’s piece, yet. thanks.
lmao!!
your sig cracks me up!!!
glad you enjoy it. it’s a joke i have with my brother.
“Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.”
I really hope that you don’t mind that I am using as a sig on epm and mlw. If you do, I’ll change it. (Reluctantly.)
i don’t mind… though you might attribute it to me, as is customary with quotes.
thanks.
i know myleftwing, but what’s epm?
e Pluribus Media
I post there under my real name.
Just what I was thinking (and saying, over at FireDogLake); Salon’s stance is eerily reminiscent of Kos’ – that we ought to shut up about the 2004 THEFT because Karl and his swiftboating friends will make fun of us if we say anything…
Not as much, but he’s still blogging.
I have proof!
Forgotten, but not gone, eh. 🙂
Or as another famous GBCW riff went….
And we all know how that turned out.
You’re a mean one, Mr. Grinch! LOL.
The extent of the denial is huge, and it is frightening.
I was excited to go to yearlykos this year, even though it was almost impossible to swing, work-wise, because I was hellbent on going to the Electoral Reform panel. I then learned that discussion of electronic voting machines was going to be verboten there, and that this was non-negotiable. No one would explain why this was, and my (painfully!) polite emails to the organizers on the topic never got replies.
These are obviously reasonable, good people who care a lot about our democracy, and they are partisan Democrats. They just don’t care about protecting Democratic votes.
I can’t understand it.
We need a strategy to remove as many of these machines as soon as we can, and well in advance of 2008.
Paper ballots are used in National elections in Canada.
I’m new here– what are people thinking here in terms of strategies? One of the things I’ve been thinking is that we need to start making this argument more simply. It’s excellent that Miller is not backing down, and I was utterly persuaded by his book, but it seems like every new post-mortem of Ohio gets dismissed with the same three responses: nothing new here, there’s no evidence (which is obviously the most maddening, b/c nothing, not even affidavits, counts as evidence to these people), or “stop whining about the past and focus on the future.”
Why not just have our message be that electronic voting is not an acceptable way to hold elections because votes cast electronically are not verifiable. Let our opponents argue with that assertion. How can they?
Other kinds of dirty tricks that have been documented are already illegal (except perhaps phone jamming now) and we can reasonably hope that people will be better prepared against those. But electronic fraud can’t be fought except after the fact by appealing to exit polls, and we’ve seen how well that works.
And I think it’s crucial that we not settle for a paper trail, since a computer can be easily programmed to spit out the right receipt and record the wrong vote.
A comment on a dkos diary earlier in the week got me thinking about the intersection between election integrity and race. The commenter suggested that the dismissive attitude towards election integrity issues was not surprising in a community that didn’t have a strong African-American presence. It rang true to me b/c when I was registering voters in 2004 in Detroit, people kept telling me that their votes weren’t going to count anyway. I don’t know what the demographics of these virtual communities actually are, but there is certainly the perception that they aren’t racially diverse, and people feel bad about it. so i’m wondering whether the issue of election integrity would resonate more with people if it were framed in these terms.
From what I understand, Dean spoke about protecting the right to vote at yearlykos. I would like to know if anyone here knows whether the DNC is putting money into efforts to stop electronic voting, and if not, what people think of the idea. I am almost tempted to terminate my democracy bonds and give my money to Verified Voting. I don’t want to do that, but I’d feel a lot better if I knew that some of that money was going to efforts to protect the Democratic vote. Does anyone have any current information about how motivated Dean actually is on this issue?
Also wondering if another argument could be the cost involved…
good point about the cost–
here is a link to some figures we can use
http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft_essay_2005_05_24_voting_rights_comparing_the_cost_of_optical_scanne
rs_vs_electronic_voting_machines.asp
think of their political enemies as “subhuman beings” and believe they must “slaughter” their opponents in the same way that religious fanatics slaughter their holy foes. Even if you believe this to be true, and even if it is in fact true, shut up about it; this sort of unhinged rhetoric can’t help, and can only hurt, our capacity to solve the problem of voting in America
Farhad Manjoo ought to have a talk with Kevin Phillips.
Interesting to see this diaried this evening. I read Miller’s post earlier today and printed out a copy for my 80 year old father to read and enjoy. He has been convinced the election was stolen since Nov. 3, 2004. Obviously, he must be one of those crazy left wing radical hippy WWII vets.
Your dad sounds cool!
I occasionally get those “surveys” from places like the DSCC that are thinly disguised attacks on Republican policies (“Is taking control of Congress back from its corrupt Republican leadership important to you? Yes or no”) and even more thinly disguised solicitations for money (“Giving $200 today will put feet on the ground in WALLINGFORD CENTRAL PO, WA”). I’m OK with the thinly disguised attacks, but I get tired of the requests for money, and usually just run the surveys through the shredder.
Next time I get one, though, I’m going to do a diary on how to fill it out. Basically, it involves taking a Sharpie, scrawling UNTIL YOU START WORKING TOWARD SECURE VOTING IN THIS COUNTRY, NONE OF THE REST OF THIS MATTERS across each page, and then putting it in the envelope and sending it back. It should go without saying that the money will be withheld as the carrot in this carrot-and-stick approach.
I just came from canceling my premium subscription over at Salon’s website when I discovered, whoa, that one of Salon’s eight outside Directors is the founder and current CEO of Rolling Stone Magazine (et.al.)
I don’t possess the creative skills needed to craft a strategy around this, but it seems to me we need to initiate a dialog with Mr. Wenner – visibly, creatively, and without delay. Any ideas out there on the pond tonight?
Off the top of my head:
Draft an open letter/diary re: your comment and email the link to Rolling Stone.
Would Professor Miller and RFK, Jr., qualify for banning as “nutty conspiracy theorists” at Daily Kos? Weren’t a bunch of people banned for stating exactly what Professor Miller and RFK, Jr., have stated?
Somebody correct me if I’m wrong.
There have been a few bannings over CT’s.
All I know is that after RFK Jr’s article came out, I wrote about it and did a follow-up and xposted them on dkos and I wasn’t banned.
I think RFK, Jr., writing that article in “Rolling Stone” broke down the stonewall at Daily Kos–that’s my point! If he hadn’t done that, would the issue of election fraud even be open for disussion at Daily Kos?
It was a forbidden topic at Yearly Kos, though.
but is the case that Dean spoke about it on his own? or did i get bad information?
In that case, I am GLAD that I couldn’t afford to go!
If there were a rating for culpable redundancy, I would give it to you.
The criticism you make in this comment has been amply made and, more importantly, amptly accepted, here at BMT and elsewhere.
DKos demonstrated what it is. I, for one, am glad that it did. True, itt didn’t ban me; it merely showed me it was something I wanted nothing more to do with. If only other persons and institutions in whom/which I’ve believed had been so obvious!
If a banning from dKos led to something like imprisonment in the Gulag Archipelago, I could see continuing to press this. A banning from dKos being what it is, I don’t see the point.
If there is a point to this endless boo-hoo-hooing about the well-documented deficiencies of Daily Kos, I would be grateful to you for pointing it out to me.
Sorry if I’m unusually brusque tonight.
Well, you answered it with your own dismissive comment, ‘endless boo-hoo-ing”…
My position is this: Daily Kos cannot simultaneously trumpet its existence as THE political blog and then say that it cannot be criticized, or to set limits on factual criticisms.
Truth is, Daily Kos hasn’t changed–and I reserve, without qualification, the right to criticize any influential person or organization if I think they’re doing wrong.
It’s the same reason we’re STILL talking about election fraud, even though the facts are now well-established: Because nothing has been done to make things right.
You seem only to have attended to the “boo-hoo-hooing” comment.
Regarding:
Daily Kos cannot simultaneously trumpet its existence as THE political blog and then say that it cannot be criticized, or to set limits on factual criticisms.
Daily Kos can, of course, do this. It does it, from which it follows that it can do it.
Regarding:
Truth is, Daily Kos hasn’t changed-
I don’t think anything I wrote implied any belief that Daily Kos had changed. If anything, in expressing my gratitude to Daily Kos for showing “what it is,” I suggested a belief in some relatively stable DailyKos “essence”, that I want nothing to do with.
Regarding:
I reserve, without qualification, the right to criticize any influential person or organization if I think they’re doing wrong
Nobody in this conversation is denying you that right.
If you post something tomorrow about what is on the front page of Daily Kos tomorrow, well, that could conceivably be interesting.
But the comment I responded to was, as I tried to suggest, just a rehash of a point that is already widely accepted here.
And the rehashing of it, given that it is already widely accepted, did not seem to serve any purpose other than a personal venting against what is, ultimately, an inconsequential object.
Flawed assumption: “Rehashing of it, given that it is already widely accepted…”
Have you polled the Booman Tribune readers and commentators to see how many of them accept that Daily Kos is deeply flawed?
If not, then your assumption is flawed, and what you really mean is that you and I know that Daily Kos is messed up–but we can’t project our knowledge onto other people. Which is why it bears repeating from time to tme.
Further, your assumption is also flawed because it assumes that this site will (a) NOT attract new readers who are (b) NOT familiar with Daily Kos and its many dysfunctional characteristics.
For the sake of Booman’s ad rates, I hope this site IS attracting new readers!
Yawn.
Please, really, don’t bore me with pathetic knee-jerk terms like “flawed assumption” that you ingested from some “critical thinking” class.
No, I haven’t polled them.
I’ve read here extensively, and what I’ve seen supports the conclusion.
I might be mistaken.
That doesn’t make it a “flawed assumption”, it makes it a “fallible conclusion”.
There’s a difference.
An assumption precedes evidence; a conclusion is drawn from it.
And my “assumption” certainly does not “assume” either (a) or (b) in your statement.
I will say this — and let’s call it an assumption! — if new readers come to this site and all they see is a bunch of pathetic kvetching about being “banned” (already an insider term) from some other site a year ago, or six months ago…well, I don’t see ’em sticking around.
I assume. (Or more exactly, infer. Fallibly.)
Just be honest here. You’re trying to justify what was ultimately a pointless venting.
You’re better than this.
Talking about the actual issues, the problems, the facts — which you’re very good at — that is what will draw the readers. (If not, there is no hope.)
Inferentially yours,
but I went over this thread a couple of times and I am not sure yet what your fuss is about other than venting your own feelings. And even then I am not sure what those feelings are. I know you are using put downs but they are not real effective for some of us older and decrepit readers because they are just mannerisms to some degree. And yes, I have been guilty of such myself. Please get a little more real and maybe even a little touch feely here and a little more close to who you really are so we can see the human in you and relate.
And I really do not mean to give offense. I know that as an occasional commenter people like to see us for more human characters rather than just “writers”. ;^)
No apologies are necessary — at least not from you. From me, certainly. I got worked up in the course of a dispute and let my irritation get the better of me. Certainly the anger evident in my later posts was disproportionate to the occasion.
I’m just getting weary with all the outcries over injustices perpetrated at/by Daily Kos. In particular because, as I suggested in the thread, it seems to me there’s a pretty impressive consensus here that election fraud is an important issue, that the Kossociates were/are jerks for dismissing it and for banning people who demanded that it be taken seriously, etc.
I realize that people, some people, continue to boil inside over their treatment, or the treatment of others, by Kos, DHinMI, Armando, etc. That anger, and the actions that it sometimes leads to — such as jumping in whenever electoral fraud (for example) is under discussion to complain about said treatment — seem to me unproductive. And also disproportionate to the occasion, since what happens at Daily Kos, the failings of its propietor, etc., do not strike me as having such monumental significance.
It seemed to me that many who participated in the recent pie war retrospective manifested a much healthier attitude: It happened. It was wrong. We won’t forget. Now, onward! (I hope I’m not putting words in anyone’s mouth.)
Regarding the more personal dimension of your post, well, a concern for certain “intellectual virtues” — marking the distinction between a flawed assumption and a fallible inference, or the difference between failures in logic and other kinds of inferential deficiencies, for example — is a big part of who I really am. Perhaps that seems pedantic or impersonal; I see it as a care for the basic framework of thought and speech. And it does get my dander up when charges like “flawed assumption” or “faulty logic” are not only simply asserted without substantiation (which seems to me a dishonest rhetorical tactic), but used incorrectly to boot. When I hear such things, which I do regard as dishonest, condescending, and abusive, from people of whom I expect better, I am sometimes tempted to respond in kind — invariably to my subsequent regret. That is one of my all-too-human failings.
Thank you for your words — here and on previous occasions.
for precisely this reason.
I do wonder if it’s wise to give up on it, since it’s the most widely-read “progressive” blog. Since protecting our electoral process is absolutely crucial to professed aim of that site–getting Dems elected– it’s hard to imagine that attitudes over there aren’t going to change. But having been around there for less than a year, I don’t know if this is at all realistic. Is your sense that it’s totally hopeless?
I really can’t say. I almost never go over there any more, and never stay for long, so I’m in no position to have an opinion on the current state of things or likely developments. (I have a vague sense, from things I’ve seen here, that RFK’s article was not received very warmly, but again, that’s vague and second- or third-hand.)
I know there are many worthy folks who continue to make the effort to influence the discussion over there. More power to them; I would be the last to disparage or discourage such efforts.
Over the course of my blogging existence I’ve always been a reader first, a writer second or not at all. I select my sites based on how much I think I will benefit from reading them, which is why I’m here all the time and never at Kos. I guess there’s something to be said in favor of reading it just in order to be up-to-date on that part of the blogosphere’s Zeitgeist, but I personally don’t have the patience.
I would certainly say, give it a shot if you’re so inclined.
I have written many criticism of Part D (Medicare D) and have cross posted and linked to my cross-posts. I got sick of the all of the bullshit games at the orange place, so I stopped posting there. If anyone is interested in Part D, they know where to find my writings. And, if all person wants to do is read, bitch and nothing more, the hell w/them!
my comment as my daughter would say “In the spirit in which it should be taken!” It is very difficult in comments to avoid dashing something off that might leave a reader wondering where the heck the writer is going or to make the assumption that the readers will all be on the same page as ourselves. And I, in particular, seem to think that the reader is in my head with me and no explanations are needed!
I attempted to engage you in a calm, respectful manner, despite my intuition that you would ultimately respond with nasty personal invective when I exposed the flaws in your logic.
And indeed, that is what you have done. You do realize that by responding with the sophomoric “yawn” remark, followed by a string of juvenile personal insults, you completely undermined your own credibility in the argument and handed it to me on a plate?
I have a reason for everything I do and say. I don’t just post here “off the cuff” but choose my words rather carefully.
“Yawn” was sophomoric; you’re right about that.
I am unaware of any “flaw in logic” that you exposed. I believe you accused me of making a “flawed” (in what way? false? unjustified?) assumption, which a) would be a different kind of error, and b) was, as I tried to point out, inaccurate. (If my post was founded on an error, it was an error of a different kind.)
I apologize for the derogatory tone. (See my response above to glitterscale if you’re interested in more information.) But not for the substance of what I said.
Including, most importantly: “You’re better than this.” I take that to be an expression of respect, and of a kind of disappointment that presupposes respect.
no3reed–Man, you need to tone it down. The more you lose this argument, the nastier you get. No doubt about it–you lost this exchange.
Really? My two posts of this afternoon seem to you to raise the level of nastiness, despite the apologies and admissions of excessive anger etc.?
I’m not challenging you to defend this, but I would welcome your explaining it to me. And just so that it’s understood that I’m not aiming at some kind of “victory” or “vindication” — not a confrontational or competitive exchange of any kind — I’ll “take my answer off the air” as they say on call-in shows.
If I wanted to know any more than I care to about that orange thing, I would not have stopped posting there! And if others want to carry on about it, there is always blogspot!
Ok ok, I’ll shut up about D_ _ _ _ _ K _ _, henceforth to be known as The Blog That Must Not Be Named!!!!!!!
tapes a Post-It to computer screen: DO NOT DISCUSS THE YOU KNOW WHAT ANY MORE
You have just made most who post here very happy! 🙂
Why has voter disenfranchisement gone unreported; unnoticed?
First, it is not in the news. Corporate media can’t foment a revolution, wealthy owners pay their salaries, capitalists and reporters tend to lose their heads and portfolios during periods of social upheaval.
Second, Democrats are scared. If truth telling bursts into the limelight, like Congressman Murtha, a fierce smear campaign will ensue as only Karl Rove can do. Also, the only thing keeping American afloat is all the foreigners buying US debt. As soon as foreigners realize the USA really is Northern Argentina, an economic collapse occurs. So Democrats do what their wealthy supporters tell them to do.
Third, all of us are in denial. If one recognizes how radical and theocratic the Republicans are, our whole rational safe world crashes all around us. New Orleans becomes a preview of what’s to come.
Al Gore said it best in a recent remark in New York Magazine:
http://newyorkmetro.com/news/politics/17065/index2.html
If JFK and Lincoln were alive today, Ann Coulter would be calling for their murder–to thunderous applause on “The Tonight Show” while Jay Leno sat impotently behind his desk with a vacuous grin on his face.
And some want Gore to run for President again? WTF?
The thinking may be, “once bitten, twice shy.”
Or “fool me once” — no, let’s not have that weary Bush joke yet again.
The point is–powerful men like Mr. Gore and Senator Kerry haven’t publicly challenged voter fraud because they’re shit scared.
I don’t think that Gore and Kerry are (currently) in denial about voter fraud–they think it exists, it’s massive, and that both of them were robbed of the presidency.
Yet they fear to act, because if they challenge the massive theft of elections, they’re passing out of the realm of politics as we know and claiming status as revolutionary leaders. And then all bets are off as to what would happen when that revolutionary fervor was unleashed…and almost certainly, violence would ensue (it’s the American way).
But it’s JFK’s quote that is most prophetic here: “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.” JFK’s father supported FDR’s New Deal because Joe Kennedy said, “I’d rather give up half my fortune voluntarily than have it all taken away involuntarily.”
I have to admit I’m a bit scared, too–because challenging the theft of two presidential elections will make the Sixties look like the Fifties.
I don’t think that we can look for the challenge to the burgeoning fascism from established “mainstream” politicians like Kerry or Gore, though. At the end of the day, they’re part of The System and have too much invested in it to go against their own class interests.
No, the people who will lead against this are out there, their names unknown to us as yet, but they will be the ones who do this because they’d rather die on their feet than live on their knees.
Question is, will we have the guts to join them? I hope I find the courage when the time comes….
I don’t think that Gore and Kerry are (currently) in denial about voter fraud–they think it exists, it’s massive, and that both of them were robbed of the presidency.
Yet they fear to act, because if they challenge the massive theft of elections, they’re passing out of the realm of politics as we know and claiming status as revolutionary leaders.
Thank you for saying that. These two sentences were a whack on the forehead that got me to see what had been before my eyes all the time.
I’m not sure about the rest of your post. But this much seems incontrovertible.
If you realize that all of our institutions – presidency, legislature, courts, media and religions have been co-pted by a fringe group and that fringe group is pushing an agenda that is inimical to our rights, our freedoms, our way of life. And that agenda is harming our nation, our ecology, our children. And we know most of the people who get their news from the co-opted media have no way of getting any other information that is not filtered. And if we knew that some of the people are being used by political agendas even inside of their churches how would we respond? And if we thought that merely sitting at a keyboard helps us vent and gives us a community would that response be enough? And if we merely gave money to candidates we thought would counteract those agendas would it be enough?
And if we look at the results of the current “leadership” – unending WOT, huge deficits, no accounting, no accountability, NOLA, lack of health care, pollution, global warming, energy crisis, terrible destruction even in our wildlife refuges, dislodging from our usual place of being envied by the rest of the world – if we look at all those and more how do we respond?
My fear is that we are losing even the ability to respond in blogs and in these communities – telcos acting as gatekeepers for instance. And we will lose what fringe abilities we will have to become visible to the outside communities in our country. How then to respond?
I’ve marched in DC and been told that it was not good enough, that the messages were not enough to give our “leadership”. I know that software can be corrupted, that machines that have modems can be compromised and I have been questioned over and over by others who have no technical knowledge as to how I know. We don’t even listen or hear each other. And others outside who have been thoroughly programmed by media and clergy certainly do not hear or understand.
How do we respond?
How, indeed? That’s the question.
The other question: does it matter how we respond?
How would the responses of good people in Athens in 400 B.C., or in Rome in 400 A.D., or in England in 1920, have made a difference?
It’s hard to see how.
camped out on the mall, did it not bring some changes?
When the army of people who were looking for work camped out on the mall did it not bring some changes?
When the students were killed at Kent state, did it not bring some changes?
When people marched for civil rights did it not bring some changes?
When, in France, people go on strike does it not bring some changes?
Fear never changes ANYTHING.
I agree completely. We can stop or mitigate some of the government’s worst abuses through political action. There were many Brits who understood that the days of the Empire were over and did their best to support Gandhi and other leaders of independence movements. We who worked against the Vietnam War did shorten the conflict.
I’m just saying that, long-term, the days of the empire are over. So let’s give up those illusions and make some intelligent and moral choices.
that I had w/an aquaintance re: Part D. The aquaintance said, “The bloggers have got to get out from in front of their computers or nothing is going to change.”
And, the aquaintance was right, as we stay on top of everything. However, some bloggers would rather type and bitch–my feelings re: those were listed upthread.
We already know the moral arguments, backwards and forwards, upsidedown and sideways.
So, let’s start tossing out some intelligent choices and take it from there.
YES.
terrialiceatgmaildotcom
If we don’t respond, we’re fucked. When you look at it that way, what the hell do we have to lose?
I have been sitting here, re-reading your comment and I keep thinking about a conversation that I had with a somewhat conservative friend of mine. I can still hear him saying, “We need a revolution before things change in this country.” (And this is the LAST person in the world that I expected to hear that from.)
Bottom line is that it is inevitable. And, as you said, those who are in leadership positions are too shit scared to lead. (I am both judging and observing.)
You can only push a person so far…
Violent revolution is kind of jumping the gun. how many peaceful protests have even been organized around election integrity?
Instead of imagining that a revolution is going to happen around this issue, we really need to commit our time and energy to making it a priority among self-defined “progressives,” and getting it on the radar screen of the Democratic party.
Does anyone have any answers for me about my Dean question?
I don’t think you can have massive street protests that question the legitimacy of the government without some sort of violence ensuing.
Remember, the “peaceful” and “nonviolent” civil rights demonstrations of the 1950s and 1960s were VERY violent–all the violence came from the Establishment, from the police, true, but it was violence nonetheless.
Do you really think that you can put 10 million people in the streets on the premise that the current government of the United States is illegitimate, and NOT have the police crack some heads?
Look to American history, both recent and far in the past, and you will see that massive demonstrations have inevitably provoked violence, or devolved into violence.
Nothing I’d like more than to punch someone who assaulted me for trying to protect my right to vote.
Antiwar protests have not done much, but I think protests around this issue could have an impact- it could help put this issue on people’s radar screen. but we need numbers.
Our fearless “leader” uttered those words and now we have even more dead and maimed from the so-called WOT.
Believe me, I get that. My point was that we can’t just let this issue rest in the space of apocalyptic discussion about revolution.
There’s a contradiction here: hand-wringing about the widespread denial of self-defined progressives about this issue slowly drifts into a discussion about the inevitability of violent revolution about it. In that shift, opportunities for strategic discussion are lost– it is a move from one form of fatalism to another.
It seems to me unlikely that after all this denial people are suddenly going to take up arms, as was suggested. Rather than talking about these hypothetical scenarios, why don’t we start focusing on some intermediate steps we can take to fix this problem?
I had a kind of lengthy comment above that didn’t get much of a response; it talked about ways we might frame this better so we don’t get bogged down in endless point-by-point bickering about particular elections:
–we desperately need to get other progressives on board with this, and to regard this issue as an opportunity rather than a threat.
–once we have numbers, we can have demonstrations that would actually get some media attention, etc.
My other suggestion was pressuring the DNC to use money we are donating to election-protection efforts: I am convinced that if the party would take a strong stand against the disenchfranchisement of its members, turnout would go UP. As we know the reason why no one will touch this issue is b/c they are concerned that “suspicious voters” won’t make it to the polls– I think there is reason to believe the opposite, if the Democratic party does the right thing.
And I’d add volunteering our time to groups like Verified voting.
who speak out and motivate others about this issue–
there are some interesting suggestions made in a diary by Jeeni Criscenzo (CA 49) that’s up at dkos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/17/111645/922
I think that if things continue on AS THEY HAVE BEEN, we are headed for a stark choice: submit to a fascist regime or a violent revolution. Neither is palatable.
That is why the obstinant refusal of the Democratic Party as an institution to stand up and fight against electoral fraud is so frightening and so frustrating–because by their actions, they make a violent backlash inevitable.
And it doesn’t have to be that way. The Democratic Party still has enough strength to fight for free and fair elections.
But it is squandering that strength. And with each new election, we slip closer to the pit of fascism, when our choices will be reduced to submit or fight.
Quite frankly, I don’t hold out much hope that even when faced with such a stark choice, most Americans, or even a noticeable number of them, would choose to fight a home-grown fascist government. As long as Americans have their material comforts, they won’t miss their democratic freedoms. As time goes on, people will forget more and more how things used to be, and will accept fascism as a normal way of life.
understood. But as you imply, we are basically faced with that stark choice now: we have a president whose love affair with signing statements means he never has to implement legislation he doesn’t like.
Future demonstrations may or may not turn violent, but we are depressingly far away from having to worry about that. As you say, we can’t even get diehard Dems motivated to make this issue a priority, much less get a group of 10,000 into the streets.
People who are worried about election integrity get smeared as fatalistic do-nothings, so let’s prove that stereotype wrong.
If everyone who is upset about electronic voting would at least commit to writing the DNC about it, that would be something.
Let me toss out a thought:
First of all, I would like to say that I never said anything about a violent revolution. What I did say was that we have to do something or we are fucked. The economy sucks, health care is a mess, the environment is being destroyed, the invasion of Iraq, in addition to all of the bullshit this admin has pulled.
Litigation hasn’t worked–witness the court challenges to the past general elections. Negotiations appear to be futile, look at all of the times the dems in Congress have fucked us over. Now the mantra is wait until after the mid-terms. Next it will be wait until after the general election, assuming that there will be one where our votes are actually counted correctly.
So, what is next? Do we go back to a 60’s-style activism? Works for me, if that is what you are saying.
You have got to clarify things, mis, that is the only way that a problem will be solved. No mind readers here. So, please stop talking in circles and tell us wtf you are really talking about. I promise I’ll listen, hell, I might even back you up. Go for it.
When and who are the operative questions.
And, on that note, I am calling it a nite.
BTW, I am still thinking about that earlier comment that you made…
I wish I had a 10-rating option, for this comment, and your previous comment on this subthread.
Keep talking…
Great comment.
Bogus elections are routinely ignored or denied for the same reason that other truths are routinely ignored or denied: Americans have invested heavily in a national mythology which these truths would destroy.
For generations the United States has operated in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America as a neo-fascist, imperialist, criminal regime that finances and carries out assassinations, coups, and economic subversion. In those places, the US has been the enemy of democracy, the enemy of justice, and the enemy of liberty. Americans have never faced these truths squarely.
Now neo-fascism, always present but usually kept at the margins, is moving into the mainstream of American politics. All the components of what we in the 60s used to call the Establishment are complicit: political parties, corporations, corporate media, the financial community, right-wing Christians, white racists who feel threatened by people of color, and the Silent Majority of those comfortably benefitting from the status quo.
Like Athens at the end of its 30-year war with Sparta, the United States is a deeply corrupted state living off its ideals and ignoring the ugly realities enveloping it.
Kudos to RFK, Jr. for his courage. Shame on Bill Clinton for allowing his deep need to be loved and his wife’s political ambitions to prevent him from speaking out. Shame on everyone else who thinks that keeping quiet is any kind of way forward.
Original version (English children’s rhyme)
Remember, Remember the fifth of November
The gunpowder treason and plot
I see no reason why gunpowder treason
should ever be forgot.
Guy Fawkes Guy, ’twas his intent
to blow up king and parliament
Three score barrels were laid below
to prove old England’s overthrow.
By God’s mercy he was catched
with a dark lantern and lighted match
Holler boys, holler boys, let the bells ring
Holler boys, holler boys, God save the King!
Updated version (with apologies to Mother Goose, or whomever)
Remember, Remember second of November
The vote-stealing treason and plot
I see no reason why vote-stealing treason
should ever be forgot.
Turd Blossom Rove, ’twas his intent
to re-select the pResident
Three million e-votes were laid below
To prove the Republic’s overthrow
By white-livered cowardice he was not catched
Our Constitution thus put to the match
Holler boys, holler boys, let the bells ring
Holler boys, holler boys, George Bush is now King!