Ernest Partridge: 'Dear Howard Dean: Why bother?'

[phantom power]

And so, if nothing is done to end the privatization of our elections and to introduce reliable verification, the Republicans will "win" again in November 2006 and then in 2008. Today, eleven months before the mid-term election, the outcome is fore-ordained - as certain as Soviet elections under Stalin, and Iraqi elections under Saddam. For, as Stalin said, "Those who cast the votes decide nothing, those who count the votes decide everything."

In the United States today, the GOP counts most of the votes, and there are no means to verify up to 80% of those votes.

In view of this dreadful situation, when the Democrats ask me for a contribution I must reply: "What's the point? It's already been settled! What remains is an empty charade."

The evidence of election fraud is overwhelming. You, Dr. Dean, are doubtless as aware of that evidence as I am. In fact, along with millions of fellow citizens, I watched the video clip of you sitting at a table with Bev Harris, as she simulated with a computer, in just a few seconds, a "fix" of an election. If I were to elaborate the evidence of fraud, space restraints would force me to halt after I had scarcely begun, and I would never get to other issues I wish to discuss in this letter. Suffice it to say that several independent statistical analyses have put the probability of an honest 2004 election as one in several million. The thirty-plus-point polling discrepancy in last month's Ohio election reform initiatives are off the probability scale - in effect, impossible as random error. Attempts to explain away the 2004 exit poll errors are risibly lame. (For example, the theory that Republican voters were more reluctant to speak to exit pollsters is supported by no independent evidence, and fails to explain why this alleged phenomenon was confined to districts with paperless e-voting machines, and not found in paper-ballot districts). Reports of machine failure and error during the 2004 election were overwhelmingly to the advantage of Bush/Cheney. No one has come forth with a plausible explanation of how Bush gained an additional eleven million votes over his 2000 total. (For a "gateway" into the evidence of voting fraud, see The Crisis Papers pages on "Electoral Integrity" and "Election Fraud.").

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=24015&mode=nested&order=0

[natrat]

1. kind of weird democrats don't push this more

part of the whole scam???????????

[phantom power]

4. Right now, the political climate is perfectly in favor of...

perpetuating this scam. If a Democrat candidate goes on air saying "the election was stolen!" The GOP just calls him a sore-loser. A wacko conspiracy theorist.

Most Americans simply don't believe it could be that bad. You know. "That could never happen here!" Until they do, it's going to be very hard to get any political traction with this.

[Dhalgren]

2. More and more, this is my attitude toward politics in this country:

"What's the point? It's already been settled! What remains is an empty charade."

I will make a prediction. The Democrats will not win back either House nor Senate in '06 and a Republican will be elected president in '08. And I don't even have a crystal ball...

[yurbud]

3. DLC probably is paid to look the other way

[phantom power]

5. On that note...

the more I think about it, the more creepy I think it is that both Bush and Kerry are Bonesmen. Think about that. Both presidential candidates in 2004 belong to the same secret society. It was guaranteed that a Bonesman was going to be president.

[w13rd0]

6. Not to be the devil's advocate...

...but the same logic would dictate:

guaranteed that ______ was going to be president
a) a man
b) a caucasian
c) a wealthy person
d) an aristocrat
e) a Yale alumni
f) etc, etc

[phantom power]

8. I think it's good to be a Devil's advocate! However...

I might then point out that (a) through (e) are all completely consistent with being Bonesmen. It's basically a society of rich WASPs, yes?

I really don't know what to make of Bonesmen. I'm willing to entertain the idea that the whole thing might be just a rich college-student version of playing "secret fort" and/or "He-Man women hater's club"

But it's simply a fact that the members of this particular Secret Fort include a heck of a lot of wealthy powerful men. These people aren't just ineffectual playboys. They wield real power, both behind the scenes and in public.

Should a sitting President be allowed membership in a Secret Society? It used to be that skeletons in the closet were political death, and the rationale was national security. Any secrets a president might have could be used as leverage by persons unknown, to influence his decisions. There's some real logic to that principle.

[Mr Rabble]

10. None of those other criteria are rare.

While being a bonesman is in fact quite rare. So in fact that is not dictated by logic.

In fact, to extrapolate on your criteria, we could guarantee that a human would be elected...

[w13rd0]

11. Sorry...

...but Bush puts that particular criteria to the test. I don't think he's human so much as an approximation of a human.

[Fiendish Thingy]

7. I will put a copy of this in every Dem fundraiser I get n/t

[yurbud]

9. Howard Dean knows about it--he was shown how it works in documentary

votergate.tv

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. He was told about it in late 2003 and early 2004.

Several folks mentioned it to him before he was a speck on the radar.