CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, AP, WaPo. Goebbels would be proud!

[RaulVB]

We know that Kerry won the election and they know it too. But, what can we do to make Kerry and the DNC understand that they have to fight a frontal battle with the MSM regime's minions?

- Chris Matthews: "former Carter speech writer" (pro Bush). Doesn't deserve the courtesy of talking with him.

- Andrea Mitchell: Alan Greenspan's wife (Not a single DNC "leader" has said that on the networks)

- Bill O'Reilly : sexual predator. Why in the name of God, a DNC "leader" would talk to anybody with his record???

- Scarborough: stupid jerk, probably involved in murder. Would you sit to talk with him?

- Sean Hannity: Nazi moron. Ignorant about all the issues that matter to the Democrats.

- Dan Rather: coward.

- Jennings: Canadian turncoat. Big checks are what he likes the most

- FOX "News": boycott, boycott, boycott!!!

- Wolf Blitzer: worthless.

Do you guys agree in that is necessary to have high level talks with representatives of all the networks and pressure them to change their behavior?

Wouldn't that be a major statement from Kerry and his people?

If the talks were to be unsuccessful, a Democratic boycott to the anchors and reporters involved with them will be very effective, since we are screwed by them anyways!

[GetTheRightVote]

1. I am all for actions and boycotts but we must act as well in the streets.

This they will listen too.

[RaulVB]

3. I agree with that

But the DNC must make clear that the MSM is a Republican propaganda tool. I just don't understand what type of politicians work for the Democrats.

[GuvWurld]

126. Leopards Don't Change Their Spots

"Pressuring" the DNC is as likely to prompt them to "make clear that the MSM is a Republican propaganda tool" as such prompting is likely to make the MSM be anything but a propaganda tool. There is no incentive large enough to make DNC or MSM be anything they are not already.

Focus on what you can do, not what you imagine you can make others do.

[DireStrike]

2. Hey, don't be so hard on Rather!

He does what he can. So, maybe he's a little scared.

But so am I.

[RaulVB]

4. Yes, but...

He has a "safety net" where to fall. He could do more.

I don't have that net and I'm sure you don't either.

[holomua]

119. I like Dan Rather

I agree that we shouldn't be so hard on Rather. I think he's trying to make a difference in his own subtle way.

[northzax]

5. er, Kerry DIDN'T win

you may have noticed. I still haven't seen enough evidence to lead me in another direction. the numbers don't add up. sorry. we lost. it sucks, I know, but it's getting close to time to move past the denial stage in the grieving process.

[RaulVB]

6. Go on with your life, then

I am a member of the "reality based community."

Enjoy the next 4 years!

[northzax]

10. I am, thanks

you spend your time in 'reality' and spend the next four years complaining about the fact that Kerry 'won' just like people spent the last four years complaining that Gore 'won' how'd that work oyu for you? did you get what you wanted? huh?

you spend the next four yers on your knees whining about some percieved bias and slight like a prima donna football player who can't believe he got screwed by the refs. good luck with that.

I'll spend the next four years working every day to make the country and the world a better place, so we can live in a world where Americans are free from the burdens being placed on them by this administration. You complain about the past, I'll work to make sure that it isn't close enough in 2008 for the other side to whine about having the election 'stolen'.

I have an idea for you. If MSNBC offends thee, don't watch it. I don't even have cable, why give them money? you don't like Fox, stop making Rupert Murdoch rich. Instead of bitching about getting screwed by the system, shy not work to build a new system that reflects your beliefs better? If you don't like mainstream journalism, support and promote alternative journalism. If you can't find anything you like, start your own. If you can't find a company that does what you need, found one. stop paying so much attention to that which you hate, obsessivness is not an attractive feature.

[RaulVB]

11. "Building a new system"?

How, with a Nazi boot on your neck?

Wake up, you still can.

[northzax]

16. right, nazi boots

why just last night I saw a bunch of soldiers herding Jews down Multnomah Boulevard, they went right through the Pearl District, down to Union Station and got shipped out to Umatilla for 'reeducation.' and those damn Jew-hating Nazis at KATU didn't cover a thing.

Look, I appreciate your anger. I really do. But if you think this administration is a 'nazi' administraiton, then you really should have paid more attention to your history lessons. I can suggest some good tutors in Stumptown, if you want to catch up. The Nazis w3ere socialists not fascists, the ideology of this administration is much closer to Franco's Spain than Hitler's Germany. (and by much closer, I mean not all that close at all, only that Franco's power was based on the military and conservative religion, while Hitler's was based on the military and nationalist pride)

Screaming 'nazi' at people isn't helpful, unless they are, in fact, nazis. I find it somewhat hard to believe that an administration that has such strong support for Israel could in fact be members of a movement to exterminate Jews. maybe it's a trap?

Do you say anything except old military advertising slogans fomr the early 40's?

[DireStrike]

18. "the nazis were socialists"

Um, no. They were fascists.

Perhaps you're talking about the party name, National Socialist? Where the word Nazi comes from? It has nothing to do with socialism. Just look at the party's policies.

So I guess we'll just have to wait until they start piling up bodies at home. Never mind the hundreds of thousands of iraqis who died for lies. Well you let me know when that pile of dead jews reaches 6 million. Then we can officially call them nazis. It has to be jews, not blacks, or arabs, or liberals. And there has to be at least 6 million.

No, this isn't the fascism of yore. It's kinder and gentler, but it's still fascism. At the very least, it's moving towards fascism.

[RaulVB]

21. Well said

The lack of understanding and historical perspective of some people is just amazing.

[northzax]

30. Hitler came to power promising

that every German would have a good job. That the state should take care of children and the elderly. That the state should determine how much people make and how they spend it.

George Bush came to power promising that private companies should create all the jobs and that individuals were responsible for the care of children and the elderly, that the state had no business telling you how to spend your money or savings.

boy, it's like two peas in a pod there. Gosh, they're like twins!

And why pick Nazi? the nazis are associated with the attempted genocide of an ethnic group. Lenin and Stalin killed more people, so did Mao. Pinochet killed a higher percentage of his country's population, hell, the PRC in Mexico uses the same campaigning techniques. Hugo Chavez promises jobs and welfare to his citizens, maybe they're chavists? More people, as a percentage of the population died in the Rwandan genocides of the early nineties than germans in concentration camps. so why Nazi, exactly? The rape and pillage of China by the Japanese was worse than anything the Germans did to Poland, so why Nazi? what buttons are you trying to push? the occupation of Baghdad is a lot closer to the French occupation of Algiers or the Italian occupation of ethiopia than the german occupation of Budapest.

but you go right ahead, scream NAZI NAZI NAZI. and then wonder why no one pays attention to you.

[RaulVB]

34. You are "right..."

The regime needs to start killing their own first...wait,

2% percent of the American population is on jail...wait,

1300 soldiers sacrificed so Cheney can make more money...wait,

11.000 mutilated so "God's President" can accomplish his divine "mandate"...

You mean killing their own in their land?

Let's wait with you until 2008. The survivors of the next 3 wars will vote then and, who knows, "we might win..."

[northzax]

39. well, I guess you can't argue with paranoia

2% of the US population in jail, that was Bill Clinton's doing as much as Bush,don't you think? you somehow think that John Kerry was going to let people out of jail? wait...

there are many reasons for this war in Iraq, Cheney making more money is not one of them. Your overly simplistic view of the world does you no credit (unless of course, I'm aruging with a 13 year old with ausberger's syndrome)

we live ina democracy, you may have noticed. more people voted for George Bush than John Kerry. therefore, the American people voted for George Bush's policies. get used to it. If the Media is a GOP tool, why would they listen to you?

Change the world if you don't like it. try acting locally, make your little corner better, if we all do that, we can win.

step one: turn off the television. You obviously pay a lot of attention to waht these peopel are saying. I don't know who half these people are, because I don't watch them. I don't pay money to them in cable fees, and then provide them with more viewers to raise their ad rates. stop paying attention to them.

Step two: support alternative media. it exists, support it financially and with publicity. If you can't find it, start your own. or is that nazi boot too heavy for you?

step three: organise. organise. organise.

here's a list of what I'm going to make my corner of the world better:
1: I work full time doing environmental research and analysis.
2: I work part time organising for a grass roots environmental group.
3: I volunteer for my neighborhood advisory commission organising my neighbors on environmental and political issues.
4: I volunteer as a tutor at my neighborhood boys and girls club to help raise a more deucated generation of Americans.

What are you doing, locally, to make the world a better place? Take all that time you spend watching cable news and apply it to making your neighborhood better. you'd be suprised at what 60,000 DUers working in local neighborhoods across the country, talking to people one by one, educating people one by one, can do.

or just post complaints about a political party and major corporations on the web. either one will be just as effective, I'm sure.

[RaulVB]

41. Ha, ha...

For what you wrote you seem to be 11 years old...

G'day!

[northzax]

43. no, really raul. tell us

three things, oh hell, one thing, you are doing to change the area in which you live. one thing. please?

you can even do it in two word sentances if you want.

tell you what, give me the name of an organisation that you volunteer for more than five hours a month and I will make a donation to that organisation.

one little thing you are doing, not talking about doing, but actually doing, to make the world a better place. just one. please? I'd hate to think you are all talk.

[ooglymoogly]

52. does anyone have the Goebbels quote

if you can tell the population a lie and repeat it over and over they will believe it. maybe you have been paying to much to your own Goebbels kkk rove... and surprise the election was a fraud

[northzax]

57. I have listed the things I am doing to help my country and my community

you may do so as well.

list three things, outside of posting on this message board, you are doing to help move this country in the right direction.

and then list an organisation you spend more than two hours a week volunteering for, and I will make a donation in your name to that group.

otherwise, you might want to stop questioning my credentials and start looking at yourself.

[ooglymoogly]

65. and what a sweetheart you are

like most of the people on du i spend many hours trying to insure that this country remains a democracy, and by the way does 150,000 and counting, Iraqis men women and children count or are they just a bunch of gooks. and you can send your donation to the du.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RaulVB]

97. WOW, that makes a "HUGE" difference!

Now the whole massacre of civilians by the Americans is "justified."

Few thousands less. They should be saying thanks and drinking coffee with the troops!

BTW, to complete your "racist dictionary" I will use the term that the glorious GIs have used to talk about Iraqi civilians;

"ragheads..."

Happy now?

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Clark2008]

59. It wasn't Goebbel, it was Goering

Is this the quote?

"Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." — Hermann Goering, Nazi leader, at the Nuremberg Trials after World War II

Another one I like is this:

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

Sounds like Bush, but was Hitler.

[ooglymoogly]

67. no that is a good quote and its close to the issue

but there is a quote of goebbels that is pretty close to my post i just don't believe it is the exact wording.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Turn CO Blue]

116. Actually, the first part of that quote DOES sound like Bush:

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator"


"I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn’t do my job."

-- President Bush, quoted in the Lancaster New Era, during a private meeting with an Amish group.

'I've heard the call. I believe God wants me to run for President.' " Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention heard Bush say something similar: "Among the things he said to us was: I believe that God wants me to be president, but if that doesn't happen, it's OK.' "


"God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam , which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them."
--Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Abu Mazen quoting Bush when they met in Aqaba; reported in The Haaretz Reporter by Arnon Regular

_______________________________________
The huge and SCARY point is that Bush seems to think that God speaks through him, that he possesses the "divine right" of a king. What hubris!

[Laurab]

110. Northzax lost me at...

"we live ina democracy"

err..not anymore we don't.

[Clark2008]

44. Really, now...

You don't think Bush ran on these issues? Your lack of knowledge shows me that you must be quite comfortable with the MSM.

"Step one is to reform the Medicare system. I want to call upon Republicans and Democrats to take care of a senior prescription drug program. I think it’s important to have what’s called Immediate Helping Hand, which is direct money to states so seniors don’t have to chose between food and medicine." George W. Bush, St. Louis debate, October 2000

# Modernize Medicare.Give seniors a greater choice in plans with more options & access to the latest medical technology.
# Provide a prescription drug benefit now.Underwrite at least 25% of the cost of prescription drug premiums for all seniors.
# Provide catastrophic Medicare coverage. Ensure seniors suffering from life-threatening illnesses will never pay more than $6,000 annually for Medicare costs.
# Provide patients a bill of rights.Provide patient protections, like those in Texas, to ensure quality of care from health care providers.
# Provide access to health care for the uninsured and underserved.Refundable health credit of $2,000 to help purchase health insurance. Commit $3.6 billion over five years to build 1,200 new Community Health Centers.
# Support caregivers and long-term care. Additional exemption ($2,750 in 2000) for each elderly relative; plus 100% tax deduction for long-term care insurance premiums. - Source, Blueprint for the Middle Class, September 2000

My proposed] “Family Health Credit” would make a basic health plan more affordable. It would pay for 90%of the cost of an insurance policy, up to $2,000 a year, for every family making less than $30,000. Every family that is not already covered by government programs or an employer plan would be eligible. This Family Health Credit would help to buy a basic policy that covers visits to a doctor, discounted prescriptions, and hospitalization. - Bush, USA Today

Bush provided health insurance for kids. He used Texas’ tobacco settlement fund to provide health insurance to children whose families do not qualify for Medicaid and whose family income is 200% or less of poverty level. Bush, Texas Legislative Register

So... how much of this has come to pass? None of it, really... but he ran on that.

[northzax]

48. ok, you all win

bush is a nazi. I will stop everything and spend the next four years using that as an excuse for my party's failings. in fact, I am going to quit all my organising work and simply tell people that the nazis are back in power.

bush is a nazi. there. now I feel better.

no need to use reason or logic to oppose bush's policies, we'll just piss off the other side by calling them Nazis.

phew, I feel so much better now.

I'm going to go call my neighbor a nazi, that'll convince him not to support Bush anymore!

Nazi, it's the magic word!


why do we think insulting 75 million of our fellow americans by calling them nazis is going to help?

[RaulVB]

51. He is the only nazi

His supporters (outside his inner circle) are sucked into it by the propaganda apparatus.

MSM main piece of it, of course.

[Clark2008]

55. I didn't say you should call people "Nazi's"

I just pointed out that Bush ran on the same issues that Hitler ran on.

There is valid reason to believe this country is becoming more and more fascist with the tragedy of 9/11, but the only Nazi I can see is Bush and his goons. The American people, unfortunately, have been duped by glitzy advertising, a lazy media and "black is white" mentality.

If they'd actually read some unbiased news and get it out of their heads that every story that shows Bush in a bad light isn't necessarily the result of bias on the reporter's behalf, but just might be the truth, they'd be better off.

I really don't think most of the people who voted for Bush are Nazis, or are even "dumb." I just think they're not getting very issue-oriented, responsible journalism.

[blueatheart]

60. of course there was some party failure...

and yes, theres work to be done to strengthen it, I doubt anyone is denying that.Always room for improvement. You miss the point all together though. The party can work as hard as they want, work themselves to the bone, if the election can and will be stolen, its futile!!!!

[ooglymoogly]

76. it isn't a case of insulting people its calling a spade a spade

recognizing what is happening and screaming to the rooftops that this country is being thrown into the crapper... are you blind...why do you think the rest if the world hates us and is laughing at our president...are they just stupid, the rest of the world and we are the only sane ones?... get real

[northzax]

81. you're not screaming anything from the rooftops

you are sitting in front of a computer preaching to the choir. go out and fight for your country if you think it is being stolen from you. if the system is irretrievalby broken, if nazis are in charge, and you are not violently resisting them, then you are culpable. when confronted with tyranny, it is the obligation of a people who wish to be free to rebel,violently if neccesary. Johnny, get your gun, you'll need it.

[ooglymoogly]

83. you really do underestimate the power of the computer screen and

the internet; it is the new rooftops and a well placed squawk gets noticed and if there are enough well placed squawks guess what, the world starts to pay attention. internet chatter is becoming the new source of news since the news organizations now owned by a few powerfully people are abdicating that grave responsibility and trying to drum propaganda into our heads. so heads up bright darkness.

[thanatonautos]

91. This is completely ahistorical.

It seems to be a common canard on the right wing to claim that the Nazis were
socialists. I suspect it is part of an apologetic created by Western
right-wingers and anti-communists who formerly looked favourably on the NSDAP
and Hitler.

The NSDAP were emphatically not socialists. They were founded as an ultra-right
wing fringe minority party, with a racist, ultra-nationalist platform in the
most extreme opposition to that of the center-left majority coalition, led
by the German socialist party (SDP). It was majority government led by a
plurality of the SDP that marked the years of the Weimar Republic up until
1930.

In 1928, when the Nazis first gained seats in the Reichstag, the
representation of the major parties stood at:

KPD: 54 Communist Party (Left)
SDP: 153 Socialist Party (Left)
BVP: 78 Catholic Zentrum Party (Center)
DNVP: 73 Nationalist Party (Ultra-Right)
NSDAP: 12 Nazi Party (Ultra-right, fringe)
Other: 120

In 1933, the numbers were:

KPD: 81 Communist Party (Left)
SDP: 120 Socialist Party (Left)
BVP: 93 Catholic Zentrum Party (Center)
DNVP: 52 Nationalist Party (Ultra-Right)
NSDAP: 288 Nazi Party (Ultra-right, fringe)
Other: 23

Hitler himself came to the chancellorship with direct aid from Franz von Papen
of the BVP, and a coalition government was formed between the ultra-right wing
DNVP, and the NSDAP.

There was never any question whatsoever of the SDP or the KDP being
involved in a coalition with the NSDAP or Hitler. The SDP in fact voted against
the enabling act, which gave Hitler dictatorial powers in 1933, and the party was
immediately afterwards banned. Its leaders were all arrested, and sent to
concentration camps. Soon afterwards the same was done to the communists, then
the trade unionists, then the Jews, and then all other enemies of the regime.

Support of Hitler was trumpeted by right wing partisans and anti-socialists in
all Westerm nations, as a bulwark against the encroachment of communism and
socialism.

So it is utter nonsense to characterize the Nazis as socialists.

Here is the Twenty Five Point Platform of the NSDAP.

It was announced to the world in February 1920. Here are the first four
points:

1. We demand the union of all Germans, on the basis of the right of the
self-determination of peoples, to form a Great Germany.

2. We demand equality of rights for the German people in its dealings with
other nations, and abolition of the Peace Treaties of Versailles and
St. Germain.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the nourishment of our people
and for settling our surplus population.

4. None but members of the nation may be citizens of the State. None but those
of German blood, whatever their creed, may be members of the nation. No
Jew, therefore, may be a member of the nation.

This should serve to establish some major aims of the NSDAP from the
outset. Some of the other points appear superficially socialist, but it is
plain enough from the actual history that the NSDAP in fact found little common ground with the German
socialists.

The NSDAP techniques for gaining power included orchestrated street violence,
and a cult of worship for the `charismatic leader.' These were borrowed
directly from the Italian example of Benito Mussolini and his Fasci di
Combattimento.

Mussolini indeed did start out as a writer for a socialist newspaper, but he
made a transition to far right wing politics, when he was kicked out of the
party. His interest was in personal power and he gained it by collaborating
with various `white' war veterans, who had many things in common
philosophically with the Freikorps in Germany who formed the core of the
NSDAP. Italian fascists were supported by the Italian monarchy as well as by
Italian capitalists, once again, as a bulwark against communism and socialism.

The fascist model of the corporate state, expounded by Mussolini and
his propagandists, became quite
fashionable among a certain group of Western, and specifically, American
industrialists and financiers.

The Bush government may in the end realize the goal of a `corporate state'
much more effectively than Italian fascists ever managed to.

I would suggest that the appellation fascist for the ultra-right wing of the
Republican party is marginally justifiable at the present time, but that the
appellation Nazi is not applicable, so far, though some outward aspects of the
NSDAP are shared ... e.g., ultra-nationalism and patriotism, extreme love for
symbolism, and an attempt to enforce respect for the authority of the leader
at all times.

[RaulVB]

100. Thanks, "thanatonautos"

I appreciate you took the time to make that clarification.

Regards.

[thanatonautos]

121. No problem "RaulVB" ...

I noticed you fighting the good fight, and this
particular falsehood about the Nazis is one that
especially irks me.

[Eye_on_prize]

89. Presott Bush's banking deals weren't with Spain, but with Nazis

just to be historically accurate, like u say.

[lgardengate]

114. The point he made about nazis was accurate...

They were NOT in any way religious or conservative. The nazis rejected christianity as a religion for weaklings (concept of forgivness,turning the other cheek,etc) Hitlers approved "Bible" only spoke of obeying government and leaders.Also,Hitler and the SS etc practiced the occult,and were very serious about it.

[thanatonautos]

120. The NSDAP as a party embraced a `positive' Christianity.

The Nazi party accepted all confessions. They did
not make serious efforts to tamper with
the practice of the Christian religion, though
it may have been Hitler's long term goal to remake
Christianity, with a view to extirpating Jewish and
other un-German influences from it.

Relatively few German clergymen suffered at the hands
of the Nazis.

The story of the Protestant and Catholic churches under the
Nazi regime is that they were accomodationist. That is to say,
the clergy were directly bought off by the Nazi party, by being
given direct access to about 10% of tax monies. They found it
on the whole, to be best to go along, in order to get along.

Many Nazi party members, including also SS members,
considered themselves to be devout Christians. In the early
days the Nazis drew many of their votes from the Lutheran
confession. Occult influences on the Nazi party existed,
and there was much talked and written about a Voelkisch
religion and Germanic myths. The actual importance of all
of that has been greatly overstated. For anything else to
have been the case would be extremely surprising, after all,
for Germany was at the time a nation composed mostly of
Christians.

Hitler was born, baptized, and raised a Catholic; he
died without ever having been excommunicated from the
Church. Some of his main political mentors in the early
days of the NSDAP were extreme nationalist Jew hating
Christians.

There is an extensive literature on the subject
of NSDAP relationships with Christianity.

The best, most recent and most detailed treatment
of the specific religious beliefs of important NSDAP
members I know of can be found in the book `Holy Reich.'

[RaulVB]

19. WOW, your ignorance is startling

The propaganda management of this regime is "Hitler-like", no question about it!

The populist take on issues is "Mussolini-like."!

The control of the intelligence affairs and the constant repetition of the "security threat" almost twice a month is "Stalin-like" along with the labeling of the opposition as "Unamerican."

Enjoy your President, "pal."

[Cha]

31. Maybe they're just fucking gangsters..

[northzax]

33. gangsters,perhaps

but then they aren't nazis are they? screaming nazi has a single and direct connection to the genocide of a people. Al Capone was a gangster, but he wasn't a nazi. there is a difference, don't you think?

Let's not fall into the Bushist trap of simply painting all 'evil' people with the same brush (was Saddam Hussein linked to al quaeda? of course, both are bad, obviously they are the same thing) a gangster is a gangster, a nazi is a nazi, make up your mind.

[RaulVB]

35. Nazi gangsters, you win (n/t)

[blueatheart]

42. whats in a name?

From Encarta

Na·zi < ntsee, nátsee > (plural Na·zis)

noun

1. follower of Hitler: a member of the German National Socialist Party that came to power under the leadership of Adolf Hitler in 1933 ( often used before a noun )
2. racist: somebody regarded as having right-wing political views, especially on race and immigration ( insult )
3. Na·zi or na·zi (plural na·zis) bossy person: somebody who is regarded as behaving in an authoritarian or dictatorial manner ( insult ) ( offensive in some contexts )




na·tion·al so·cial·ism or Na·tion·al So·cial·ism
noun
ideology and practices of Nazi Party: the ideology and practices of the Nazi Party, in Germany’s Third Reich, which included national expansion, state control of the economy, the totalitarian principle of government, and antisemitism


na·tion·al so·cial·ist noun, adjective

National Socialism was similar in many respects to Italian fascism (see Fascism). The roots of National Socialism, however, were peculiarly German, grounded, for example, in the Prussian tradition of military authoritarianism and expansion; in the German romantic tradition of hostility to rationalism, liberalism, and democracy; in various racist doctrines according to which the Nordic peoples, as so-called pure Aryans, were not only physically superior to other races, but were the carriers of a superior morality and culture; and in certain philosophical traditions that idealized the state or exalted the superior individual and exempted such a person from conventional restraints.



From Encyclopedia.com
According to Nazi dogma, races could be scientifically classified as superior and inferior. The highest racial type was the Nordic, or Germanic, type of the “Aryan” race, while blacks and Jews were at the bottom of the racial ladder. Intermarriage contributed to the deterioration of the superior race, and the Jews, knowing this, had furthered prostitution and seduction to defile the Germans. Consequently only small islands of the pure remained, but it was their destiny to govern their inferiors and, through scientific breeding, to extend the “master race” and limit inferior races.





Source: Dr. Lawrence Britt, a political scientist, wrote an article titled "Fascism Anyone?" which appeared in Free Inquiry magazine, a journal of humanist thought (Spring 2003, page 20). Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile). He found the regimes all had 14 things in common, and he calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism.

The 14 Identifying Characteristics of Fascism
Judge for yourself how far the United States has progressed.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes the media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Obviously some of the 14 are missing but did not want to copy all of the article.
http://linkthing.com/fascism.html



From Wikipedia.com
The word fascism has come to mean any system of government resembling Mussolini's, that

exalts nation and sometimes race above the individual,
uses violence and modern techniques of propaganda and censorship to forcibly suppress political opposition,
engages in severe economic and social regimentation, and
espouses nationalism and sometimes racism or ethnic nationalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism


The National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei), better known as the NSDAP or the Nazi Party was a political party that was led to power in Germany by Adolf Hitler in 1933. The term Nazi is a short form of the German word (NA)tionalso(ZI)alist (National Socialist) - the ideology of the NSDAP (a variant of fascism under a misleading name). The NSDAP set up the Third Reich after seizing control of the German government in 1933.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_German_Workers_Party

[bobbieinok]

71. socialist in name came from some people in party before Hitler

took over......they were 'eliminated' the Night of the Long Knives

there is NO WAY the Nazis were socialists....that's a RW lie

[Blue_In_AK]

82. Not there yet, but....

This article from today's Anchorage Daily News...

Nearly half in U.S. say restrict Muslims
Copyright © 2004 Nando Media
Copyright © 2004 AP Online

>>

By WILLIAM KATES, Associated Press Writer

ITHACA, N.Y. (December 18, 5:45 am AST) - Nearly half of all Americans believe the U.S. government should restrict the civil liberties of Muslim Americans, according to a nationwide poll.
The survey conducted by Cornell University also found that Republicans and people who described themselves as highly religious were more apt to support curtailing Muslims' civil liberties than Democrats or people who are less religious.

Researchers also found that respondents who paid more attention to television news were more likely to fear terrorist attacks and support limiting the rights of Muslim Americans.

<< more >>

http://www.adn.com/24hour/nation/story/1937446p-9902952c.html


Are "our" Muslims heading the way of Germany's Jews? I hope not, but it seems to me they're well on their way to being demonized, and there's always Guantano.

[Blue_In_AK]

99. Guantanamo, I meant

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RaulVB]

95. Why should I?

Just one example, you seem to be a very "educated" individual:

Billboards in Florida : "Our leader."

Billboards in Danzig, 1938 : "Der Fuhrer."

G'day.

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pointsoflight]

32. You think the effort here is a bunch of whining?

That is such narrow-mindedness. This is about electoral reform. The only way to force change in our electoral process is to show how horrible our current system is, whether it changes any election results or nothing. There is nothing more important.

Our democracy is one that is supposed to be "by the people, for the people." It is a participatory government in which all citizens are participate via their vote. When voters can no longer be confident that there vote has been counted and that their right to vote will be protected, that erodes at the very foundation of our democracy.

If you think this is nothing but whining about losing, you just don't get it.

[northzax]

36. I think making a list of media people

and claiming they aren't paying any attention to you is whining.

there are many excellent complaints to be made about our current electoral system, but simply complainging that 'the media knows kerry won and won't say anything about it' isn't the solution. linking your legitimate complaints about the electoral system and process to less legitimate complaints about a particular candidate serves to marginalize your legitimate complaints. It looks a lot like grasping for straws. look forward, not back.

if you don't want to sound like you're whining about losing, then stop sounding like you're whining about losing. this post was a whine about how the media won't cover a 'fact' that I don't conceed is actually a fact, as much as I may wish it to be so.

I will conceed the folowing points:

1: the US electoral system is anyiquated and in need of reform.
2: George Bush suckered more people into voting for him thatn John Kerry.

[RaulVB]

37. Blind, ignorant...?

or both?

[pointsoflight]

38. That's fine, but I can't agree with moving on...

It's one thing to argue what the best strategy is and what the message should be. But you suggested more than that above--you suggested that people need to move on from this whole issue. And THAT, I have to take issue with.

In my opinion, nothing is more important right now than the issue of problems with the election and the need for reform. You have to strike while the iron is hot--RIGHT NOW--when the election is still in the minds of the public and inaugeration day is approaching. We can't afford to be patient and hope something gets done months and years from now. We already know how that'll turn out. Just look at the 2000 election. After inaugeration day, election issues received little attention. Most people don't even know that recounts in Florida did end up showing that Gore had won. Most people don't even know that just a handful of republicans wouldn't even let electoral reform legislation come to the floor to be voted on. Again, if we want change, the best time to apply pressure is now, not months from now.

[northzax]

54. fine, my complaint isn't with you

it's with the posting of a supposition, follwoed by a complaint that someone else isn't doing anything about it. And then, when you are questioned about it, you use the nazi trump card, comparing life in 2004 US to 1989 Germany. We may get there, or not, but we certainly aren't there now. And the response by some people is to complain that someone else isn't doing anything. Well get out there and do something. that's all I'm saying.

you are posting resonable, logical respones. I may not agree with them, but you have a record of doing so. Otheres simply cry worl and run when challegned. We cannot wait for someone else to take care of us, we have to do it ourselves.

but to some people that makes me an appeasing nazi. which I would take offense to if it was used in a way besides a reflexive insult.

[Clark2008]

49. Then all the fundies have been whining for years

because they finally took the MSM and made them into the stooges for the right-wing they've become.

How did they do this?

They whined that Christians were being prosecuted and whined to the media for being so secular.
They whined that Republican and right-wing agendas weren't being reported on and shamed the media into reporting on it.
They whined that the media listened to the "Hollywood Elite" far more than to the "Average Joe" until the media started listening to the "Average Joe," except that the Average Joe was a right-wing Christian fundamentalist, which is still less than 11 percent of the population.
They they whined to Rush, they whined to liberals that we didn't "get it" because we didn't listen to Rush, so we, being open-minded individuals, listened to Rush, driving up his numbers and causing his infiltration into radio stations all over the country.

So... if that's whining, then I say we whine to the media until they start reporting on issues that effect more people than Scott Peterson's trial, Britany Spears marriage and how folks voted for moral values.

Safety may not just come in numbers - so do ratings.

[Chimpanzee]

56. Man, are you delusional n/t

[pgh_dem]

70. I wonder if you'll also concede this 'outtaleftfield' point

That the Nazis set the Reichstag fire and exploited it for their political gain.
You seem to be pretty informed about Nazis, and it's my experience that the response to that question gives a really clear picture of what a person really thinks the Nazis were.

[northzax]

73. see, there those nazis again

people are so obsessed with the nazis that they can't see this administration for what they are, a bunch of power hungry, greedy, religious whackos. you don't need to keep bringing up the Nazis, the present is scary enough.

[pgh_dem]

77. sorry that confused you

The Nazis in fact were power hungry, greedy, religious whackos.
The current whacko-in-chief's grandfather's banking business (Prescott Bush) was shut down as a result of trading with the enemy during WWII. People see this nazi duck walking and quacking.

[northzax]

80. every country has a history of power hungry, greedy, religous whackos

why use the nazis as the only example?

and the sins of the grandfathers shall be vested on the head of the grandsons?

Is Arnold Shwarzennegger a nazi since his father may, or may not have been? Every german alive is descended from a nazi, let's blame them all.

using the term nazi to describe Bush is a same as the Freepers use of Hitlery, it just makes you look kooky.

[blueatheart]

78. religious whackos, not...

whackos, I will agree there. I personally believe that the administration is not about religion that religion is just used to fuel the fire.

[RaulVB]

86. And you're right, you know...

Religion is a tool on their hands, that simple.

[RubyCat]

93. It sounds like you're one of those media personalities above that

Raul just ripped on, or someone who closely works with one.

[candy]

7. You've got that right----How can you move forward if you're stuck--

in the past. Wasting time and energy IMHO.

[RaulVB]

8. If you don't understand about the fraud by now...

There is little hope for you.

[pointsoflight]

20. Wasting time and energy?!? This attitude sickens me.

Do you understand all of the issues involved here? Here's one of them...

"...I and a great many others believe that something profoundly wrong occured in Ohio. We are haunted by the events of 2000. Our party in her entirety did not rise and stand in 2000 in the halls of congress and challenge Florida's electors. Not one senator stood with the black representatives whose constituents came to the polls in astounding numbers...And now, in 2004 our black brothers and sisters have once again faced hurdles that no man or woman should face on election day. If we are a nation of equals then we have all failed. Our party failed her african american voters in 2000, now will it do so again? Let us pray not...

To all of those intimidated on election day, to every african-american who came to vote and was harrased by GOP lawyers simply for being black and a Kerry voter, to every college kid in Ohio and elsewhere who recieved bogus calls from republicans telling them not to vote because of no registration, and for every black who waited for 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 hours in line simply to cast their ballots while most white Bush voters had little problem cast their vote, moving on is like saying "fuck you" to them...

Shelia Jackson Lee, the honorable congresswoman from Houston, who has signed many letters to Ken Blackwell demanding fairness and equality, is a woman of great diginity. She sat on the Judiciary committee during Clinton's impeachment, and spoke with words of power and elegance about the situation at hand. The honorable Jackson Lee saw beyond the disgusting smears of Kenneth Star and fought the hard fight against the Republican men of the U.S. House of Representatives whose sole goal was not to preserve the Constitution but to obliterate the elected popular president Bill Clinton. This was attempted not out of an understanding of the true meaning of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors," but out of their desire to hunt down and destroy him and his wife (a woman who continues to remain a role model for women: be independant, smart, and express your opinions, for women are the equal of men.) The Clintons stood for something those conservatives hate: they were (are) fierce defenders of the impoverished, the ever pressed middle class, and not the rich white men who are always trying to assert their dominence over the the peoples of this great nation. The Clintons are also Baptists. They go to church and read the Bible every Sunday, and the GOP conservatives simply could not stand a man of poise, a man who was more articulate in discussing the Bible and its values than they were.

The honorable Jackson Lee saw the GOP for what it was then and sees that party for what it is now: one which will stop at nothing for power. Nothing. It does not matter if a black mother has to wait for hours to simply cast a ballot, and then must walk away because its time to run home and feed her children. The lines that our African-American brothers and sisters stood in was a form of intimidation, we know that now with certainty, as revelations reveal there were dozens more voting machines which were simply never used and to this day we have not been given a reasonable answer as to why these men and women had to wait in monsterous, exhaustive lines to cast their rightful votes...

Too many black boys and girls were blown up, lynched, beaten, and raped by a white society which allowed their repression to go on for too many long years. It took from 1865, and the death of some 600,000 men, to 1965 to finally be given their right as Americans to vote. Lyndon Johnson, the leader of our party some thirty odd years ago bravely ensured through the Civil Rights Acts the right for all men and women to go to the polls to vote without being harassed by white men, to go to the polls and be able to cast their ballots with no obstruction, to go and vote with the same dignity and respect as every white man and woman had in this nation. That dignity and respect was missing this past November 2nd 2004 and on election day 2000 in the state of Florida.

...We cannot, we must not, betray our black brethren in the state of Ohio. If the honorable Maxine Waters, the honorable Jackson Lee, the honorable Jesse Jackson Jr., the honorable Conyers, the honorable Barney Frank, the honrable representative Nadler, and other congresspersons deem it fit and necessary to challenge Election 2004 and Ohio's electors, then we owe them nothing but the same bravery and courage which they have exhibited throughout this process.... Unlike in 2000, one senator must rise with representatives whose people have been disenfranchised twice already in the 21st century, so many years after Reverend King died for the cause of liberty, freedom ,and equality for God's children. ALL OF THEM. It means that we must take the deep, serious accusations of the black and white members of our party with at least a modicum of respect. We must ensure now, not in 2006 or 2008...that all citizens of this nation will not have their votes defrauded, will not have their people intimidated, and will not be taken for granted or abused by this party, the party of all people--black, white, Latino, Jewish, Catholic, Vietnamese, Chinese, Puerto Rican or whatever be their race or faith...

We value this democracy so very much that the very hint of undemocratic practices runs afoul the liberties and equalities that Washington, Madison, Franklin, and others so dearly fought for over 200 years ago. The founders may not have been perfect men, but they tried to set in motion something unheard of: a free, open nation with equal rights for all. It took much blood and toil to actualize these words--a civil war which cost us so many young men, a violent invalidation of the civil rights of black citizens in Reconstruction, and then a subsequent 100 years of bloody apartheid and disgrace for our country. Finally, a great number of Americans had enough of Emit Tills being hung, and fought in the streets and at the capitol of our nation for justice and the equal right to vote. Now this sacred right is under attack, but this time it is not with billy clubs, water hoses and dogs, it is with a more subtle intimidation, one that will not be as shocking as being physically beaten at the polling place.

The GOP failed for decades to provide equal rights to black citizens, so the Democratic party did so and with that millions of blacks cast their trust and their vote to the party which showed them true decency and respect. We must not betray this loyal constituency. We cannot do so again after the 2000 debacle. Betrayel is surely not honorable nor worthy of the true party of values, the true party which claims civil rights for all--be they straight or gay, white or black, and so forth.

...I urge all of those who call themselves "progressive" to be so and support the efforts of the black caucus and others. We simpy cannot keep saying the tired old phrase "move on, in 2008 things will be different." Those words were said in 2000 while black congressmen told a nation on January 6th that their rights were violated. They were rewarded with boos and Al Gore's gavel. I hope that we all try and prevent such miscarriages of justices again by urging all members of congress to stand for equality and democracy...

(These words are from pronin2 on DailyKos, http://www.dailykos.com/user/uid:1332 )

[RaulVB]

26. Amazing, isn't?

"One man/woman, one vote" is not important for some when African Americans are the ones discriminated.

Sad.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RaulVB]

14. Too late for you, then

We are in it to the end and we will not surrender.

[pointsoflight]

22. Prove it. If we had a transparent election process, you could.

But we don't have one, so you can't.

[RaulVB]

29. Yep, no way to prove it...

Bad thing when democracy is destroyed from within.

[northzax]

40. you are the one making the allegations of misconduct

I believe the proof lies with you.

[pointsoflight]

58. I would argue that you have it backwards.

If you don't have a transparent election process, then you can't know who won.

You say that we need to prove there were problems. I think that's backwards.

We should have an electoral process that can prove who won. Companies audit their books. Cashiers audit their cash drawer at the end of their shift. You and I "audit" our checking accounts when we balance our check books.

Yet for the most important decision we make as an electorate, our legal system does not protect an individuals right to vote, our electoral process is not transparent, and we don't even conduct rudimentary audits to verify the results of our elections. That's simply preposterous.

The burden of proof should be on our elected government officials to prove that the votes were counted and counted accurately. "By the people, for the people," remember?

[northzax]

64. then we disagree, I suppose

I tihnk tearing down a 200 year old system requires evidence of fraud. you think fraud is a part of the system and we need to prove good faith.

If you really thin kthe elelction was stolen, you have an obligation to start a revolution, you understand that, right? If the US system is broken to that extent, reform won't help, it must be removed and rebuilt from the ground up.

Look, I agree with you on the neccesity of continuing to make our election system more transparent. I just think that creating a divisive wedge issue by claiming systematic fraud (saying Kerry won is claiming systematic fraud) is not the way to make it a real issue. You go your way, I'll go mine.

I still don't see where the nazis fit in.

[pointsoflight]

69. Not arguing for tearing down the system.

One simple thing would do wonders. Add a statement to the constitution that says all adult citizens have the right to vote and have that vote counted. Right now it's implied but not explicitly stated. The unfortunate result of this is that our judiciary doesn't have the power to protect an individual's right to vote (just state's rights to cast their electoral votes).

This is at the root of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2000. It's also at the root of many failed lawsuits across the country over the years. A constitutional amendment that opened up the possibility of lawsuits would motivate widespread changes to reduce suppression and disenfranchisement, as well as make the electoral process more transparent.

Anyway, just for the record, I'm not completely convinced that the election was stolen this year (i.e., that Kerry got move votes). I do, however, think that the process is broken to the point that there's reason for suspicion that it was stolen. I also think the process is broken to the point that elections certainly *could* be stolen if changes aren't enacted.

Oh, and I also don't see where the nazis fit in. :-)

[northzax]

75. you aren't

but people should be. you have a solution, great. it's the first one I've heard all thread that doesn't involve someone else doing something. You can agitate for this amendment, you aren't sitting around complaining that someone else isn't doing anything and then insulting the people who question you.

Look, things only work as well as we, as a society, let them. those who would resort first to insults will never built the consensus needed to change things. The powers that be want us to spend our time insulting each other, it means we aren't paying attention to them.

thank you again for your reasoned responese

[Helga Scow Stern]

28. To increasingly many people, you are the one in denial. n/t

[northzax]

45. ok, you can perceive it as you wish

find me evidence, not suppositiong, but evidence, that John Kerry recieved more votes than George Bush. It cannot be done, or at least no one has done it yet.

They want you to bitch about a stolen election, because then you won't be spending time working to defeat their agenda.

[RaulVB]

46. Unbelievable

So, we the ones talking about fraud, are Republicans?

Are we distracting you from your "planning for the bright future of America"?

Don't descend to our level, then.

[northzax]

61. no, just tools

and cogs in a very large machine. I don't think I'm playing at your level, I have yet to start a discussion by complaining about oppression from nazis.

[Helga Scow Stern]

68. I saw what happened on election night. You prove to me that GW Bush

got those votes legitimately. There are many, many reasons to doubt. We shouldn't have to wonder. Prove it if you are so sure that Bush fairly won the election. That's all anyone is asking. We are not in denial. As I think you will find in the coming weeks, months, maybe years, you have been in cognitive dissonance, if not denial.

But it is good that you come here and speak your mind and listen.

I am sorry if anyone is too vehement, but if you have experienced a crime and someone comes along and says it didn't happen, it kind of gets your dander up. To many of us having our vote stolen is a deeply personal issue. Frankly, I'd rather someone steal my money than my vote.

[northzax]

74. 'it's good that i come here and listen'

that's fucking absurd, I was a moderator on this board long before you were a member, so don't paint me as a fringe group, you are the fringe.

If you really believe the election was stolen, and you obviously do, then you have an obligation to start a revolution. obviously the system cannot be fixed if Bush stole the election. why aren't you in the streets? why aren't you camped out on Pennsylvania avenue clamoring for justice like the Ukrainians? You know, in about15 minutes, I'm going to walk in front of the white house on my way home, I better see you camping out there.

If you really think your vote was stolen, do what our forefathers did when government was forced on them: rebel, violently if you need to.

If you really think the election was stolen and all you can do is complain that the DNC and the media are complicit in the theft, then you are no patriot. Face it, the world is aligned against you, simply talking won't solve the problem, the tree of liberty must be watered periodically with the blood of patriots. get out there and take your country back, don't wait for the DNC or the Media to do it for you.

In 1990, I stood at the front door of the Supreme Soviet in Vilnius and watched as 2 million Lithuanians took their country back from a despotic power 200 times their size. I watched them walk up to the soldiers guading the building and dare them to shoot them. They took their country back, and were willing to risk their lives to do it. what are you willing to risk?

[RaulVB]

84. Man, don't come here to lecture us about democracy!

I lived and survived 17 years under a fascist military dictatorship sponsored by the US.

Spare me...

You seem to like the autoritarian features of this regime. Not a surprise considering that you lived under another one for many years.

And that is your democratic privilege, indeed.

[Helga Scow Stern]

107. I really meant that it is good you come here and listen.

I wasn't saying anything about you being on the fringe. And maybe you are right. Maybe I am, we are, on the fringe, especially those of us who have never been so politically inflamed before it was so obvious our vote was stolen, AGAIN. Or maybe we are the small sparks of a raging bonfire to come.

I am no political insider, no moderator of this board, no one who works within minutes of the White House, so I don't claim to be as much of an insider as you.

I only found DU after I went searching in shock to find news of others who saw the election stolen. I couldn't believe it wasn't being talked about on the news on 11/3.

And I don't know why you would call my patriotism into question like you have, just because I am just coming to my political senses on this board. I agree that I am partly responsible for the mess we are in, as we all are.

But I am changing that. There is nothing more important now, period. Many more feel just as I do, and more and more will feel that way once it comes out that their vote was stolen. I think many of us would risk our lives to have our country back. Would you? Is it fear of the consequences of accepting the reality that our country has been stolen from us that keeps you from admitting the reality that it has?

You have seen first hand what it takes. Are you ready to stand up?

[EuroObserver]

118. ...The world is against you?

I think the world just realises (hopes) that the idea of US democracy is deeply-enough rooted over there to know how to defend itself.

And many of us believe that before resorting to violence it helps to uncover, and act on the basis of, the truth - something I see many DUers and others working hard to achieve.

As for your electoral processes: Puhleeease. Tom Wolfe's 'A Man in Full' gave a nice hands-on description, I thought. I think your Nº1 priority problem overall is disenfranchisement, especially of the economically-underpriviliged in your society. And it is frankly breathtaking for western europeans to observe how you seem willing to put up with this whole 'underclass' concept. Just stop voting on a working day, for a start, then eliminate those queues and weird stuff like unjustifiable provisionals and paper-weighted registrations...

Overall priority Nº2, the straight fraud in the counting process, however, is Nº1 right now because of the opportunity window: to reveal enough of the damning truth by Jan 6th.

+ repeat here of something I made and posted a week or two ago, in case some missed it:

--
Summary of the preliminary findings of the Election Observation Mission (EOM) of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) - ref. http://www.osce.org/documents/odihr/2004/11/3779_en.pdf - on the US Elections of 2 Nov 2004. Note that the Mission was terminated at the moment the polls closed - {this is correct, isn't it - no observation of the counting?}.

The EOM calls attention to "a number of significant issues" threatening the idea that "the will of the people, freely and fairly expressed through periodic and genuine elections, is the basis of the authority and legitimacy of all government."

In particular, the EOM observed the following during the pre-electoral period:

1. "Allegations about voter disenfranchisement and so-called voter suppression were ... widely aired. It was claimed that such practices included non-processing of voter registration applications, the improper removal of eligible voters from voter lists, harassment and intimidation of voters." However, "while recognizing the seriousness of the above allegations, the EOM was not provided with first-hand evidence to substantiate {or otherwise} them or to demonstrate that such practices were widespread or systematic."

2. There were "no uniform standards for processing absentee ballots."

3. In a number of states, citizens who have been convicted of any felony (a criminal offence more serious than a misdemeanor) suffer a "restriction on the right to vote {which} is not made proportionate to the seriousness of the criminal offence," while, in general, "voters in different states do not enjoy equal suffrage."

4. The regulations on provisional ballots are "ambiguous as to whether the voter must cast the ballot in his/her allocated precinct for the provisional ballot to be counted" and as such are open to abuse. In fact "deadlines for verification and counting of provisional ballots vary widely from state to state and have the potential to delay announcement of final results at the federal level."

5. Furthermore, "there are no uniform certification procedures."

And during the election itself:

1. "Long queues and pressure on poll workers at some polling stations ... deterred or prevented some voters from participating in the election." - {disenfranchisement or lack of universal suffrage}.

2. Some "poll workers {may not have} received sufficient training to perform their functions," and there were doubts about the "secrecy of the vote" in some precincts, since "political party observers were present in many polling stations, although domestic non-partisan observers often had no legal right to such access. "The EOM also noted in this context that "the way in which election administrators are appointed may raise questions of possible conflict of interest." - {possible intimidation and dirty tricks}.

3. The EOM observed "considerable confusion and varying approaches from one state to another regarding the use of provisional ballots." - {open to abuse}

4. There were "faults and breakdowns of DRE (direct recording electronic) machines" and many voters had "difficulties with newer voting technologies." - {must be investigated}

In general, the EOM:

1. Observed that "Allegations of electoral fraud and voter suppression, primarily among minorities, were widely reported and presented to the EOM in the pre-election period."

2. Recommends the "prompt introduction of a paper audit trail" in all precincts.

3. Regrets that EOM observers were permitted "in a number of states, sometimes only in specific counties," while "in other states, access was not possible or was limited... " {elipsis in the original}

4. Suggests the following concerns should be addressed:
- "provisional ballots"
- "problems with DRE (direct recording electronic) machines"
- "polling stations lacking the capacity to ensure a reasonably prompt throughput of voters"
- "voting {during} ... working hours"
--

[buzzard]

102. How can one find evidence when the system doesn't allow for a full audit

that could provide the evidence. Somewhat like the statement: absence of proof isn't proof of absence.

[lthuedk]

79. Time to re-check your reality. Kerry won and you cannot or will not

connect the dots. The fraud is blowing out of Ohio like Mt. Saint Helens and you need the situation put in clear terms.

Winners do not need to go through grieving steps.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TruthIsAll]

113. "WE lost"? You mean "WE WON" Only a Repuke would say we lost.

.

[mattclearing]

123. You'll have to do better than that.

Like provide some numbers that don't add up. It's the numbers for Bush that don't add up, and that is why the majority of the people in this forum are pushing the recounts.

Back it up, please.

[EFerrari]

9. Raul, imho, a boycott by viewers would be more effective.

Because pols come and they go. We stay.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RaulVB]

15. I agree

But it would only be effective if the DNC releases an statement explaining their position and the lack of fair standards by the MSM.

[northzax]

17. why are you waiting for the DNC to do something?

do it yourself, for the love of god. stop spending all your time bitching about the DNC not doing something and do it yourself.

or is the nazi boot already on your throat?

[RaulVB]

23. Very "smart" reply

Thanks for your comments.

[EFerrari]

27. I have this bowl full of Valium I'm trying to get rid of. Thanks for

starting the thread, RaulVB.

[Helga Scow Stern]

62. For the love of god, I am furious at the DNC and I think it is damned

important that the world know it.

They are not representing my right to a transparent election, among many other things.

They are saying that they didn't get the minority vote, or that not enough of it came out, when the sad truth of the matter is, our party didn't take care of us. Didn't even care about our vote.

They no longer represent the interests of the people, of any color. And I thank RaulVB and everyone else on this board who is not denying our experience.

[northzax]

63. if they don't represent you

then find someone who does. or work within the system to change it. don't complain that they aren't doing something. or complain and follow it up with action. to complain that the media is biased and then pay moeny to that same media is just absurd. Republicans don't do it, why should we?

The right wing took over the republican party by simultaneously complaining about the leadership and by working to create new leadership. they ran for county chair positions, they took over the grassroots. you want change, do that. the Democratic party doesn't listen to you because they don't care about you. why is complaining now going to make them care about you? I don't get it.

[RaulVB]

88. I think you really admire the "rethugs"

Go work with them...

[Helga Scow Stern]

104. The DNC will care about us because we are the people.

"the Democratic party doesn't listen to you because they don't care about you. why is complaining now going to make them care about you? I don't get it."

Why is complaining now going to make them care about me?

Bingo!

They will care about me and many, many others who got out the vote and to vote and who sent in money, and raised money only to have it be made blatantly obvious that the DNC doesn't really care.

About us. Maybe they care about you, or you think they do. But they don't care about me. Nor do they care about 60+ million or so other voters who voted for John Kerry.

You act like you think they don't need us. You brag that you work or live steps away from the White House. Are you so far removed that you don't think the people matter any more?

And just what do you think we are doing here on the internet? Do you think we have nothing better to do than to stay here?

Get a clue. We are organizing, we are caucusing, we are going to be heard.

You just wait and see and then we will see who's in denial.

[mirandapriestly]

24. In this article, Kerry talks about how he was against

single ownership of a lot of different media. No wonder they were so unfair to him and are ignoring election fraud. read how intelligent his statements are, we got so screwed.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/media/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000600685

[RaulVB]

25. He saw it coming

But his managers didn't!

[genieroze]

47. Vote with your wallets people. eom

[luaptifer]

50. high level talks?....

how mang digits are you considering for your argument?

:-)

[RaulVB]

53. I'm afraid 6...

at least...;-)

[IndyOp]

66. Strategy: How about we start working on the left/alternative media --

Very few left/alternative sites are dealing with election fraud. If our lefty/alternative media -- like Counterpunch, Common Dreams... are ignoring this story shouldn't we start by blasting them?

:kick:

[Dolphyn]

72. Target the advertisers. Boycott the advertisers.

I think these MSM types will listen to money. If the money stops rolling in as a direct result of their right-wing stance, they will change. Just my opinion.

EDIT: As a more positive approach, perhaps someone could start a website listing Olbermann's advertisers and _encouraging_ people to patronize them.

[AmerDem]

85. The History Channel, CIA and the Nazis.....Sunday, link inside

Here is a link to a post I started in GD politcs. The History Channel will be airing a program Sunday on the CIA and Nazi connection. I'm sure it will be interesting.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1439852

[RubyCat]

90. You're absolutely correct. This is why it's so important that

there be no further media consolidation, like the raising of the media ownership rules from 35% to 45% in a single market like what Michael Powell is fighting for. If anything, the media must be broken up into numerous smaller entities so that their reporting isn't beholden to the interests of a few corporations. The way the media behaved in the run up to the war in Iraq should be enough justification for this. Why were they so unquestioning of the Bush administration's claims in the run up to the war? The media is acting equally irresponsibly this very minute in reporting not a peep on the obvious election crimes that have just been perpretrated on our democracy. But I guess if your parent company is GE and you make a windfall in profits from government military spending in Iraq, you're not going to bite the hand that feeds you.

[RaulVB]

92. Exactly!

NBC would not report anything negative about Iraq because their ties with the DoD.

Let me give you a on their quote from one of their "elder journalists", the now retired Tom Brokaw:

"Now we own that country (iraq)...what are we going to do next...?"

Free press, eh?

[RubyCat]

96. Yeah. Judging from the responses you got from your message, I think

you must have pissed off either someone who is one of the above media personalities, or someone who closely works with one of the above media personalities. They lurk here too to get their research.

[RaulVB]

98. I'm starting to have that feeling, you know...

BTW, nice cat!

[Helga Scow Stern]

115. Jeez! Was that one of the liberal elite? One of the "proudly ineffectual"

or maybe it was David Corn himself......:smoke:

[Pierre de Fermat]

106. I'm new here...

"We know that Kerry won the election..."

Please tell me how you know this.

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Turn CO Blue]

117. Oh, middler and Fermat -- you two have met. That great!

I noticed you guys and your posts on the threads tonight
Welcome to DU!! I would imagine you both have a lot in common!

Again, Welcome!

:toast:

[mattclearing]

124. Was middler the one with the deleted message?

Shocker.

:eyes:

[Turn CO Blue]

125. Yep. Poof!

n/t

[Straight Shooter]

111. Start here ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x137414

And then continue with reading, on a daily basis, all relevant threads on 2004 Election Results and Discussion, and also the Latest Breaking News forum.

:thumbsup:

[GetTheRightVote]

112. I believe they stole the election and here is one good reason why ....

They are only counting the precincts they have choosen rather then a random sample, they have it all figured out in the counties of Ohio, they are sand bagging us all with the set ups that they are controlling. I helped in the recount of Ohio and they only let us look at the precincts that they choose to let us research, they did not do a random selection as they were suppose to, nor did they let us look at the polling books, absentees and provisional ballots which would have helped us with verifing totals recorded by the counties. The Director where I assisted told us in fact that he did not want to use to many machines in the recount and wanted the closes precincts that would total to the 3% needed for the recount. This was a little fishy but along with this the poll workers who were helping in the recount effort did not seem to know how to take care of any problems concerning the scanners. After working the polls on election day you would think that they would be more then a little effienct with the machines but they were not. In fact, they complained about having to even do the recount and acted like it was a total waste of time and effort not that this was a Democracy at work. In fact they were upset to the point that they kept asking if this was the last time they would have to do any recounting since it was such a waste of time and effort, a very negative additude towards a recount for sure. The Deputy Director had to keep coming over to fix the machines for them, now how would this work during election day ??

The Director and Board also told us that if the voter did not vote in two federal electons sequencely that the voter would be dropped off of the registion list. This I found to be very disheartening but along with this issue I also saw overvotes where a voter had mark a candidate but then also wrote in the same candidate but this vote was not counted even though it was obvious to all who they were voting for, it was Bush, boo, but still it was an uncounted vote. We were told that there were not many of these kinds of votes and not to worry about them anyway, I was upset at the casual way these votes were dismissed by this board. I told them perhaps I was a little extreme but if a vote was obvious why not count it, and they had no answer for me but because the machine could not read it, how many other obvious votes were not counted because a machine could not count it ?? How many voters could not vote though they had not moved because they did not vote in the last two federal elections ?? Are these not examples of voter disenfranhisement ?? After my experiences these last few weeks, I am aware I do not live in a Democracy but a dictatorship of the many officials who run these elections for us right up to the top of the Republican party because they make up the rules. Are we going to allow this to continue and put flowers on the bed of Democracy's grave or fight to bring her up from the dead ??? I hope it is as obvious to you as it has become to me that our elections are manipulated by these self serving individuals.

I am one deeply concerned American Citizen.

[lbr]

122. Tyranny protects its power by controlling the means of its demise

See post replying to Ohio news propaganda at:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=177484#177727