Failing to Fight: Sen. Reid: "I think the Ohio count was bad" in 2004 but glad Kerry pulled plug!

Right on the heels of the convictions of Ohio elections officials for rigging the presidential recount (see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=465777&mesg_id=465777 ) we now have this:

Sen. Harry Reid now admits the Ohio presidential election 2004 vote count was "bad." But still, there's nothing to be done about it apparently since he's glad Kerry was a "good American" who "pulled the plug." Senator Reid, Does this mean that only bad Americans fight for every vote so that every vote be counted?

There's a Failure to Fight (for every vote) here. Now the trigger for said fight (a bad count) is not even denied!

Harry Reid appeared on Hardball last Thursday. Asked by Chris Matthews if he thought John Kerry "got a good count in Ohio" in 2004 Reid responded as in the transcript portion below.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for Jan. 25
Read the transcript to the Thursday show
… MATTHEWS: What did you think your colleague John Kerry, the Democratic nominee last time around, who you worked hard for, dropping out of 2008 contention so early in the battle?

REID: Chris, I spoke on the Senate floor and it was really heartrending to me, to see him say he is not going to run. He did the right thing, I acknowledge that. But he came so close and that was such a terribly unfair election. Here is a man who is a hero, decorated war hero, and with the Swift Boat stuff at the end of the campaign, people wondered if he had even ever been to Vietnam. John Kerry is a good American. He has been a great senator. He will continue to be a great senator.

MATTHEWS: Do you think he was treated unfairly in the count or was it just in the campaign? Do you think he got a good count in Ohio, for example at the end of that election?

REID: Well, I think the Ohio count was bad, but he is a good American. He realized that it was time to end the election and not drag this on. I think some votes could have been changed in the state of Ohio, but John Kerry did the right thing. He just pulled the plug….

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16826322/

fought it all the way to the US Supreme Court?

We should suspect anybody that "approaches that jewel" as Thomas Paine referred to the public liberty (which would include elections), since after all, who is opposed to accuracy. The journalism of the "crisis" this causes is mostly if not totally manufactured.

While the evidence of rigging is in plain sight (and was sent to him), the prosecutor is saying no fraud. You do the math!

Regarding the recount: If the ballots are punched at the wrong precinct, or the ballots are schuffled to a different precinct after voting, 1,000,000 recounts cannot reset the clock to election morning. This recount conviction story is a cover-up of the REAL problem (and is gloatingly being spun as lazy Dem workers problem).

The CRIME: Vote-switching

OHIO 2004: 6.15% Kerry-Bush vote-switch found in probability study

Defining the vote outcome probabilities of wrong-precinct
voting has revealed, in a sample of 166,953 votes (1 of
every 34 Ohio voters), the Kerry-Bush margin changes 6.15%
when the population is sorted by probable outcomes of
wrong-precinct voting.

The Kerry to Bush 6.15% vote-switch differential is seen
when the large sample is sorted by probability a Kerry
wrong-precinct vote counts for Bush. When the same large
voter sample is sorted by the probability Kerry votes count
for third-party candidates, Kerry votes are instead equal
in both subsets.

Discussion here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
And here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Read the article with graphs of findings:

Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes

http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html

Discussions here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=259620&mesg_id=259620
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=466044&mesg_id=466044

This article was released as Senator Reid's made his comments. Perhaps he will have something different to say upon viewing new evidence, as should Rep. John Conyers. These things do not happen overnight.

he didn't say anything about Gore.

. . .just as Barbara Boxer did.

When Gore submitted to the treasonous Bush v. Gore edict, he betrayed the nation. He did not "fight for us" as he declared he would.

He can redeem himself by telling the truth and admitting he was wrong. Until that day, he will not have my support in any primary election.

Neither will any other member who betrayed us on January 6th, 2001 and January 6th, 2005

And what exactly was he supposed to do? Please tell us exactly what further steps you think he should have taken.

"He did not fight for us" . . .

"He can redeem himself by telling the Truth and admitting that he was wrong"

You certainly have applied every meme you can think of - only totally and incompetently towards the wrong target.

:eyes:

That elections are intended to measure the will of the people, not the will of the candidates; therefore, the election is not his to concede.

That the Bush v. Gore edict does nothing but render Florida's election incomplete, and therefore invalid.⁽¹⁾

That no unlawful election process can lawfully certify electors.

That We the People charged Congress with the duty to judge the legitimacy of electors on January 6th.

That on January 6th, each Senator/Rep is constitutionally charged with the burden of being the backstop or safety valve for an election procedure that has rendered an invalid result.⁽²⁾

_______________________________________________________________

(1) The electors were not "regularly" appointed because the election laws of Florida include a "contest" provision. That election contest was underway when the Bush v. Gore edict put a stop to vote counting. It was the duty of the Congress to recognize that the Florida election had been truncated and was therefore invalid.

Title 3 Section 6 (emphasis added):

"...as soon as practicable after the conclusion of the appointment of the electors in such State by the final ascertainment, under and in pursuance of the laws of such State providing for such ascertainment, to communicate by registered mail under the seal of the State to the Archivist of the United States a certificate of such ascertainment of the electors appointed,..."

"...and if there shall have been any final determination in a State in the manner provided for by law of a controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, it shall be the duty of the executive of such State, as soon as practicable after such determination, to communicate under the seal of the State to the Archivist of the United States a certificate of such determination...."

Clarification of "under and in pursuance of the laws of such State" in Title 3 Section 5::
"...by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures..."

The laws enacted prior to the election make it clear that the appointment of the electors must be pursuant to an election (not by direct appointment of the FL legislature). And, the role of the Florida judicial system (by "judicial or other methods or procedure") is clearly spelled out in Florida law, which gives broad powers to State judicial authority in determining remedy in a contest situation.

(2) Justice Breyer provided instruction on the matter in his dissent to Bush v. Gore.

531 U. S. ____ (2000), http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZD3.html">Breyer, J., dissenting, Bush v. Gore:

The legislative history of the Act makes clear its intent to commit the power to resolve such disputes to Congress, rather than the courts:

"The two Houses are, by the Constitution, authorized to make the count of electoral votes. They can only count legal votes, and in doing so must determine, from the best evidence to be had, what are legal votes .... The power to determine rests with the two Houses, and there is no other constitutional tribunal.” H. Rep. No. 1638, 49th Cong., 1st Sess., 2 (1886) (report submitted by Rep. Caldwell, Select Committee on the Election of President and Vice-President).

The Member of Congress who introduced the Act added:

"The power to judge of the legality of the votes is a necessary consequent of the power to count. The existence of this power is of absolute necessity to the preservation of the Government. The interests of all the States in their relations to each other in the Federal Union demand that the ultimate tribunal to decide upon the election of President should be a constituent body, in which the States in their federal relationships and the people in their sovereign capacity should be represented." 18 Cong. Rec. 30 (1886).

Under the Constitution who else could decide? Who is nearer to the State in determining a question of vital importance to the whole union of States than the constituent body upon whom the Constitution has devolved the duty to count the vote?” Id., at 31.

At the point he stopped, was after the Supreme Court took it all away. How dare you blame anything on Gore?

I think he should have fought it longer, harder, and to whatever extent necessary to assure that all votes counted. We now know, in at least Ohio, that didn't happen.

What would the world be like today with Kerry in office instead of Bush? Unfortunately, we'll never know. :(

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2006/oct/07/did_carville_tip_bush_off_to_kerry_strategy_woodward

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Did Carville Tip Bush Off to Kerry Strategy (Woodward)


I just came across a troubling incident that Bob Woodward reports in his new book. Very troubling.



On page 344, Woodward describes the doings at the White House in the early morning hours of Wednesday, the day after the '04 election.

Apparently, Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

So what happened?

James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President Cheney told her."

Matalin does, advising Bush that "somebody in authority needed to get in touch with J. Kenneth Blackwell, the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio who would be in charge of any challenge to the provisional votes." An SOS goes out to Blackwell.

The rest is history.

Does something about this story stink to high heaven!

---------------------------

no longer tenable? Criminal election recount rigging? That would still be grounds for an investigation and election contest! Oh, and gee, as the link in the OP shows, in fact OHio elections officials are now being convicted of felonies for recount rigging. but the ones so far who have been so convicted are in Cuyahoga a democratic county (Cleveland).

In many cases, MORE POWERFUL than partisanship or the desire for election truth is the desire to protect the original count as being "legitimate" whether it is or not. This is why election officials can't be trusted with post-election audits and recounts -- they are too tempted to do CYA and mask what the audit or recount is showing in order to do CYA, or even CYA for their friends and associates so as not to cast them in a "poor light."

250,000 provisional ballots. I believe that they were told that there weren't enough provisionals to overcome Bush's lead in Ohio. So concequently contesting is pointless. Don't quote me on this, but that is what I remember reading in followup discussion re this incident.

_____

What I do remember is going to my local Kerry headquarters where I was volunteering. I told the regional coordinator that I would be happy to stay on and phone bank or whatever needed to be done while prov.

The regional coordinator said and I am paraphrasing -- "Thanks, but we got a call from national. They looked at the numbers in OHIO, and they just aren't there -- Bush's lead was overwhelming and it couldn't be made up"

---

and that the "loser" must make up the difference. Boy would that engender hearty guffaws in any reaonable collection of scientists or investigators. With any doubt to the process, both totals are in doubt, both that of the winner and that of the loser...

Now, it seems to me, with the above referenced info about TRAITOR Carville, that perhaps Blackwell either made sure or lied about how many provisional ballots were there. It was rigged and stolen. I can't believe that Carville is such a traitor (tho I always suspected that), and that Kerry gave up so easily and quickly without confirming some of this... or at least forcing the issue.

I didn't know about that. Thanks.

That's not a rhetorical question. I really would like to know.

... after supposedly all of the votes were in (even though Ohio polls were still being held open due to the mess there), and how he was practically already throwing in the towell then and trying to analyze why the Dems then didn't get the votes they needed and the results were the way they were. It was if he was trying to legitimize what was likely an undercount of votes for Kerry then! I still don't trust Carville ONE bit! I've been meaning to watch that DVD I got a little while back called "Our Brand Is Crisis" which is supposed to show how Carville and his crowd were monkeying around with elections in South America to Democracy's detriment there too.

Thanks Paul for noting this. I wonder how soon we can get a change of leadership in the Senate... I really wish someone like Feingold were calling the shots that would fight the good fights on issues like this and SCOTUS nomination approvals instead of buckling under in a suspicious way that a corporatist DLC member might.

It's all the more reason that I don't want to touch voting for a Democratic nominee in the primaries that even smells like DLC for this coming election. We need some real change soon, and not the window dressing stuff that the DLC is trying to get us used to happening.

Apparently James C is working on the HC campaign. Why? He's a loud-mouth, at best, indiscreet and wobbly at worst.

The same team that told Gore he HAD a case to continue. There was NOTHING that could be done at that point without a whistleblower coming forward. Even RFK has said there was no legal case to make at that point.

Maybe the actual betrayal was in that Dem party legal team.....we know McAuliffe and Carville were betrayers....why not some of the party's election lawyers, too?

For one thing, I think little stock should be put in terms of Kerry's concession to bind us away from getting at the truth because, after all, his decision was made based on limited information available within the wee morning hours after election night. Under the pressure of little sleep and little information and high media pressure plus the threat of a high personal cost being inflicted on kerry personally if he were to contest..... Based on the legal advice I believe (as an election lawyer) he likely got, I can understand a tactical concession even if i don't agree, but what I can't accept is the idea that THE TRUTH NO LONGER MATTERS or that a concession in any way means the truth of the election was not in kerry's favor. It's perhaps hard to understand but election contests are notoriously difficult cases that are seemingly designed to fail (after all, the laws for the same are written by incumbents who also write other election laws to favor incumbents, so the chances are that they will NOT be the contesters of the election...)

GOV. family law firm. It is bullshit to have the opposing party have access to strategy by the likes such as Carville or Hoffheimer or anyone else involved in strategy. You can bet no pukes would allow it.

:hug: I have missed your posts lately.

This post shows just how frikkin' out of touch the "leadership" in the Dem party is with the millions of us who are watching them like hawks over the election fraud.

For Reid to say this is unconscionable. There were a million and one ways he could have answered that question and show himself as a true statesman who wants to restore integrity to U.S. elections, and instead he chose the WORST talking point.

What a skanky dweeb. He needs to get a brazillion letters from us on this attitude of his toward the sanctity of our elections.

K & R

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick::kick:

after a while the insanity takes its toll, you know?

Who does Reid think he is making these kinds of statements?

Are the votes that DID get counted in Ohio - MORE IMPORTANT - Than the votes he says: "could have been changed in the state of Ohio"
WE, the people must DEMAND better leadership. VOTING is a fundamental right.

COUNT EVERY VOTE GODDAMMIT!!!

Reid's bland comment is devoid of any significance, but of course the BBVers thrive on outrage so they'll whip some up.

Did YOUR Vote Get Counted? How do you know for sure?

this is not an idle subject or a mere speculation for kpete. There's a thread out or two on her suit.

as many a founder said: "Not to have the vote is to be reduced to slavery." Not to have it counted is the same thing.

so, no, I think there's a good chance my vote did not count.

and if they happen to believe that their right to vote is sacred and get REALLY fighting mad, well, i'm not sure they are "wrong" to be that way. In fact, I lean the other way.

Isn't going through the hassle and expense of a lawsuit a pretty good indication of a certain amount of (proper) political passion in one's vote?

Tell me about the status of the suit.

not even STARTING to count them until days after the election day. The appellate court sat on the case for a couple weeks as I recall then denied any relief without an opinion or supporting reasons being fully stated. You can contact the court or attorney Ken Simpkins who represented her if you want more info.

I also have a suit in which I am plaintiff, concerning DREs. www.votersunite.org/info/lehtolawsuit.asp Some months after filing the county council dumped all DREs in our county. the county then argued the case was moot and the trial court agreed, though saying it was favorable to our arguments against trade secrecy. It is presently on appeal because it is not moot - the issue of the $5 million refund to the county is still very much alive it seems to me.

devoted to the Ohio investigation and ER. I guess I just thrive on outrage. :sarcasm:

Perhaps if you were a Dem voter who waited in line in the cold pouring rain for about five hours on that Nov day only to have your vote not count and your party not fight for your vote-you'd feel a little different. I was pissed because in my wealthy white suburb-that went repuke "for tax reasons", I waited ~ 15 minutes at morning rush time, while less than a mile away in a low income predominately Af Am precinct (Cols 25-B if you want to check it out) where I spent my fall weekends out canvassing for Kerry/Edwards, and where voters had to stand for 5 hours to votes, and were more likely to receive a provisional ballot, which probably didn't count.

I FIND THIS DEPLORABLE AND THINK OUTRAGE OVER THIS CRIME IS SIGNIFICANT AND JUSTIFIED!

There's some real Dems, who've made real sacrifices (businesses, lawsuits, years of time) and have real facts and you got little besides ridicule for that, or for the "overblown" statements you feel emerge from these front line troops from time to time even when they are highly justifiable statements of opinion.

In the past, I've made some statements about how "stolen vs not stolen" can get us into un-useful debates when the elections have no basis for confidence to begin with (and in any event), but recent convictions and the facts as they emerge are vindicating the "stolen election" crowd, piece by piece.

This summarizes what happened in Ohio W/O the machine factor:

4 STEPS TO HOW THE GOP STOLE THE '04 ELECTION (and will repeat again)
Posted by mod mom in Election Reform
Tue May 23rd 2006, 11:54 AM
I have attempted to define how the GOP stole the '04 election in the most simplistic terms and provided links to support the premises:

1. MISALLOCATION OF MACHINES (and less reliable machines) in high Dem Precincts.
2. MANIPULATION OF VOTER REGISTRATIONS and PURGES
3. UNCOUNTED VOTES
4. GOP DIRTY TRICKS

I believe we are heading for a train wreck with the upcoming election, and hope this will help define areas to concentrate our efforts in the future. The use of electronic voting machines will allow more methods for stealing. I am an advocate of Hand-counted paper ballots (with strict procedures) and public witnessed counting at the precinct level.


1. MISALLOCATION OF MACHINES (and less reliable machines) in high Dem Precincts:

Fixing America's Broken Elections
Rep. John Conyers, Jr.
February 08, 2005

My staff reviewed thousands of pages of primary source materials, including copies of actual ballots, voter registration databases, and poll books. They also met with several individuals having firsthand knowledge of irregularities. What they found indicated problems in multiple areas, from machine tampering and malfunction, to the intimidation and caging of minority voters in urban and rural areas, to the purposeful misallocation of voting machines and the unjustifiable restrictions that were placed on the use of provisional ballots.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/fixing_am...






Ohio 2004 election thief grabs Gov nod while (surprise! surprise!) voting machines malfunction
by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
May 5, 2006

Ohio's Republican Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell has grabbed the GOP nomination for governor in a vote count riddled with machine breakdowns. In Franklin and Delaware Counties, election officials had to "shut down and recalibrate throughout the day," according to the Columbus Dispatch. Election officials use recalibration as a code word when machines are malfunctioning including the recording of votes for wrong candidates.
<snip>
http://www.freepress.org/departments/displ...



2. MANIPULATION OF VOTER REGISTRATIONS and PURGES:


Did 308,000 cancelled Ohio voter registrations put Bush back in the White House?
by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman
February 28, 2006

<snip>

It turns out, we missed more than a few of the dirty tricks Karl Rove, Ken Blackwell and their GOP used to get themselves four more years. In an election won with death by a thousand cuts, some that are still hidden go very deep. Over the next few weeks we will list them as they are verified.

One of them has just surfaced to the staggering tune of 175,000 purged voters in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), the traditional stronghold of the Ohio Democratic Party. An additional 10,000 that registered to vote there for the 2004 election were lost due to "clerical error."

As we reported more than a year ago, some 133,000 voters were purged from the registration rolls in Hamilton County (Cincinnati) and Lucas County (Toledo) between 2000 and 2004. The 105,000 from Cincinnati and 28,000 from Toledo exceeded Bush's official alleged margin of victory---just under 119,000 votes out of some 5.6 million the Republican Secretary of State. J. Kenneth Blackwell, deemed worth counting.

<snip>
http://www.freepress.org/departments/displ...





“Finally on Voter Registration Mr. Chairman, as the Committee is well aware, there were innumerable political parties and 537’s spending tens of millions of dollars on voter registration drives. In Franklin County alone, we processed more than a quarter of a million voter registration forms between January 1, 2004 and the close of registration in early October. This was twice the registration activity as compared to the same period in 2000.”

Bill Anthony testimony on March 21 2005
http://cha.house.gov/hearings/Testimony.as...

Mr Anthony’s testimony stated that in Franklin County alone, more than a quarter million voter registrations forms were processed between Jan. 1 2004 and the close of registration in early October. Yet when the registered voter numbers are compared from 2003 to 2004, we see a change of 120,869.

google: Ohio voter registration historical data
http://elections.ssrc.org/data/voterreg /

Ohio Election Data - Registered Voters before Certification
The Feminist Majority Foundation
Detailed chart of annual changes in Ohio voter registration numbers from 2000 to 2004. The data demonstrates a large voter roll purging in 2002 and relatively high numbers of new registrants from 2002-2004.
voters in 2004 = 845,720
voters in 2003 = 724,851
# Changed
from 03-04 = 120,869

http://www.feminist.org/pdfs/OH_election_p...




-October 4, 2004 was filing deadline for new voter registrations. At that point there were approximately 20,000 unprocessed voter registration applications with less than a month before the election. One mail tray containing 4,500-7,000 (estimates vary) unprocessed “Project Voter” registrations were discovered on or about October 18,2004.
SOURCE: SOS Investigation pg 10

***Of interest here is information obtained from the SOS website entitled ElectionsVoter/results 2003 and 2004 which show the # of registered voters number change from ‘03-’04 was 11,947 in Lucas County: reg voters 2003 in Lucas=288,190 ; registered voter in 2004=300,137.

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/elections/l...




3. UNCOUNTED VOTES:

Cranks and Kooks: Kerry won in '04
by Greg Palast
May 11, 2006

Answer: The Uncounted.

In Ohio, there were 153,237 ballots simply thrown away, more than the Bush "victory" margin. In New Mexico the uncounted vote was fives times the Bush alleged victory margin of 5,988. In Iowa, Bush's triumph of 13,498 was overwhelmed by 36,811 votes rejected. In all, over three million votes were cast but never counted in the 2004 presidential election. The official number is bad enough-1,855,827 ballots cast not counted, reported to the federal government's Election's Assistance Commission. But the feds are missing data from several cities and entire states too embarrassed to report the votes they failed to count. Correcting for the under-reporting of the undercount, the number of ballots cast but never counted goes to 3,600,380. And there are certainly more we couldn't locate to tote up.

Why doesn't your government tell you this? Hey, they do. It's right there in black-and-white on a U.S. Census Bureau announcement released seven months after the election -- in a footnote to the report on voter turn -- out. The Census tabulation of voters voting "differs," from ballots tallied by the Clerk of the House of Representatives for the 2004 presidential race by 3.4 million votes.

This is the hidden presidential count which, excepting the Census' whispered footnote, has not been reported.

Unfortunately, that's not all. In addition to the 3 million ballots uncounted due to technical "glitches," millions more were lost because the voters were prevented from casting their ballots in the first place. This group of un-votes includes voters illegally denied registration or wrongly purged from the registries.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/displ...




November 2, 2004 Election

Iowa New Mexico Ohio

Ballots “spoiled” 18,847 21,084 103,660

Provisional Ballots Uncounted 7,368 6,593 33,998

Absentee Ballots Uncounted 10,596 4,217 15,519

Ghost Votes & blocked votes unknown 2,087 85,950

Total Uncounted* 36,811 33,981 239,127

Bush “Victory” Margin 10,059 5,988 118,599

*Totals here include ghost vote only for New Mexico and machine shortage only for Ohio. Registry purges etc., would increase these totals.



-U.S. Civil Rights Commission reports that ballots of “non-black” voters were rejected: 1.6% (1 in 63 did not count); while black voter ballots were rejected 14.4% or 1 in 7 African American votes went uncounted.

-The rejection of provisional ballots were cast over-whelmingly in Democratic precincts.

-In New Mexico, 9 out of 10 votes uncounted were cast by non-Anglo voters. (90% of this population vote Democratic.

-Nationally, the total numver of voters voting provisionally was 3,107,490 and the rejection rate was 1,090,729.

SOURCE: Greg Palast "Armed Madhouse"




1,597 Provisional Ballots from Franklin Co categorized as Status 200-”Not Registered”, yet voters were registered

http://my.core.com/~rhh/index.htm



Study of Provisionals in Cleveland


From a recent Cleveland study on ‘04:
Almost 1,000 provisional ballots may have been wrongfully rejected because of registration problems alone. At least 944 rejected provisional ballots, mostly classified as “not registered”, were apparently mistakenly purged from the registration lists. Since this error was detected by only one type of search, which did not detect other voters who claimed similar errors, the true number of provisional ballots wrongfully rejected is likely to be higher.
We estimate that 2 out of every 5 provisional ballots that were rejected should have been accepted as legitimate. If we combine incorrectly purged provisional votes, projected votes rejected because of initial registration errors, provisional ballots lost through polling place misinformation and innocent errors filling out the provisional application, it appears that over 41% of rejected provisional ballots (or 14% of all provisional votes) may have been unnecessarily rejected.
We estimate that simply changing residence exposes voters to a 6% chance of being disenfranchised. Youth, the poor, and minorities are disproportionately affected. In fact, with respect to just provisional ballots, we found a two-fold increase in rejection rate in predominantly African-American compared to predominantly Caucasian precincts.
Full text: http://www.clevelandvotes.org/news/reports...
from Feb 2005-but important, in case you missed it.




Wednesday, December 14, 2005; Page A28:


A Defense Department survey on military voting found that 79 percent of military personnel tried to vote in the 2004 presidential election and that 73 percent of those actually voted .

But the survey obscured an important fact: Disenfranchisement of military and overseas absentee voters remains high. Between 30 and 45 percent of these potential voters failed to receive their absentee ballots or received them too late to matter, according to surveys by the National Defense Committee and the Overseas Vote Foundation.

About 1.4 million active-duty members of the uniformed services and 1 million spouses and family members are eligible for absentee voting. In addition, an estimated 4 million U.S. civilians who live abroad are eligible. Yet most states still conduct absentee voting through U.S. mail via a cumbersome three-step process.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...


4. GOP DIRTY TRICKS:

Busheviks connected to New Hampshire phone-jamming scheme
by The Ostroy Report
April 14, 2006

Every day brings new surprises in the wild and wacky world of the Bush Monarchy. One day its WMD lies, the next day illegal wiretappings, the next day leaks of classified data, and now news that the Busheviks and the GOP may be central figures in the 2002 phone-jamming scheme that kept New Hampshire Democrats from voting in that year's midterm elections, according to court documents.

Phone records show that Bush campaign operative James Tobin made dozens of calls to the White House in the immediate days leading up to New Hampshire's election for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Robert C. Smith. Tobin and two others were convicted in December 2005 of hiring Virginia-based GOP Marketplace on behalf of the New Hampshire GOP to jam another phone bank being used by the state Democratic Party and the firefighters' union to get-out-the-vote for then-governor Jeanne Shaheen. John E. Sununu, the Republican candidate, won 51% to 46%. The phone records show that most calls to the White House were from Tobin, who became Bush's presidential campaign chairman for the New England region in 2004.

<snip>
http://www.freepress.org/departments/displ...







GOP SUPPRESSION FLYERS
http://www.solarbus.org/stealyourelection/...





Rep. John Conyers, Jr.
February 08, 2005

My staff found substantial evidence, admitted by a Triad voting machine company employee—in public, videotaped testimony— that he developed documents and manipulated voting machines for the purposes of allowing county officials to forgo a legally required full hand recount of ballots. Other instances of inappropriate political advocacy by voting machine company officials are well known.

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/fixing_am...



Free Press uncovers evidence of ballot tampering in Warren County, Ohio
April 19, 2006

After locking out all media observers and declaring a Level 10 Homeland Security Alert, the Republican-dominated Warren County, Ohio reported the vote tally in the wee hours of the morning on November 3, 2004 -- and gave George W. Bush a surprising 14,000 vote boost. Two election workers told the Free Press that the ballots had been diverted to an unauthorized warehouse where they had been possibly stuffed. That is, punched for Bush only. Maps were supplied to the Free Press showing the locations of the warehouse and the Board of Elections.

Warren County officials refused to allow the Columbus Institute for Contemporary Journalism to handle the ballots, but they did allow us to photograph a few. Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D., has analyzed the ballots for the Free Press and concluded that there is evidence of fraud in Warren County. The ballots as photographed with Dr. Phillips' commentary below each ballot are included here for the first time.

The Free Press predicted early on that the ballots would be found punched only for Bush in Warren County. The Moss v. Bush lawsuit pointed to Warren, Butler and Clermont Counties as the three counties that provided more than Bush's entire margin in the Buckeye State: Bush won Ohio by 118,000, and 132,000 votes were supplied in these three southwestern Republican counties.

Now, for the first time, the Free Press is releasing images of the obvious election fraud in Warren County. The Free Press will continue its ongoing investigation in Ohio despite stonewalling by Republican state officials. See the images by clicking on the link below.

<snip>
http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/3...


Ohio GOP Challenges 35,000 Voters
Saturday, October 23, 2004; Page A09



The Ohio Republican Party challenged the eligibility of 35,000 newly registered voters yesterday, an action that party officials said was unprecedented but necessary to prevent election fraud in a state where polls show President Bush and John F. Kerry in a statistical tie.

Most of the 35,000 voters live in urban, Democratic areas, party spokesman Jason Mauk said. Local party officials, joined by Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie at a news conference, said the voters were mainly registered by "shadowy" Democratic-leaning groups and were chosen after the GOP sent them mail that was returned as undeliverable.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...

We all have a right to comment on Reid's ridiculous comments that paint Kerry as a "good American" for not fighting. Now that the truth about Ohio has come out, gosh... I imagine Kerry might actually be President right now had the Democratic Party stood behind him and fought with him. Because I don't appreciate Reid's comments, and because the vote in Ohio was tainted.. I don't appreciate being pegged as a "BBV" whiner.

Oh My

#1 media excuse not to cover the 2004 election in Ohio: KERRY CONCEDES

#2 media excuse not to cover the 2004 election in OHio: "Bipartisan" election boards mean recounts not needed. (see convictions of Dem officials for not counting Dem votes, first link in OP above, because they want to avoid work and not call into question their professionalism by obtaining different recount results, this is a conflict of interest possessed by all persons of all parties who participated in the original counting process!!!)

Note: as to recounts and audits, any official of any party is really possessed of a disqualifying conflict of interest: they lie to avoid work during thanksgiving and christmas and to protect the PERCEIVED integrity of their original count. Personal CYA trumps election accuracy and count every vote. PUBLIC OVERSIGHT is the only solution and outsiders should do all recounts/audits.

Nice guy, but way too TIMID and conciliatory.

children. Vote against anyone who supports his presidency or his illegitimate decrees.

If we had any courage, we would/should all be in the streets throwing rocks and screaming at the top of our lungs.

Shame on us
History will judge us just as harshly as it does those Germans who allowed Hitler and those Russians who allowed Stalin.

if you really believe that, are you yourself in the streets throwing rocks. If not, why not? Is it maybe because you don't really believe it?

plus one has to have the idea first before any reality can take place. I've thrown some rocks myself but they were into the woods and landed silently in the snow. It seems we have to spend a thousand bucks to travel to a big demo first-- or something like that. Not sure you should be jumping on this guy, unless you want to defend property rights from rocks, in which case let's hear both sides of the debate in true American fashion...

then yes, guilty as charged.

One of the benefits is that I'm free to see reality as it is, for example that Reid didn't say anything to be outraged about, in fact imo he just uttered a platitude.

Black Box voting is an organization headed by Bev Harris which is one major organization of a half dozen or so major orgs in voting system reform. Black box voting also refers to computerized voting generally. But it is not proper usage to call everyone who is in this movement, much less everyone who makes a comment you interpret to imply "membership" in the movement a "BBV"er. That's an exaggeration at best, or a misattribution at least

Reid said: "I think some votes could have been changed in the state of Ohio"

If some votes included YOUR VOTE - would you not be outraged?

EVERY vote has to count!

Senator Kerry's only job in the 2004 campaign was to try to get elected President of the United States. As far as ensuring that everyone's vote will count, it's up to the people of Ohio to make sure that they have a fair election system where their votes will be counted. IMO, they did this in 2006 by tossing out the entire GOP cabal and putting in Ted Strickland and Jennifer Brunner.

candidates are the one's with the clearest standing to do an election contest. It is vaguer in most states whether citizens can and with HB3 Ohio recently made clear that Ohio citizens are stripped of their right to contest any election for federal office. So kerry was the only man who could do it, at least as of the last year or so for sure, and possibly depending on court rulings may have been the only person who could back then (along with the Green and Libertarian candidates, who DID step up)

So we have 2 candidates for pres who got more than a few votes contesting and asking for recounts (green and libs) and one who didn't (kerry)

Reid openly acknowledged he thought fraud may hav occurred and then he just shrugged it off.

I feel heartsick when the leaders of my Party say things like this.

I was outraged. I am outraged. I have been outraged. I will be outraged until this shit stops.

he changes the subject immediately, and then Mathews chimes in with the Miss America pageant in a ogling way:



on edit: the above text appears immediately after the "pulling the plug" comment quoted in the OP.

and I was truly weirded out by it. Really. I am reassured others ( like you) noted it.

J30, Ohio Vigilance, and the Ohio GREEN PARTY (as well as a lot of other volunteers) We were self funded and organized the rallies, hearings, recounts, investigation w/o the help of the Dem Party or BBV.

If you think this outrage is so fake, perhaps you should talk to John Conyers, or is he in our little outrage cult as well?

of course it's in the purported name of anti-exaggeration. But it's no exaggeration to say the 200 election was stolen, and it's a matter of education and time before the majority realizes 2004 was stolen also. In fact, as of my August 2006 Zogby poll 45% of americans did not believe GWB was elected fair and square in 2004. As of today, it is probably over 50% and if you want to donate the $5K or so we'd need i'd be happy to run that question again.

Conyers stated that he didn't think the 2004 election was stolen (though he respects people's right to believe it themselves), despite people here twisting his words to say he did believe that it was stolen.

regarding Conyers' state of mind. There may be quotes somewhere that fall short of outright "stolen" but you'd have to check those against later ones and then distinguish between what is believed to be the case and what one has, so far, proven as a factual matter. Cocoa did you know about the convictions of the recount-rigging Ohio elections officials? As more facts come out, and this is the tip of the iceberg as bob Fitrakis has written recently (again), people will be coming around, you know?

for all he has done in his career, is it too much to ask that we not misrepresent him and insinuate things about him for our own ends? And what do you mean about his "state of mind?" It sounds like you're insinuating something about his age, but I could be wrong. Please clarify.

concerning what they believe happened vs. what their position is on what's been proved. As any lawyer knows, those two things often have some differences between them. You quoted Conyers below and I don't see what there is to be outraged about, his statements are quite different than Reid's.

you are asserting the election was stolen. Conyers is not. Deal with it.

Im saying Conyers differs substantially from Reid and I've no problem with conyers even ASSUMING he doesn't come out 100% for a "stolen" election using exactly that phrase...

Ill have some quotes from that foreword down thread in a few minutes.

or not. just to clarify. See also the reply shortly below with the same book title for exact quotes.

he references Freeman's "Who really won the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election?" But that didn't imply that Conyers's answer is Kerry, and Conyers's report does not conclude that Kerry won, and I'm going to bet you a dollar that his foreward doesn't answer "yes" to the question in the book title.

Koko and Cocoa. freaky stuff.

He does not claim outright that the election was NOT stolen.

Saying that one does not BELIEVE or THINK that it was stolen is quite different than saying it absolutely was not.

It took President Clinton a few years to finally say publicly that the election in 2000 was stolen.

Conyers, as a black man and a politician certainly knows the ongoing history of how votes have been traditionally "stolen". Given the qualifiers in his statements regarding the possible theft of election 2004, it is not too great a leap to believe he may lean toward the idea of a theft having occurred. I'm very certain he keeps accounts of events as they continue to unfold, conscientious individual that he is.

While the media may choose to ignore the recent guilty verdicts in Ohio, Conyers has most likely moved just that much closer to perhaps ultimately concluding that 2004 was indeed stolen.

But he has never said "move on" or I'm glad we just forgot about diving into that mess too deeply", or other similarly outrageous sentiments that appear not only lazy and negligent, but would seem to imply that voting just isn't all that important in the big picture.

Questioning peoples' emotions is a baffling pursuit in this thread. Perhaps you confuse "outrage" with disgust? What would it matter? why would you risk the understandable possibility of having anger directed toward you for such a presumptuous statement based on no evidence whatsoever? What--other than swerving off the discourse--does that accomplish? And what exactly is a BBVer?

Again, what exactly is a BBVer as you yourself have applied the term?

Bleifuss. If you are going to, Cocoa, continue to claim that COnyers has not said specifically that Ohio was "stolen" you are splitting hairs. Let's see what else conyers has said:

Conyers wants everyone to read that Foreword, and this book, so I’ll give you some quotes. Cocoa you can place your order for the book at your local ind. bookstore, powell's or amazon.

In that book, in the foreword, Conyers stated, inter alia,



Now, now, Cocoa, if you jump on this and say the word "stolen" doesn't appear in CONYER'S words even though it's the title of the book he wrote the Foreword for and he does say the above and much more, you're really making too much of your point, and there IS a big difference between Reid's philosophy on election protection and Conyers'

Rep. Conyers has stated that "by and large, when it comes to a voting machine, the average voter is getting a lemon - the Ford Pinto of voting technology. We must demand better."

Cocoa does that make Conyers one of the misnamed “BBVers” you denounce upthread?

The non-partisan GAO report (requested by Conyers, regarding voting machines that are electronic) has now found that, "some of concerns about electronic voting machines have been realized and have caused problems with recent elections, resulting in the loss and miscount of votes."

Rev. Jesse Jackson, among others, has asserted that "public elections must not be conducted on privately-owned machines." Is he a BBVer you denounce, cocoa?

people here have asserted that the 2004 election was stolen. They say that the exit poll data prove it.

Conyers has never done either. He cited Freeman in his report. He wrote the foreward for the book. But he did not in the report, and I'm confident he doesn't in the foreward, conclude that the election was stolen and he did not say that the exit poll data can or did prove it. I actually doubt that the book does either of these things either, but I haven't read it.

You put a "yes" after the book title that isn't actually in the title. Is this your own editorial, or does the book actually answer the question definitively?

or arguments of the other side? You weren't aware apparently of the Conyers Foreword yet you confidently pronounce your opinions. At the least conyers would say it "could well be" that Ohio was stolen, especially after criminal convictions for rigging recounts, don't you think? Speculation is something you do engage in, so please be fair, balance all the evidence, and tell me.

I thought the exit poll section was relatively unconvincing, compared to the actual empirical evidence of irregularities. I imagine the book would be the same. I find that whole line of argument to be of little value, relatively speaking.

That's my opinion. What's fact is that regardless of what I think of the exit poll arguments, John Conyers does not say that they prove the election was stolen. That fact is in no way related to my opinion of the argument or to yours.

Were all the votes counted in Ohio or not?
And if they were not all counted, then whose votes were and whose were not?
And then, WHO has the right to make this choice of WHOSE VOTE COUNTS?
Which of us get to be the Second Class Citizens whose Votes DO NOT COUNT?
Who gets to choose this group of Second Class Citizens?

All OUR VOTES MUST COUNT.

No person, government official, or not should get to decide if some votes are worth counting and others are not.
Until EVERYONE understands this, then NO VOTES COUNT!

just my humble opinion, Peace to you, kpete

there or in countless other areas, in 2004, or in 2006, or in any other year.

And even if they were counted perfectly everywhere, it would still be all fucked up because of the campaign finance system.

And yet, I still care about politics, despite the horrendous flaws in the system, which people are working hard to fix.

you don't really know how many weren't all counted, we know uncounted provisionals heavily favor Dems, well, I think you know the rest but you don't want to add it up and come to the conclusion you are busy ridiculing so we all learn the lesson not to bother speaking up again (you probably feel your points are finer than that, and mostly they are, but your tone teaches that lesson, lotsa people don't have the stomach to get beat up on and to beat on others like you do)

"you don't want to add it up and come to the conclusion you are busy ridiculing so we all learn the lesson not to bother speaking up again"

Awwwwwwww.

ETA: Really, the whole thread is like you're picking a fight with yourself. I don't know why you do this.

Sheesh..."the whole thread is like you're picking a fight with yourself"

and many were obviously miscounted.

So one can state that the election was stolen and be about 99% sure that it was. But nobody can be even 10% sure that it wasn't stolen.

See the difference?

From the Conyers' Report comes the following quote:

"With regards to our factual finding, in brief, we find that there were
massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio.
In many cases, these irregularities were caused by intentional
misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of
State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in
Ohio."

Does this mean CONYERS believes "Bush won and I refuse to call Ohio "stolen?"" as Cocoa insinuates?

I originally drew a distinction between what I believe is Conyers' belief vs. what he's in the WRITTEN record as saying, which I'll admit, provisionally, does not include the specific phrase stolen. But to me that's like saying Conyers never said the number "four" when he said "we all should think of what two plus two is equal to"

needed a fellow DUer to help me find some and where were you? Hmmmm hmm? Where were you when I needed you?

Yes, I truly do believe that Bush' presidency is illegal and against the will of the majority. A miscarriage of Democracy. Don't you?

It is my shame that I haven't done more.

Are you of the belief that you have done everything possible, practical or otherwise, to right the injustices that you know exist?
If not, does that mean that you don't believe an injustice was really committed?

Hmmmm?

Perhaps you shouldn't tar someone with one possible, yet unlikely, explanation.

profusely for turning him onto a country singer a couple of years ago. Seems the two are great pals. Any friend of Imus .....well....one would wonder.

Dems are running away from the Election Fraud once again. Afraid someone will take away their November win but not realizing that they would have been in power long before now ...but for the HAVA Act and those machines.

After 2000, the Democrats should have been prepared for this and they should have seen Ohio as the state most likely to be rigged against Kerry. I really have no idea why Kerry conceded so quickly...but it had to be for extraordinary reasons. No one puts up with a grueling 1 year campaign and folds without some inside understanding that the results couldn't be overcome. Maybe he knew that the media would begin the "sore loserman" symphony and the actual results could never be devined. Maybe this and a hostile Republican Congress ready to start Clinton2 impeachment proceedings were too much to overcome. Bottom line, the battle should have been engaged before election day. I think if Dean had been DNC chair, he'd have done a helluva lot more to protect the Party interests than McCauliffe did before November. I wonder if the Clinton wing of the Party really wanted Kerry to win as his loss has paved the way for Hillary's run in 2008.

I wonder why no outrage against Conyers for his much more substantial statements than Reid's? My answer: the outrage is insincere.

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/12/21/conyers/index.html?pn=2

<snip>

Q.And what about John Kerry? Have you spoken with him about your investigation?

A.His lawyer was in Columbus for our hearing there last week. And he has also, at the same time, asked for a full recount in Delaware County .

Q.Has the Kerry campaign done enough? A lot of Democrats think Kerry conceded too soon.

A.It's easy to be in an armchair somewhere saying, "You've got to do this; you've got to do that." He had more in his control. And besides, he's the candidate. I wish he'd listened to me more, and everybody wishes that the guy they voted for would listen to them more. But he's the master of his ship.

Q.When you say that you wish Kerry had listened to you more, do you mean during the campaign or in the days after the election?

A.During the campaign and after.

Q.What do you wish he were doing now?

A.I don't want to go into all of this "shoulda, coulda, woulda." I think it takes our focus off the fact that we had far too many grievances and misfires in this election that have to be corrected.

the implication that had kerry listened more he would have taken a different course of action? that's a quite different sentiment than Reid's saying he did the right thing.

We'd already had 4 years of Buschism, it's not like Kerry didn't know what the stakes were! No, not 'good' - ill-advised, pathetic even disgusting, but 'good' no!
p.s.
Dear John Kerry,
Can I have my $2,000 back?

>>>>Well, I think the Ohio count was bad, but he is a good American. He realized that it was time to end the election and not drag this on. I think some votes could have been changed in the state of Ohio, but John Kerry did the right thing. He just pulled the plug….>>>>>

What, on earth, he is talking about? What would have been so bad about 'dragging it on"? Especially since the count was, in Reid's words, "bad"? (I'm assuming he means , by that word, "tainted")

What vital gov't function would have been interfered with by demanding that the "bad" count be rectified and transformed into a *good* count?

A better interviewer would have clarified the point; unfortunately, Mathews goes onto some inane blather about judging the Miss America contest.

I believe in some fairness doctrine but I don't see cocoa's point that Conyers has behaved just like Reid. really not fair to conflate the two, I don't think, as if doing hearings in Ohio because NO ONE ELSE WOULD and pushing as hard as he can is the same as reid saying kerry did the right thing by pulling the plug...

and when you couple it with Carville's betrayal of the battle plan on election night, you can see how the behind the scenes manipulations to STOP Kerry from continuing.

The Dem party's election legal team claimed there was no legal evidence to continue - I agree that may have been the case - BUT....the more I read about some Dem leaders' manipulations and betrayals in 2003 and 2004, now I have to wonder if some of those on th eparty's election team had stifled some of the evidence.

I just don't trust the Carville, McAuliffe, and assorted ClintonTeam players.....not at all.

a legitimate Democracy and how it comes into being.

I wonder what he would have said if he'd lived in the days of the American Revolution.

Or has it been infiltrated by a fifth column of corporate shills. Harry is anti-choice, anti-union, and generally anti-freedom. "our party" made corporate consolidation possible, assisted in the dismantling of our once mighty manufacturing base, degrade our educational system to the laughing stock we have today, passed the "free trade" agreements, made supporting the banking and insurance industries legal requirements, created the WTO and IMF, etc., none of which has any benefit at all for the people.

I want my party,and its leaders, to be what it wants us all to believe it is.

Senator Kerry's job in the 2004 was to get elected President of the United States. When it became clear that getting a recount wasn't going to change the outcome of the election, there was no point in Senator Kerry contesting the results.

It is the people of Ohio's job to ensure that they have a fair election system where their votes will be counted. As far as I'm concerned they did this in 2006 by electing Ted Strickland and Jennifer Brunner.

Not all that surprising for a politician. He should never have promised that in the first place, because it's not a campaign's job to ensure that all votes are counted.

Remember that brand new Office of Voter Integrity that popped up after the 2000 election fraud? THAT is the part of the Dem party who HAD the job to secure the election PROCESS and FAILED every one of the voters and the candidates.

But Reid's leadership is even weaker than Daschle's - Daschle stood up to * and refused to allow *co unlimited war powers after 9/11 even under intense pressure. Also got us the 9/11 commission even though it was so totally a whitewash. I really question whether Reid would've done the same in those circumstances.

The only thing he got was the sunset provisions on certain parts.

If I remember correctly, they had only hours to look at the bill before voting on it. The pukes had this bill in storage, ready to go once they had an opportunity.

And the Senate Majority Leader determines when the bills when be called up for a vote. In the House it's very possible that they kept the Dems from reading it. If members of the Senate didn't have time to read it then the blame lies on Daschle.

by the envelope full of weapons-grade anthrax one of his staffers had opened. Others were locked out until their offices could be decontaminated. And this was only a month or so after Sept 11 so everyone was pretty freaked out to begin with. I agree someone had that bill ready to go "just in case."

I want to throw something every time I hear the RW noise machine chant "* has kept us safe because we haven't been attacked since 9/11".

. . .as did every other member of the House and Senate who failed to vote to throw out the illegitimate Ohio electors.

damn right they are OUR elections!!

A very strong argument can be made that it is NOT the candidate's personal decision on whether or not to contest, and the office is NOT the personal property of any one who occupies it or attempts to occupy it. It is OUR office, as we We the People.

. . .Even in terms of their cowardly and unprincipled "strategery," what does he think he gains saying this? Who does he think he's talking to?

The magnitude of the denial and delusion within their insular world approaches mental illness.

Stunning.

they do it all the time, it means nothing, it's just a bizarre ritual.

don't you think? How can you be such a STICKLER here on DU and blithely accepting of Senatorial, on the record, in the media "stroking"?

Stunning.

How many people who fought and bled for their country had their vote thrown in the trash, all across the country, Harry? When Ohio's Kerry votes didn't count, the votes for Kerry in all the other states were moot too. I think less of Harry every day.

Because the Kerry votes in Ohio didn't count, all the GI's votes for Kerry coming in from overseas meant nothing.

The election was a waste of time, I think is what Harry means.

try at least one of "19 tricks or Weapons of Massive Creation for Global Amelioration"


"12. I stole this one from now rumored to be reincarnated, though used to
be, old "sleeping prophet" Edgar Cayce.

Take baths. If you have no bathtub available, then bathe around. Aaaand
don't tell me that you have no extra time for baths, as baths take about
15 minutes, showers take 5-10. No one is really that busy or all too
important to not be able to do so.

Cayce recommended adding 1 part baking soda to 2 parts Epsom Salts
for baths. That stuff is really cheap. and readily available. I add
my fave oil (lavender). You can add yours. Ritual full immersion is
an age old, time & tried tradition for more than just physical
purification. It is especially so for more sensitive sorts. It is great
to do during lunations. That would mean, once every two weeks or so.
It is alleged to release all sorts of accumulated psychic effluvia
from bodies and auric fields . I just know that when I take one, I
invariably feel reborn, and am reminded that I too have a life, instead
of contemplating the troubles of others all the time as is my
ridiculously inherent proclivity."

Then you perhaps won't be so contrary and will bea bit more collaberative.

best

there are things at stake even in questions of whether someone lost by 2% or 5% like the competitiveness of a state which affects later fundraising, and other questions. But we don't need further jujstifications: It's the job of ALL politicians and candidates to LISTEN for the will of the people, and not to get hard of hearing too quickly.

After all, why would the American people think that those politicians would fight for us.

Why did Jim Webb make such a big hit?

Because he took the bastards head on and beat them with the truth.

Also because he "threw away the prepared speech the PTB gave him."

I want Jim Webb or someone with his guts to represent me in the Presidential electoin and as
spokesman for my party.

Senator Jim Webb, DEMOCRAT, Virginia:

:hi:

Reid's statement would be a career-ender, IMO.

who despite massive media censorship and a total lack of an organizaed opposition on Capitol Hill, determined on their very own that the Repulicans were the biggest disaster since Herbert Hoover (and
it didn't even take a depression).

So they can have the "gentleman's club" and wave the white flag. That's fine. New leaders are
emerging.


The Hon. Jim Webb,
Democrat, Virginia

Along with the last two years and the next two years.

Wow. I hope this was just mouth moving on without brain on camera. That can happen.

transcript continues here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=101566&mesg_id=105944

this attitude that the deals made among the patricians are more important than the democratic process.

Democratic complicity with a corrupt election system is one of the most disturbing things anyone who works this issue for any length of time encounters.

I keep trying to explain it away, but it gets harder and harder and harder.

PLENTY of reasons to think the election lacked integrity. Should have been a moment in which election integrity, opposition party scruples, and dem perseverence took center stage. Instead....

It's been said on DU many times that DC politics is really just a big Hannity and Colmes show....orchestrated to keep the illusion of real politics going. Maybe it works on the long run...life does go on. But what a disappointment to learn that we're really on our own here, and many of our reps in DC are there for other reasons.

votes to be ridiculed and called conspiracy theorists. Thanks a f%#!ing lot. I'll remember that when you call for money.

Paul, I hope you don't mind but I passed this on to many here in Ohio-ER list servs, OH PDA, OH Dem groups, with, of course full attribution to you.

pisses me off!

I can't think of a resistance movement that achieved it's goals in 2 years, two years!

That's unparalleled. You didn't need anybody but Buckeyes with bad attitude and a relentless
spirit.

You Ohio Democrats are the inspiration for the new wave of fighters who demand social justice

in.

:hi:

Thanks to all of the hardworking Ohio citizens. Today, thanks particularly to those who worked the Cuyahoga recount issues that led to the prosecution and convictions of the Ohio election officials for rigging the recount. I am looking forward to learning all those names and hearing that story!! Wish I knew it already... Of course there are scores and scores not to mention thousands more in Ohio who've had some role large or small in all this. I know some names, but will hold back until I have a more complete list. but to all who helped in Ohio: I salute you.

It was blatant, in your face theft, and the voters most disenfranchised were the voters least likely to be able to fight for their votes to count (ie low income). I don't know if some folks are ok with this two tier system, but I call BULLSHIT to this. As I have stated many a time on ER&D, it was the equal protection aspect that inspired me to fight for those votes. I went to precincts where I promised folks that "THIS TIME WOULD BE DIFFERENT-KERRY/EDWARDS PROMISED TO MAKE SURE EVERY VOTE WOULD BE COUNTED". Maybe some Dems use words loosely, but not me. I promised and I fought.

Can you tell my blood is boiling?

"Sen. Harry Reid now admits the Ohio presidential election 2004 vote count was bad.

So what will he do to make sure that the next count won't be BAD?

Why should we have to fight to get two separate ballot counts, if an American citizen disagrees with the first count, He/She should be entitled to Hand Count ALL the Paper Ballots, its that simple, they may not want it to be that simple, but thats the way it should be.

The terms should be set prior to an election, heres what you need to do to hand count all the paper ballots.

If an American Citizen wants to do a SECOND Hand Count of ALL the Paper Ballots. I don't care if it takes a Republican or a Democratic Citizen one day or ten days to count them. He She should be entitled to do it, under the terms agreed upon (PERIOD)

No restrictions on the amount of ballots, that they can count, it should not cost them tens of thousands of dollars to do it, they should not have to go to court, to be able to do it.

This is America, we won't stop people from auditing the machine counts, if they don't try and stop us from counting, All the Paper Ballots.

Its the American way.

:kick:

Especially senators (not saying I like it) ...perhaps he will revisit it at later date.

K&R

she sayeth as much right here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=101566&mesg_id=107212 Good way to put it, sfexpat2000!

How can anyone not believe the 2004 election was tampered with?

Reid is a "go-along-to-get-along" politician. Kick his ass to the bench and put Jim Webb in his place. I want a fighting Dem to speak for me. Reid does not speak for me.

"Pull the plug." What an asinine remark.

=====================

Before I say good-night and shut this computer down, just want to say thank you, Land Shark, your posts are always educational and entertaining.

It beats me. The whole environment of this administration is based on stunning and
disgusting lies...WMD...WAR...a huge lie that has killed hundreds of thousands and
wasted opportunities that will never come again.

You never know but maybe all the theft and degenrate activity, the assault on the Consitution, and
lets not forget the world-wide torture network ... maybe all that's just the exception and they
really did run a clean, transparent, inclusive election.

Partial list of voting rights law suits in Ohio since 2004
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0701/S00386.htm

# Strickland v. Blackwell
While this isn’t the most far ranging suit, it is certainly the most egregious abuse of regulatory power by a Secretary of State in 2006. “Strickland” is Ted Strickland, the Democratic candidate for governor. In Strickland’s home county, the mother of a Blackwell supporter filed a challenge to Strickland’s voting status in that county. The net result of the challenge, had it been carried by the local board, would have been disqualification of Strickland as a candidate for governor. Outrageous, maybe, but elegant in its design, this move would have led to Blackwell’s election as governor by default. With the help of the U.S. District Court for Northern District of Ohio, Strickland proceeded to quash to action by the board and went onto trounce Blackwell by 900 thousand votes, 60% to 37%.

# Ohio Citizen Action v. Blackwell. Ohio Supreme Court
In one of the strangest cases, Ohio Citizen Action sought to overturn Blackwell’s regulation stating that precincts were no longer required to post election results at the precinct prior to sending votes off for tabulation.. The complaint stated, “Ohio may face the risk if vote manipulation and outright fraud during the vote tallying process by the Secretary of State’s office.”

The Ohio Supreme Court managed to support Blackwell stating that it was just too late to disrupt the procedures in place for the election.

# ABC v. Blackwell. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
In 2004, Blackwell sought to restrict press access to polling places. In an inventive move, loitering laws were invoked to this end. ABC sued to prevent this from happening again. While ABC failed in its motion, the court reiterated a previous requirement that Blackwell have polling places post a notice stating that loitering laws were not to be used to discourage the press.

# Ohio Democratic Party v. Blackwell. .Franklin County Court of Common Pleas
The Democratic Party sought the court to issue writ requiring Blackwell to alleviate congestion at polling places, fix malfunctioning machines, and provide security for voting machines to avoid manipulation. As with each of the other Ohio court cases, this was denied.

# Boustani v. Blackwell. US District Court for the Northern District (Ohio)
Here is a very special Blackwell regulation, the subject of this suit. This is the Ohio procedure allowing anyone to challenge anyone else as an illegal foreign voter.

If the person is challenged as unqualified on the ground that the person is not a citizen, the judges shall put the following questions:
(1) Are you a citizen of the United States?
(2) Are you a native or naturalized citizen?
(3) Where were you born?
(4) What official documentation do you possess to prove your citizenship? Please provide that documentation.

The court encouraged an agreement by the parties that relieved this outrageous “look and guess” test about “foreigners” voting in an Ohio election.

# Northeast Ohio Coalition for the Homeless v. Blackwell. US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
This action sought to overturn the new Voter Identification (Voter ID) requirements in Ohio, central to any effective voter suppression strategy. The court issued a temporary retraining order but the appeals court overruled it. So much for the homeless.

# Harkness v. Blackwell. U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 established “procedures that will increase the number of eligible voters who will vote in federal elections.” One procedure was to have any office providing public assistance give out registration forms, help fill them in and accept the finished forms as voter registrations. It seems they were a bit selective in Ohio. The suit cites small counties like Athens and Marion registering more public assistance voters than 500 thousand or more population counties like Hamilton (Cincinnati), Franklin (Columbus), Montgomery, and Summit. This was so outrageous, the plaintiffs prevailed…on December 28, 2006, just a bit late.

# Project Vote v. Blackwell. U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
The complaint argues: “These onerous and vague new laws and regulations chill core political speech and association and have forced all of the plaintiffs to seriously curtail or halt their voter registration and related core political speech and association activities.” Precisely as intended, I suspect. Groups like Project Vote were given all sorts of unnecessary requirements to register voters and penalties were in place to punish even trivial deviance from this Blackwell absurdity. This case was continued until February, 2007.

… & Potentially the most revolutionary case in the history of modern voting rights

# League of Women Voters v. Blackwell. U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio
This is quite simply the most comprehensive voting rights law suit imaginable. The Ohio League of Women Voters and long time election law attorney and voting rights champion Cliff Arnebeck put together a case that may serve as the blue print for reforming Ohio and as a model for other states. The election of Attorney General Marc Dan and Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, both sympathetic cleaning up the mess Blackwell and Taft created may introduce a new level of voting rights and put in place the type of comprehensive program that guards against the varieties of election fraud introduced and intensified since Election 2000.

As the old saying goes, leopards don't change their spots.

It defies logic to watch the events unfold on Election Day 2004 and not grasp that something went terribly wrong. A deliberate, malicious manipulation. At the top of it all? Probably Cheney, the same man who destroyed the Counter-Proliferation Division of the CIA.

We know the counts were bad, but nothing can be done now. Why is that? If I were overcharged on my credit card, I wouldn't just shrug it off. I would insist that it be fixed. And my vote is more important!

That comment alone may have earned him the next Lamont-style takedown.

These LieberDems have simply got to go. They are entirely worthless.

--

This throws a whole new light on what used to be considered the priori truth of mathematics. It makes Einstein's theories of relativity seem too trite and banal for words. (Apparently, the then Manchester Guardian's golf correspondent (the only one who could speak German, it seems) got it right, when, in reply to the Editor's enquiry concerning a lecture on Einstein's new-fangled theories by the man himself, which he had been sent to, replied, "Cliches, my boy. Nothing but cliches!"

It not only brings unimaginable glory on Mattthews and Reid for identifying the true, primordial nature of mathematics, as not at all partaking of a priori truth, but rather its being "inter-subjective; not only that, as if that were not enough, but also on the your country, the United States of America, for producing an electoral context that was able to add this crucial new dimension to the counting of ballots.

Far from being an exact Science, it turns out that its is actually an Art! Indeed one of the Fine Arts, I would think, judging from the hesitancy and delicacy with which your politicians broach the subject, if at all. It can only be awe-filled reverence, a sense of unworthiness to even contemplate what went on in recent elections. Something the rest of the world would now do well to learn about.

On the other hand, perhaps it would be best to reef in a bunch of people from the street and get a show of hands.

Consider also that perhaps the conversation may be an avante garde recognition of the inherent uncertainty and unknowability of all elections now that the votes are all counted in secret even on opscans, such that dragging the country through an examination of this abyss into which they've pushed Democracy would needlessly upset us all, so why do it? :sarcasm: for failing to defend democracy

mustn't we?

Why drag the nation through a nasty controversy - even the dramas of court-room trials, the modern-day equivalent of the Western? And for what? Just so that the choice of your leaders should be your own, and not the choice of powerful, Big Business interests, such as the oil lobby? It really would make no sense at all, would it? I think it's simply political naivety to question election results. Un-American to the nth degree! Commie-inspired, I reckon!

Who could know better what is and what is not in the interests of the American people than the luminaries of the Forbes Four Hundred and their offshore compadres? Are we not, in both our countries, already sated with the manifold treasures of all kinds that their "proprietary" government shower down upon us?

Eat your hearts out, Europeans! Bah! You know what you can do with your free, universal health care, functioning trade unions and social safety nets, don't you? How many of those countries can boast that they spend such a mind-boggling percentage of their GDP on armaments, eh? Answer me that!

For shame, restless minds! You may hate Murrka, but Murrka doesn't hate you? How many times would it have gathered you to its bosom, you ungrateful progressives, like a mother hen its brood, but you would not! The Lament of the American military-industrial complex over the New Jerusalem, and those who would promote it. For shaaaaame!!!!!

K&R Thanks Landshark for the great post.

No, Harry, a GOOD American would have fought tooth and NAIL to get the fucking presidency back where it rightfully belongs after the LAST theft. Al Gore is a hero for fighting them. Kerry lost all of my goodwill toward him by cutting and running. It was fucking embarrassing when he did that.

Is Reid subtly bashing Gore? Or is he just saying incredibly stupid things?

Harry.. dear.. Democracy is not always convenient, or tidy, or simple, (do I sound like Rumsfeld?), our Country was not born of timidity, resignation, and convenience. Sometimes you have to fight for what's right. Kerry made a HUGE error in giving up. Huge error. And Reid is compounding it by supporting that decision.

true patriots in their long-standing fight against high-level, white-collar, organised crime, the scourge of American public life; evidently exercises obviously not without risk, and which few of us would relish.

It's scant consolation, but rather a cause of infinitely understandable fury for those of us who find ourselves and/or our family, friends and plain fellow-countrymen increasingly under the cosh of our "robber-baron" capitalism; a cosh of such barbarity it is only found in countries with residual, imperial aspirations and a consequent predilection for preserving the legal right to physically torture people to death.

Few, if any people in public life, other than the rare likes of Martin Luther King and John and Robert Kennedy, for example, see their job as prophetic in the narrower, more lonely sense, but believe that the longer-term workings of the government and laws, provides the safer alternative for all, in that its ultimate success can be counted upon. Still, the poorest are counted on to bear the lions' share of the burden - to wait patiently for a perod of time they can ill afford, or indeed spare at all any longer. Little wonder then that it sticks in our craws to hear someone like Harry laying on that kind of BS blandishment with a trowel.

He is a wimp beyond belief and totally doesn't GET BushCo and what is really going on in this country. I am appalled that he is the leader of the Senate. He is a Publican enabler and a coward.

:grr:













added "ive"

because I will NEVER FORGIVE JOHN KERRY for not counting the goddamned votes and being a good goddamn American.

We were NEVER supposed to have this murderous giggling fuck as president!

He's been "failing to fight" during his entire tenure!

People who expect that to change are going to be in for a disapointment.

which party is in power. He still will never have to worry about failing public schools, or his kids being sent off to war. Hell, he might even benefit from a tax cut for the wealthy if Repubs are in control. Again, why would he worry about counting votes? That's too much work! Sorry if this post sounds bitter but its true.

but, they've been very good to him so far...