Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Debate over Rolling Stone Article ignores what's Important to USA

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 12:48 AM
Original message
Debate over Rolling Stone Article ignores what's Important to USA
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 01:19 AM by Land Shark
The False-Fake Debate over RFK Jr's Rolling Stone Article Started by Salon Ignores Democracy and What's Important
(cross posted in part at Salon as letter to the editor)

by Paul R Lehto, Attorney at Law

Sources
<http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the... > Robert F. Kennedy Jr's Rolling Stone investigation into stolen election 2004, and
<http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/ > (criticizing Kennedy's Rolling Stone investigation


The fight started in the Salon response linked above over the sufficiency of the evidence to prove a stolen election in 2004 that was amassed by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a great disservice to democracy, because it fails to take the risks to democracy seriously. It's net effect is to say it's "ok go back to sleep, no need to be alarmed" while also suggesting we get together and deal with issues like voter suppression.

Though it seems that it's uncool to take something extremely seriously in this modern day, I believe We should all be earnest about defending democratic elections, like Salon's Farhad Manjoo used to be when he wrote election protection articles prior to Election 2004. That recited fact tells us especially strongly that it's ok to slumber away, RFK=no credibility here.

But there's a better way to understand this debate over the sufficiency of evidence, one that shows why 2004 is so important. Elections fundamentally shifted in the late 90s by the advent of electronic voting and that shift was increased greatly in 2002 with the passage of the Help America Vote Act and its $3.8 billion in funding for electronic voting machines to be installed around the country, with the HAVA addition of legal requirements that generally favor electronic voting.

Articles like Manjoo's, though probably well intended, are doing what Jon Stewart said CrossFire was doing when he went on CrossFire and said:

Please...
Stop.
Please.

You're h-u-r-t-i-n-g democracy. Please stop.

Stewart was both comical but deeply serious. Many agreed that the muckraking debate on crossfire was fake debate.

I'm no comedian so all I can do is be serious. To go with fake debate still alive on non-canceled shows, we've got fake elections designed to give out little or no evidence. Thus, we can always have a debate over the sufficiency of the evidence no matter whether the election was actually stolen, or not.

The very debatability of 2004 (when I assume Manjoo is totally right for the sake of argument) means that democracy is dying or dead. Mock me if you like at lehtolawyer@gmail.com, but it's time for all good men and women to come to the aid of their country. Seriously.

My name real name is below, and my cell phone number. You can have them -- the government certainly already does, along with all of my phone numbers dialed, and yours. At least if you call or write there's a thread of reasonable purpose to have my number.

THere's a late 1970s Supreme Court case that says just having the numbers but not listening doesn't require a warrant. Devotion to the "rule of law" won't save us by itself because legal rules are tiny rules with gaps and loopholes between them, so ultimately we must be able to, in a binding/serious way, ask ourselves:

Is collecting all phone numbers dialed for all Americans consistent with a decent vision of a free society?

Is funding electronic voting where votes are necessarily counted in invisibly using secret software consistent with a decent vision of a free society?

Is America's status as having the highest percentage of its population in prison in the entire world, consistent with a decent vision of a free society?

We the People are frozen in false debates because, for whatever reasons, there are 90% of criminal defendants getting hammered beyond the requirements of justice, but others would be likely correct in citing examples of lenient injustice. Weighing the two and realizing that one is far larger than the other has been rendered impossible, perhaps by the effects of equal time in the media for craziness by the powers-that-be.

Why we can't do a proper balancing is not as important as understanding that the Public is stymied by these kinds of debates where both sides have at least a tiny point, so long as the tiny point is heavily funded, it get's repeated one million times for one million dollars, compared to the citizen's one dollar (or "two cents")


THis confusion and inability to balance is re-created by the Salon article on elections, which attempts to go mostly point by point and provide a plausible explanation for each irregularity, ignoring that any hacker who thinks for a second will choose a cover that has a plausible explanation.

Elections are incredibly unique. For example, while normally we must obey government laws, in elections the government seeks the consent of the governed, essentially coming to beg for authority and approval. This reverses the usual role of citizen-as-virtual-subject. The secret ballot means the ballots can't be audited back to their owners to verify them, making analogies to "reliable" ATMs hazardous and inapplicable.

Salon's Manjoo fundamentally doubts stolen elections in 2004 or apparently in general because they require "widespread conspiracy," and that it's "hard to keep everyone quiet." (paraphrase) Phrased that way, he must think elections can only be stolen by large conspiracies when we know it can be done with one person.

If this "conspiracy" was so difficult to keep quiet based on numbers of those who must have been involved, then the D-Day invasion was no secret to the British public, there's no such thing as secret societies, and we don't have a secretive CIA, Delta Forces or Mafias because you just can't keep those large numbers of people quiet.

Manjoo, and all of us, should be more serious about elections. We're talking about control of the world's richest country and sole superpower, available without the millions on payroll needed to field and support armies. With computerized elections, it's now possible to get the bargain of the millenium: superpower control with the bonus of public confidence in the stolen election, based in large part on the newfangled inscrutability of our e-elections, with the bonus of unwitting support via the "sore loser" attacks on any stolen election advocates raising their voices.

This high reward for faked elections is not met by anything akin to defense forces. So-called election officials will amost universally tell the public to go back to sleep rather than be concerned because the officials don't want the negative attention and feel under-funded. I'm hoping to see a few hundred thousand "sentinels of democracy" or election watchdogs. But, watchdogs suck if they're not "suspicious" so to speak, and Manjoo basically mocks the whole idea of suspicion, even though RFK Jr is a credible attorney with a reputation and something to lose, who had a researcher assisting and spent lots of time on it. Doesn't this get a ticket to the ballgame, instead of Manjoo's disqualification? Well you can get DQ'd for defending democracy, because to be suspicious as a sentinel must, you're a "conspiracy theorist."

Yup, "conspiracy theory" attacks are functionally protecting secrecy, whether intended to or not, because the only reason anyone needs to "speculate" or make a "theory" about anything, is because of secrecy making information unavailable but at the same time creating the very justifiable inference that secrecy hides the embarrassing, illegal or wrong. After all, if it weren't for secrecy, conspiracy theory could be entirely avoided by directing folks to the correct book or info source. Conspiracy theory is a new and expanded LAW OF THINKING, where regular citizens get to be thought police for the sheer fun of shutting down debate. Totally unwilling accomplices in idea suppression, but suppressing nonetheless.

Regarding the "quiet" we hear, the MEDIA rarely reports election issues, like the easy and evidence-free alteration of elections. That non-coverage makes even noisy "conspirators" appear silent even when yelling. Google "Clint Curtis". Legit or not, he's not much in the mainstream media. Heck, if a perpetrator confessed to an NBC network anchor complete WITH DOCUMENTS, they'd fear sharing Dan Rather's terminal "voluntary" fate for running a debated Guard story backed up with expert witnesses regarding documents.

Remember who, what, when, why, and where and How? In light of the "universal bias" created by everyone taking sides, AMERICANS ALL HAD BIAS AND WE ALL KNEW:

1. WHO we wished to favor: Kerry or Bush.

2. WHAT we wished to favor them with: Votes.

3. WHEN we wished to favor them. November 2, 2004

4. WHY we wished to favor them: Electoral College and life/death issues.

5. WHERE we wished to favor them: Swingstates!

6. ...and the only thing we may or may not have known was:

7. HOW we wished to favor them: MYRIADS OF WAYS, with even more if you're an official or have access.

Thus, despite the "widespread conspiracy needed" allegation, in fact with elections NONE of us need "marching orders" from the DNC/RNC to know how to act simultaneously, YET it still looks like acting "in concert" from the outside.

Again, the real sea change started in the late 90s with electronic voting, because it makes the vote counting both invisible and secret through trade secret software. It's a revolution in slow motion because it takes years to retrofit all voting machines into computers.

Strengths become liabilities in e-voting: (1) computers do what they are told without question, and (2) there's no such thing as total security, just raising the cost-to-penetrate much higher.

Gee, with more "election security" regarding computer voting, the price of beat or rig the system will really high to rig an election, so then only governments, huge corporations and KGB types could do it! Wunderbar! On top of that, the security passwords are placed, in the usual corporate fashion, in the hands of the top election official -- the very person who is a #1 suspect to have stolen an election to get that office in the first place. Instead of paying out millions to vendors for computerized voting, let's at least force elections officials to auction off the right to count votes in secret to maximize the public treasury for a time. Many would indeed pay for this honor, it being very cool indeed to have politicians treat you incredibly politely even if you NEVER ever do any creative accounting with the vote. But who's gonna know, eh? ;-)


Government can't possibly give us a real SOLUTION with elections, Elections must instead be immune from any substantial or unsupervised government tinkering, because government can't check and balance itself, when elections determine the government's own power and money.

This "widespread conspiracy" canard would be especially amusing if it weren't for the fact democracy was at stake. The Goebbelian final solution is the (misleading) charge that there's "no evidence" of election fraud on electronic machines. Because computer scientists have warned democracy for almost ten years of the problem of "no {direct} evidence" with these new machines, there's a special hair-pulling hell on earth for election activists who've been silenced with "There IS no evidence, you fool!"

Just Google "Harri Hursti" for links to computer scientist demonstrations of how a hacked machine can disobey certified software, pass all tests, and evade detection for years before kicking in and there's nothing anyone can really do about it in terms of a good "Fix."

The Real Issue with E-voting:

The fundamental problem: People of good faith must necessarily disagree about the quality of the stolen election "evidence", because the main evidence is secret or never created, the available evidence is all indirect, and also in short supply from butt-covering officials. E-voting is thus like having a body that can't experience the warning of pain: Extremely likely that mutilation and death from untreated infection will occur in time.

We will see the death of democracy as we bicker about the quality of conflicting "evidence" and miss the real issue:

We Want to feel the Pain of election controversy because it tells us something. But articles like Manjoo's want to dull the pain on account that it's probably nuthin'


It's only a matter of time before someone succeeds with e-election fraud if they haven't already, and then once installed, pulls up the "ladder" of elections from behind them and insures that elections are thereafter fakes, but still superficially identical to real ones.

Government "protections" don't matter, they boil down to trust of the government when our system's based on checks and balances. With invisible secret vote counting, theres no basis for confidence in the results of such counting, Elections are political Rohrschack tests. Our Founders settled that Rohrschack question, favoring distrust, and placing checks and balances in lieu of "trust" and the "plausible explanations" that are actually the favored habitat of election cheaters for the cover they provide.

It's wise in times of good administration to be prepared for bad administration. So distrust is no offense if you think the present administration loves liberty and serves the public's will.

Whether we break down along "partisan" lines or along "strict proof" "rational suspicion" or "faith-based-elections-OK" lines, the dreams of both Right and Left are all at risk by quibbling over the winnner and loser of one election, when democracy is in peril.

We won't know democracy died from suspended elections -- fake elections are dictator-approved worldwide.

When elections aren't real they are (1) like casinos: you win enough to stay addicted, (2) politicians don't listen, (3) incumbents have 97% or higher re-election rates, (4) the public isn't informed, (5) the government is surprisingly bold sometimes, (6) more exceptions to red tape of asking for warrants (7) the public accepts the rationale of totalitarians "nothing to fear if nothing to hide", and (8) unpopular wars continue, to save face. Only "Face" limits power at all.

The evil genius here is in making elections inscrutable via electonic technology so that people end up quibbling about important details with their partisan foes (but details nonetheless on a relative level), enough academics naturally are quite available to honestly opine the evidence ambiguous in their opinion (showing themselves smarter than all of us for seeing the other side and not getting in any way excited), and peaceful Americans detest the "partisanship" that is an inevitable part of post-election disputes because all election losers are partisans of one stripe or another, seeking to dislodge another different partisan. This confounding of elections happened through the government's "solution" advertised as the response to the problem of the ambiguous evidence in few but very frustrating Floridian chads. That "solution" was to totally *eliminate* that evidence with e-voting funded by feds. Is moving from ambiguous evidence to zero evidence an improvement in election protection?

I suppose we can just say those silly guv'mint Wabbits stole our democracy, so that we'll never know if we have one for sure again.


I don't always idealize our Founders, but I'm convinced that it's important to realize that the Founders would never have treated a government action like this as a mild provocation, or a subject only of internet blog debate.

At the end of the day, the big picture here is that some Machiavelli is laughing at the stupid Americans fighting each other instead of him, proud of his genius using necessarily ambiguous evidence to confuse, getting professionals to unwittingly protect him because there's "no proof" but they don't even know what proof would be, so they won't find it. If Machiavelli isn't real today, how long is it said to be before political power vacuums get filled up?

Power corrupts.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Secret power is absolute power used against defenseless Americans who can't see what hit them.

You know it, I know it. But if we, for example, get stuck on the actual identity of "Machiavelli", it may be too late for democracy, though we may all be fine. Tyrants need docile subjects, and lots of them, capable of tolerating those 8 conditions of societies with fake elections, six paragraphs above.

Paul R. Lehto
lehtolawyer@gmail.com
425-4221387 (cell)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. What does he have hanging out his mouth in thi pic (Wolfe, cnn interview)



> Robert Kennedy jr. and Ohio
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/06/03.html#a8561
>
> Robert Kennedy jr. and Ohio
> Kennedy wrote this new piece for Rolling Stone called "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?" I don't follow these types of stories often, but I remember some recent Republican shenanigans involving "phone jamming."
>
> Video-WMP Video-QT
>
> He was on The Situation Room, to discuss his piece.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snowbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:03 AM
Response to Original message
2. Very well written..
Land Shark, did you write that peice?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Jawohl. I forgot to say that if anyone likes it they can repost/forward
if they so choose, with the attribution as indicated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
4. Well done Senor Shark...where are the takers, the naysayers, the
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 01:29 AM by autorank
30% or less in our party who have "Fox Based" Reality Inducement.

As for Corporate Media not covering this, who cares. They're dwindling and soon to be done, stick a fork in 'em.

The dilettantes of the left (kindest characterization) like Manjoo of Salon and Tokaji of some Ohio law school can keep it up. They will end up with egg on their face soon. In the mean time, it shows that faux election reform folks are lurking everywhere...ready to co-opt the movement. Tokaji probably likes DRE;s (touch screens). Manjoo, he's subsidized by Salon (dump them if you have not already, imho).

Thank yo RFK and before him, than you Jim Lampley and before that thank you all the academicians, and ordinary people who shouted out, nonsense, lie, fake election. And most of all thank you DU Elections Forum (formerly 2004 Election Research and Discussion Forum) and TRUTHISALL...the truth will be told, there's more than enough proof now to spark an investigation, let's make it happen.

Let the whiners on our side whine and the blissfully ignorant on either side blow off a little steam.

It's all part of the big payback when the truth comes out, 2000 and 2004 were stolen and a whole lot more that we never knew about or were never willing to deal with.

Excellent post K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Here is some ammo for the upcoming battle to tell the truth...
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 01:42 AM by autorank
This is primo material:

77% of Democrats think the election was STOLEN from him. I do.


The Theft of the 2004 Presidential Election: Michael Loo, PhD, Project Censored
http://www.projectcensored.org/newsflash/voter_fraud.ht...

Theft of the Presidency: Greg Palast, GregPalast.Com
http://www.gregpalast.com/columns.cfm?subject_id=1&subj...

The Strange Death of American Democracy: Endgame Ohio. Michael Keefer,Centre for Research on Globalisation
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KEE501A.html

The Unanswered Question: Who Really Won in 2004? (Based on TruthIsAll's work). autorank (aka Michael Collins) "Scoop"
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00238.htm

Kerry Won!!! Statistical Tools Everyone Can User + An Interview with TruthIsAll: Michael Collins, "Scoop"
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0512/S00242.htm




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Love the Condi picture! Nice touch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I'm mixing my metaphors...oops
That was for a discussion of Rhandi Rhodes story about Laura moving out of the White House (oh sure ;)

I think I'll just leave it here. It's Rice explaining just how much more the WH has to do to turn
this place into a total dictatorship.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #5
33. caption for the condi pic....
"but that's how big his dick was" I was mortified....the shame of it all and here he is the potus with a dick this size!!!

thanks for the links..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #33
40. You're very welcome...now stop mincing those words
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:00 AM
Response to Original message
8. Thankyou Paul! k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emlev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:40 AM
Response to Original message
9. US people have heads in sand trying to avoid a "hearnia"
Hearnia (n.) That dread disease you get from listening to things that are too heavy.

Like stories about elections being stolen, democracy being dead, murderous Marines...

Great piece, Paul. I particularly liked the part about pain and untreated infection.

Legal question: I'm so tired of being told we don't have the evidence to prove allegations such as those outlined in the RFKjr article. Don't people usually get to use the discovery process to obtain the evidence? There's plenty of it, I believe--we just haven't been given the access. Here's a sample of some evidence obtained by
freepress.org.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:10 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. sure, you can have a basis less than proof and file a lawsuit and
get discovery later on.

the general standard, one must continually inform the "proof" people, is that the election is in "substantial doubt". That gets you a new election, just doubting who won.

Proving you have to show the other guy won is another way to skin the cat, but ain't the only one or the main one, in most states I know of.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GuvWurld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
34. About the whole idea of proof
I have a long record of arguing that there is no need to engage in the debate over whether there was fraud or theft, or indeed over who won. To do so only validates the potential correctness of either side. Detaching from that polarized debate, the objective conclusion is that current election conditions allow for no proof either way, meaning there may be no amount of evidence sufficient to convince the masses of a stolen election, but similarly there is no evidence to prove the reported results are an accurate reflection of the will of the voters.

I agree with Land Shark that this is a fake debate, and encourage everyone to side-step it by illustrating how we are currently assured inconclusive results by the nature of the election conditions. It is not only no surprise that people can't agree who won, it is completely predictable and will continue this way as long as voting is unverifiable and/or controlled by private corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. Lots more great stuff at guvwurld's new site wedonotconsent
the link is in his signature line above.

Thanks for the comments Guv, you are right

they have 'no evidence' of any actual vote counting. if critics ignore the greater issue in favor of the smaller, it's a false issue in the long run, or a small issue at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emlev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #35
43. "No Evidence Proving Who Won Election!"
Hmm.

Now there's a headline I could get behind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MelissaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:52 AM
Response to Original message
11. It is time for an honest debate about voting.
The general public knows very little about our corporate controlled machines and how easily manipulated they are. People like Manjoo certainly aren't helping. This is beautifully written, Land Shark, and well worth getting up in the middle of the night for.

:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. There are far too many distractions thrown into stop debate of the actual
issue.

We must get electronic voting machines BANNED for the unconstitutional creations they are. State by state that has to be ourt focused battle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevepol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:32 AM
Response to Original message
12. Jim Crow couldn't have happened: too many people involved!
Somebody would have spilled the beans.

I mean look at the facts. You've got milliions of people involved. You're going to have a few dissatisfied people complaiing about anything. Basically, everything is all right. Blacks and whites are both being treated equally I mean basically.

No way Jim Crow happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #12
22. Good one!
That's a great analogy.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 05:34 AM
Response to Original message
13. You've made some excellent points to remember.
I found your response to that "it's impossible-to-maintain-silence" argument to be memorable in itself:

'...If this "conspiracy" was so difficult to keep quiet based on numbers of those who must have been involved, then the D-Day invasion was no secret to the British public, there's no such thing as secret societies, and we don't have a secretive CIA, Delta Forces or Mafias because you just can't keep those large numbers of people quiet.'

And then there's this crazy-making catch-22 you point out:

'...This "widespread conspiracy" canard would be especially amusing if it weren't for the fact democracy was at stake. The Goebbelian final solution is the (misleading) charge that there's "no evidence" of election fraud on electronic machines. Because computer scientists have warned democracy for almost ten years of the problem of "no {direct} evidence" with these new machines, there's a special hair-pulling hell on earth for election activists who've been silenced with "There IS no evidence, you fool!"

*******************************************

So let's see...Manjoo challenges a well-researched and heavily footnoted piece with a lot of opinion, including the usual conspiracy theory insults, and adding to that the injury of thwacking us with that weak "people can't keep secrets" argument, (as if that's proof.)

Computer scientists have said all along that machine voting won't ever work out, (for Democracy, anyway.)

The only way possible to get any kind of evidence is to have access to the computer code, (which is proprietary corporate info.)

As autorank posted, 77% of Democrats believe the election was stolen, local governments across the country are fighting the machines in one way or another, new information continues to emerge about the ways 2004 was tampered with, we have documented information on tampering and suppression, and yet Manjoo responds to RFK's article that asks "Was The 2004 election Stolen?" with "no". Not a "maybe", not a: "I don't think so, and here's why", just a "no". Does he even say an attempt was made to steal the election?

So what are we? Chopped liver? A couple of cliches come to mind. "Where there's smoke, there's fire" and "the simplest explanation is the likeliest one."

Given the anomalies, the voter suppression, the false scenarios, (a terrorist threat, fer cry-eye!) the "weight of paper" stunts, the lack of equipment in Dem precincts, given the lists of stories known about tricks and switcheroos, and add to that the failing Bush presidency prior to the election, the magical faith-based turnarounds in poll numbers on election night, and the unfolding criminality and corruption of the Republican Party...the simplest answer is that the election was stolen.

Where there's smoke, there's fire.

I do hope that Manjoo is correct about his theory that most people can't remain silent, I'm counting on Americans who see before them evidence of a stolen election and a Democracy in danger to be fully unable to remain silent for even one day longer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
14. Thank You All, Friends! I can't keep up with you, but I am PROUD to
get to applaud you -> :applause: :applause: :applause:

I cannot express how disappointed I was yesterday to read Manjoo and his slap at DU...

Is one possible approach this: STOP focusing on whether the 2004 election was or was not stolen - just keep mum about the 'big conclusion' and just keep slamming the facts down over and over and over again -- about all of the instances of obvious fraud and highly suspicious results in all states in all past elections 2000, 2002, 2004?

In my opinion - maybe the best we can do before Nov. 2006 is to establish a very, very clear pattern of GOP culture of corruption as it pertains to elections so that ALL DEMS across the country are ON GUARD.

:patriot:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FogerRox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. KNR, Bookmarked, really good peice....easy to get your brain
around the individual concepts.........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtLiberty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:22 AM
Response to Original message
16. Conspiracy?
The REAL conspiracy is that Bush won the 2004 election. OMG -- anyone who believe that is a real nutcase.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demodonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
18. Good points, Land Shark!
Thank you!

:kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
19. I will not be renewing my Salon subscription. I saw this and almost
:puke: and we need to find out of the writer was paid by DC or the GOP or some unsuspecting casino tribe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
otohara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #19
52. I Canceled Yesterday - Here's Their E-mails to Me
Edited on Tue Jun-06-06 07:25 PM by otohara
VP of Operations sent this after I sent him an e-mail about Manjoo.....


Not at all! Farhad's reporting has been right on target in regards to this and other issues. We published a follow up rebuttal from RFK and a response from Farhad last night here

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/06/06/rfk_res... /

and a letter from the editor that delves into the debate as well

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2006/06/06/salon_a... /

I think those pieces provide a very strong response to the concerns that you and other readers have mentioned.




I wrote back and told him I canceled already....

Well Max, I had to take a stand in regards to Manjoo. Past articles he has written have turned me off and I can't support, nor will I help pay the salary of this guy. I agree with Mr Kennedy, Majoo was searching for "gotcha" moments, just like those asshole right-wing political pundits do every damn day of the week.

American elections will continued to be tampered with as long as the press continues to pooh, pooh the dirty efforts of the GOP to disenfranchise voters.

I canceled my subscription to Salon yesterday



From Salon today....

I'm really sorry to hear that. We'll continue covering this beat aggressively because it's still a huge story so hopefully you'll find something of interest in our future coverage.




BTW, You don't have to wait to your renewal, you can cancel now and get a prorated return on your annual rate. I figured I needed to make my statement immediately and write the top people and tell them why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
20. Great piece.
Thanks for writing it. Nothing is more important than verifiable elections. Nothing. Without it we are nothing more than a Banana Republic, up for grabs to the most technically advanced "ballot box stuffer".

K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zann725 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
21. Re: Stewart on "Crossfire" screaming "STOP...you're hurting Democracy!"
Edited on Sun Jun-04-06 10:28 AM by zann725
Yet by saying so, drawing attention to to the Truth, Stewart and THAT "Truth" managed to get "Crossfire" cancelled within weeks. Coincidence? I think NOT. He "told Truth to Authority"...and the sharply-told stark reality of that farse was irreversibly revealed...the little man behind the curtains in "Wizard of Oz."

I read and re-read your post. It seems to me you BOTH agree AND disagree with RFK writing the article...and the TRUTHS contained there. THOUGH you heavily seem to discourage "discussion" of of said TRUTHS "here and NOW"...for all the various same old reasons we've heard so often before over the last two years. But maybe I mis-read your piece. If I did, my apologies.

But I heartily applaud RFK's article, it's timing, and placement. Referencing again Stewart's TRUTHINESS on "Crossfire" a year ago, the producers of "Crossfire" also apparantly, ultimately appreciated (or were embarassed into) appreciating the TRUTH...at last. And cancelled the show immediately.

As you may recall, on that show, Stewart replied when they wanted him to QUIT telling the Truth and just be "funny"..."I'm no one's 'monkey.'" NOR is RFK, Jr. My applause to RFK, and his re-opening debate on '04 Election Fraud. No time seems to be a "good time" to discuss it...according to some. Not then, NOR not now.

Yet "IF not NOW...WHEN?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. On one level, it's a perspective piece: manjoo's perspective misleading

seems like Manjoo is playing Whac-A-Mole with the election protection movement. See picture at <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001GDP0... > (children's game with subtitle similar to: "whack the mole back into his hole" (with a hammer))

I think RFK's piece helps launch a very important discussion. I've got minor strategic differences that are partially cured with the Rolling Stone editorial against DREs.

I think one reason why people get so frustrated with Manjoo is that we are trying to get above water with the MSM, but they interpret "internal" division in the movement as exhibited by Manjoo as clear evidence that there's not any real consensus problem when there is.

Critics say "hey, just bein' honest here, you don't want to stifle speech or foment inaccuracy DO YOU?" But I say back to them: hey, elections are the property of all people. You seem to agree all people should have this discussion. This is "our baby" taking its first halting steps, and you are LAUNCHING your considerable intellectual powers to blow it away, even though RFK points to and calls for more work (an investigation) so Rolling Stone is basically a probable cause application for an investigatory warrant, if you will. To blow away probable cause is to end the chance of investigation. Moreover, since this "baby movement" needs to get a little air under its wings you are shooting at sitting ducks, whereas once it's got a forum, by all means let a thousand critiques flourish. Manjoo's Salon article and some other critics' roughly synchronous responses are not altogether unlike a no holds barred critique of a child's first singing recital.

In making their critique that I assume for the sake of argument only is a devastating critique of movement evidence, they are smothering this child in its crib and calling it "honesty" and "free speech". Or, put another way, quashing the application for probable cause, sort of telling the judge the applicant for probable cause has no credibility. This is not friendly.

You could call me a friendly critic of RFK, Jr. I owe him a deep debt of gratitude for helping to start a national conversation, which is the best and perhaps the only chance for a real hearing of the issues Manjoo claims are important. I don't claim Manjoo is on anybody's payroll though that inference is open. I would claim that his essay is a strategic blunder that affects the credibility of the rest of the essay as well because it is fundamental and obvious. I defend his right to say what he wants however. At least we've some freedom of speech in this movement. Here's my "more speech" in response to Manjoo's speech.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
30. Sadly there are other distractions, too. People are missing that the most
important thing is to stay on top of the ISSUE of election fraud and work to ban the electronic machines in every state.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bloom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
23. What's up with Salon?
Sometimes they seem to have pretty good things - and then they have stuff like this.

At this rate - they are just helping out Bush* - suggesting/saying it's all a "conspiracy theory".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WHAT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Salon has an agenda...
that isn't transparent.

That has been my experience when I've looked at results and not at words.

no intention to be a wet blanket, here...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. not seeing you as a wet blanket but meat has to be put on them bones
at some point. Ok, for now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. I agree
Salon has never engaged in serious political debate. They've also never been wholly serious in holding the GOP accountable for any of the myriad crimes, lies and unethical acts during the Bush administration.

They strike me more as a gossip magazine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #29
41. ...and they ran hate monger David Horrowitz...'nuf said...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pooka Fey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
27. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greatauntoftriplets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
28. Thanks for the great piece....
Kicked and recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
understandinglife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
31. One of your best. Thank you. Bookmarked and Recommended.


Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Thanks UL, pooka fey, greatauntoftriplets, bloom, Ozark Dem, all of ya!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liam_laddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
36. booted and recommended!
Once more, with gusto, everyone!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. good to see your DU face Liam_laddie!

there's more action also over in Election Forum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
38. Excellent article! Thank you!
I can feel the tide is turning against Bush and Republicans. But I am not confident that these electronic voting machines will accurately tally the votes in November election 2006. I fear the Republicans, with all their power, will be able to win again and again. RFK with his stolen election article in Rolling Stone Magazine will at least allow more people to become aware of the inept voting system in this country.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-04-06 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
39. manufacturing doubt.
somehow, someway, we, as a society, have got to stop chomping on these red herrings. these jokers do not have to prove anything. just keep on muddying the waters, and swimming away. not just on elections, but on so many of the issues where our country, our planet, indeed, our lives, are being stolen from us. it is the same tactic that kept the debate on cigarettes going, long after it was scientifically settled. same with climate change, same with all the smokescreens on so many issues. fear and bullshit. that's all they have to sell.
but how do we wise up? not us here at du- this is the best collective bullshit detector ever. but we have to figure out how to wake joe sixpack up while we still have a country. or maybe it is already too late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
42. OMf'inG!!! The users responding here match my "buddy list" almost
perfectly, any exceptions will be added promptly by the "Central Office."

Land Shark :yourock: ... a SENTINEL OF DEMOCRACY PAR EXCELLENCE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RadiDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 03:30 AM
Response to Original message
44. BRAVO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe for Clark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
45. K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
46. Kick! (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
47. Too late to recommend so I'll just give this a little kick... Well done nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
48. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Land Shark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-05-06 09:58 PM
Response to Original message
49. A kick for those still trying to find the time to read this one ; )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
50. Kick for transparent elections
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WHAT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-06-06 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
51. kick...
:kick:

This little ass of skepticism is perfectly able to haul this big band wagon of doubt up this steep hill

again and again and again and again and

:kick:

:kick:

my name is Sysiphus...& I'm not ashamed...I like the view...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brokendoor Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-17-06 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
53. Radio.Freepress.org:The Bob and Harvey show. Coming live at 2PM EST
Radio.Freepress.org:The Bob and Harvey show. Coming live at 2PM EST

Renowed journalists Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman of Freepress.org will be bringing you

another installment in their now weekly podcast, the Bob and Harvey show.
Their show brings up to the minute political commentary about corruption and fraud in

central Ohio and exposing the lies and half-truths of the current federal administration.
Bob Fitrakis is currently the Green party candidate for Governor in the state of Ohio and is

an award winning journalist.
Harvey Wasserman is the senior editor of the Columbus Freepress and the author of

Solartopia: Our Green-Powered Earth, A.D. 2030. He is an advocate of renewable energy and

has co-written three books exposing the election theft in Ohio during the 2004 presidential

elections. Research done by both Bob and Harvey was used as the basis for the recent Rolling

Stone article written by Robert Kennedy Jr. that brought the questionable results of the

2004 Ohio election back into the public consciousness. Tune in today at 2:00pm at June 17th

at http://radio.freepress.org to listen live or check out http://freepress.org/podcasts for

the syndicated show afterwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-18-06 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. This is cool, thanks. Good thread to kick too. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Oct 18th 2017, 04:56 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC