|
Edited on Sat Nov-06-04 11:38 AM by Samantha
During the era of the Clinton impeachment, Democrats accused disgruntled Republicans of attempting to overthrow the results of a legitimate election.
During the era of the 2000 Presidential election, Florida recount phase, Republicans accused Democrats of attempting to overthrow the results of a legitimate election.
This is a powerful, frightening argument used by parties in power against those challenging their right to rule, regardless of the authenticity of the challenge. This simple argument has a powerful, immediate adverse public relations impact.
Once the results of an election have been announced, particularly if the vote by states has been certified, and ostensibly if the slate of electors has been determined, the use of this argument can have devastating results simply because of the implicit suggestion insurgents are attempting to overthrow a legitimate government.
The odds of challenging election results retain the lofty appearance of simply adhering to the Constitution and our rule of law if that challenge is launched BEFORE that stamp of election finality is cast as opposed to AFTER. Should the challenge, no matter how pure in motive it is driven, be hoisted into public view AFTER that stamp of finality is cast, for example, after the Electoral College Vote, the inevitable cries of "this is an attempt to overthrow the results of a legitimate election" will be heard blasting from the tops of every neo-conservative mountain to the depths of every Evangelical valley. Echoes of "sore loser, sore loser" will rebound from every red state, debilitating through deafening pure motivations driving those analyzing the backfires and misfires of our election machine.
My point is this. I am extremely disturbed at what I have read and heard about the irregularities persisting throughout our election process. Taking an objective view of this 2004 election and remembering the plays executed by the same operatives in the 2000 election, it is disturbing to me to realize how time is not on our side. There is so much to be done, and so little time to do it in, how will we ever collect, analyze, and distribute data on election irregularities before the Electoral College vote? If it can't be done before then, any evidence surfacing after that will be tainted with the paintbrush the Republicans always use to resurface its typical dirty election tricks: playing the public relations angle as opposed to playing by the rules. Galvanize its radical base rather than coherently and truthfully responding to the questions focused on voting irregularities. Its spin will be the Devil is trying to undo the Lord's will in this election.
Time is of the essence. We cannot spend the next four years discerning how the Republicans did what they did (and how they did it) and subsequently comfort ourselves by saying, we will get them the next time. Our party, our goals, and our concern for the less fortunate among us, coupled with our alarms and our fears regarding the overabundance of the overly-assertive, bullish, motivation-by-intimidation political opponents we now face tell us this: we cannot wait another four years to start getting this corruption out of our government.
The Republicans utilize the maneuver of delay, delay, delay in responding to FOIA requests, such as those contemplated by Bev Harris. How do we expedite the collection, examination, analysis and distribution of information buttressing our assertion of election fraud, should that be her and others' finding on the matter? It's naive to think we can forward this info to Congressmen and the media for revelation to the public. It didn't happen in 2000; it won't happen in 2004. Is a partial answer simply cooperating with the foreign press and hoping some of these outlets will willingly investigate the information and, if collaborated through their own efforts, report the findings to the world?
I pledge to do whatever I can, including sending a contribution to Bev Harris. I challenge you to post whatever your thoughts are on this subject of expediting the inquiry into the legitimacy of this election.
What is your response?
|