Kerry unconceding on January 6th

[wakemewhenitsover]

Just attended a Christmas party where the entire room was buzzing with word that Kerry was planning to "unconcede", due to Triad hijinks, and other nefarious fraud evidence.

Anyone know if this is true, or was the egg nog just flowing freely?

[lonestarnot]

1. Would you really like to know, or would you really like to know, how bout

that free press...

[Goldeneye]

2. here's the du link

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x194892


happy reading!

[Xipe Totec]

3. On Epiphany? Are you serious?

That's just too ironic to be true.

[DesEtoiles]

4. change the title of your post unless you know 4 sure

[autorank]

5. Please add a "?" mark...that should do it.

[wakemewhenitsover]

32. Question mark

Just checked in, tried to add "?" and received message "editing period has expired". Sorry.

To answer a few questions: no, was not partying with Carville or Cam, just true believers; yes, people do attend parties on Christmas; no, I am not an elf.

Make that, troll.

Too much egg nog.

[autorank]

73. Hey, Welcome to DU!!! Hope you're right. Party on.

[bluedeminredstate]

6. Who were the guests?

If you were hanging out with Senators, Tery MaCauliffe, political writers, Joe Lockhart and James Carville, then I'm going to get very excited. If it was your bowling league's annual holiday get-together then I'll hope they're right but won't bet the ranch.
So dish...
Who had the inside story? If you can't use names then give us an idea of the reliability and in-the-know-ness of your fellow party goers.
C'mon, fess up!!
:)

[TwentyFive]

7. Oh man, I hope this is true - I just knew this election was stolen!!

I talked to several Bush2000 voters who had converted to Kerry, and many newspapers who endorsed Bush200, then converted to Kerry2004....then the exit polls....I just knew Kerry was going to win. When the 'results' came in, my inner voice screamed, "BULLSHIT - THIS ELECTION WAS STOLEN"

And my inner is almost never wrong....

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[merh]

21. According to your the blog you have referenced on your profile

here, you are a Republican operative. Though your home page as referenced at your profile does discuss the election fraud or scam or whatever, it is hard to believe that you are deep enough inside of dem circles, particularily the K/E camp and lawyers, to know what they may be planning. I am sure all political operatives share cocktails and diss each others candidates, but I do not think they share all with the other side and I believe you are from the other side. It is commendable that you call for the challenge and I thank you for that. But your statements against Will and Kerry are not only not appreciated, they are not appropriate given your "political leaning". If you had said, hey, I am an RNC operative and I know Carville, et al, then that statements would have been true and it would have provided the readers here the proper perspective to your posts and your insights. You only profess to have an "in" to the inner circle, but that statement is hard to believe given your political career to date.

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

My political career has included opposition research for a Republican gubenatorial campaign (the most successful in my state's history), national fund raising for an unsuccessful Republican Presidential campaign, and a Republican campaign for US Senate. Quite simply, I am horrified. What is transpiring in our country runs against every democractic principle that I understand to represent our fundamental civic and social ideals. For me, this is not a partisan issue--Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, Socialist, or other. It is a question as to what we, as a people, believe to be the "right" way to conduct our collective affairs here at home and in the world at large. This notion of "right," for me, arises from my understanding of the original aspirations, goals, and beliefs of our "founding fathers" (and mothers). Our "American experiment" depends on a continuous reassessment of where "we" are in relation to the original "American idea." Today, something is fundamentally wrong in our country. And it must be challenged before it is too late.

http://scam-o-rama.blogspot.com

[Turn CO Blue]

55. I long for the day...

It's going to sound Pollyanna of me -- but I still believe that "real" Repubs and Dems can have intelligent discourse, mutual respect and admiration, and find lots of common ground to work for the good of this country the way the "found fathers" (and mothers) foresaw it -- once shrub and his idiotic corporate-hijacked administration and agenda are removed from the White House.

I was watching Meet the Press this morning with outgoing Senators Don Nickles (R) and Tom Daschle speaking about the current level of partisanship (mostly due to the dividing nature of the shrub's agenda) and they recalled experiences in earlier sessions having both aisles working together.

I'm not calling for a move to the center (in fact, I believe that government works best when there are at least two opposing viewpoints) - I am calling for our Senators and Reps to LISTEN to each other and go have a beer together.

[merh]

61. That would be great for our nation.

But is not what this board is about and that poster was trying to take away hope from posters here by sharing his personal knowledge with us when it is doubtful he had the insight he professed. This board is not bipartisian. If you want bipartisian discourse, there are other forums for that.

[Turn CO Blue]

67. Oh, don't get me wrong...

I'm a social liberal and belong here! I just wax philosophical and hopeful sometimes.

[Eloriel]

79. It's deeper than Bush&Co.

It runs back to the Gingrich revolution. He (thru GOPAC) personally recruited and trained a bunch of Young Turks -- fascists all, really, many of them Christo-Fascists -- and these are not people to whom there's ANY value more important than simply winning, by force if necessary or even sometimes as the preferred method.

You have to have people who have a sense of fair play, are willing to abide by the rules (rather than change them to their further advantage), believe in something like what's best for the country not to mention the people, etc., etc. That's all missing from the bulk of Republicans in Congress. They're thugs -- extremist, fascist thugs. You can't reason with them, you can't give them an inch (they'll take that mile and then some!), you can't do business with them, you can't "cooperate" with them (they'll take that mile and consider your cooperation mere weakness), you can't shame or humiliate them (they have no conscience), you can't do ANYthing but strongly, STRONGLY oppose them at every turn.

[New Earth]

22. why do you keep posting the same post in every thread?

:( :shrug:

[merh]

23. Check out the homepage listed at his profile.

That will explain to you why! ;-) Merry Christmas!

[RevCheesehead]

27. It's the next F-word: FEAR.

We are getting very, very close.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

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

[New Earth]

31. wtf is that site?

[bear425]

33. I'm not sure exactly, but I found it posted here on DU

earlier tonight. Apparently it is a prize moles earn for their "efforts" here. Methinks they should get a life, no?
P.s I notice your uncanny ability to smell the enemy - I think I can, too. Remember the MiamiMD thing? Tombstoned quickly... Cheers and happy holidays! :)

[New Earth]

34. LOL yes

MiamiMD. i also think there are a few trolling around that i smell as well - but their posts aren't stinky enough (YET) for me to alert on them.

happy holidays to you too :toast: :hi:

[genieroze]

36. Kerry is a paper tiger?

* is a piece of PooP!

[KoKo]

9. Too Much Eggnog! He doesn't need to "Unconcede" if he just supports

all the investigations with a full heart and head...he will be given the election...if you read one long threaded post here.

I hope that will be the case...but I don't see Kerry being "Pro-Active" about withdrawing his consession when he doesn't yet see a reason to do so...and probably won't by such an early date as you suggest.

Hoping for a miracle...but grounded in the bitter reality...:shrug:

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[Bouncy Ball]

12. I have a party every year on Christmas Eve

and plenty of people get together on Christmas Day. What's so unusual about that?

[TrueAmerican]

13. It's usually just family for me

I am use to parties a week or two in advance. Everybody is usually traveling home this week.

[carolinalady]

14. I agree--and notice the lack of response to the questions

posed----Merry Christmas new person. Contrary to popular opinion on other web sites we are very much grounded in reality.

O8)

[cali]

45. Tons of people have parties

both on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Every Christmas Eve I go to my neighbor/friends for a Scandinavian Smorgasbord party. There are usually about 25 of us. We exchange gifts, drink homemade aquavit and sing. On Christmas day, I have Christmas with my ex and his family. Not everyone has a tidy little June and Ward Cleaver family.

[bunny planet]

56. I do, on Xmas eve, and my best friend does on Xmas day!

Why is that unusual?

[Bouncy Ball]

11. If voter fraud is proven

he doesn't need to "unconcede."

As for all of this, I'm not holding my breath. If it happens, great, if it doesn't, well then we have the same fascist bastard we had yesterday.

[New Earth]

15. it's not voter fraud

it's election fraud. :D

the voters didn't commit the crimes.


(except for maybe 2 cases)

[Bouncy Ball]

16. Sorry, yeah

election fraud, whatever.

Can you tell I'm really trying not to get my hopes up? I was thinking as in fraud perpetrated ON the voters. But you are right.

[New Earth]

18. i know i am a pain in the ass about it

:(

[Bouncy Ball]

20. No, not at all!

LOL! You WERE right! I knew there was something wrong about it when I typed it, but was being too lazy to figure it out!

:toast: No worries, mate.

[Eye_on_prize]

43. why so important what exaclty we call it? i agree that 'voter fraud' can

be misconstrued, but headline writers always r lookin for ways 2 shorten the bold text...so just 4 record, 'vote fraud' works 4 me. or 'vote rigging', or 'election fraud' or whatever ....But Pleeezzz..just not "Tinfoil Hat Brigade" or "conspiracy nuts" .. or "dissidents". But any of others these others work for me.

[sally343434]

17. I'm sorry

A lot of people on DU get very upset when faced with the facts, so I'm reluctant to rehash it again here.

I'll just say don't get worked up over this Pitt thing. You'll just be disappointed ... again.

[New Earth]

19. um

i don't think so.


:hi:

[Turn CO Blue]

64. Um. I don't think so either. n/t

[The Doctor.]

25. I must disagree...

I have never been to another site where the denizens are as inclined to accept facts, whether discouraging or not, as this one.

Not as many here will become as 'upset' as you may think.

Some, yes.

But the majority will lift up and stride on.

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[Turn CO Blue]

65. Disagree. Come back tomorrow after the suit is filed

to tell us how you're glad that we didn't have to be disappointed, okay?

[meisje]

24. They were serving Crack!

know on the street as Cracknog

[59sunburst]

26. Kerry Should Not Unconcede

It will only be labeled as another "flip-flop". Any speech that he makes should not focus on the status of his candidacy, but on the election fraud. He does need to put his full weight and resources behind the lawsuits and recounts.

[genieroze]

37. * is the BIGGEST F**cking Flippity Flopper EVER! eom

[Eye_on_prize]

44. i agree. tho i want JK as prez 2. but main focus needs to be saving

US democracy so it still means something here in USA, so there is a sense of fair play and honoring our sacred democratic institutions, and a sense of knowing the US Bill of Rights is grounded in some radical concepts, like fundemental rights to 'life, liberty, happiness' ...

[ahyums]

28. the 6th is too late to do anything.

Once Congress accepts the electoral votes on the 6th the only possible way of affecting Bush's inauguration is through the courts, at which point it's not completely political anymore anyway, and additionally nothing will happen in the courts unless the most obviously demonstrable evidence of fraud surfaced, sufficient to get every Republican in the land to at least acknowledge that enough fraud took place to allow them to swing the election. There is still a small window of opportunity before the 6th to come up with evidence; I think there would ultimately be a better chance of swaying Congress than the courts with such evidence, and Kerry could potentially on that day state that he thought the election was not free and fair, which would itself no doubt have a large impact, but in terms of the presidency, the chances on the 6th will be even more minimal than they are now.

[ConstitutionGuy]

50. The courts

will not enter the contest and overturn the electoral vote after Jan 6th. Total violation of separation of powers if that occurs. The Constitution gives Congress the sole power of determining the qualifications of the electors, deciding if the electoral votes sent from the states are lawful and regularly given, and accepting or rejecting said votes. Once Congress, exercising its powers under the letter of the Constitution, accepts the electoral votes (in effect declaring them valid and "regularly given"), the court cannot intrude.

[ahyums]

52. again though in the hypothetical situation of Bush being caught on

video on election night saying thank you to those who helped ensure that the machines gave the right result, or something similar between the 6th and the 20th, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a judge who would actually inaugurate Bush, granted though it would require something of that magnitude for anything to change in that period.

[davidgmills]

78. You just never know with these guys

What constitiutional lawyer ever thought the SC would take Bush v. Gore? Then come up with the decision they did.

Scalia and Thomas would take any case they could get their hands on if it meant a chance to keep Bush in the WH.

The trick this time around is to keep anything important out of the federal courts, but I fear if push comes to shove, the Republicans will go there again.

[VTGold]

30. I may be getting old (39.5 yrs...) but lately my bed-time fantasy......

.... goes like this.......


*******************
January 20th in the nation's capital is a crisp, brilliantly sunny, blue-sky day.

George whatshisface arrives jubilant to the steps of the capital after riding through an adoring (paid) throng (hacks) of lily white masses.

Chief Justice Rehnquist, the sun glinting off his I-V bottle and shining chrome zimmerframe, stands before whatshisface to finish what Satan's pocket-protector sporting dough-boy had made possible.

Rehnquist begins to recite the oath.

Whatshisface, his left hand on the holy book - his right hand raised to repeat and take the blessed oath. His face a'glow with pride, relief and victory.

Just as the fateful moment is about to commence - a dashing figure slips into the scene. His stature and sharp angular features are unmistakable. Our leader - the junior Senator of Massachusetts.

Behind him, a couple dozen stern men in long black winter coats file down and surround whatshisface and his well-dressed accomplices.

The crowd is stunned silent. Whatshisface is dazed and yet knowing - he looks around for his Secret Service detail but they do not move forward.

John Kerry steps up to the podium and says to the dazed lily white masses "What has been stolen has been taken back. We will have to move ahead before we can fully heal from the wounds inflicted but we will do it together. God Bless you and keep you on this stunning and difficult day. We will meet again in a few short days and begin a'new."

Old Glory flaps loudly in the wind......
*********************

It used to be Denzel Washington or Mel Gibson - now its election fraud exposed....sad......"hope I die before I get old"....

[helderheid]

35. It's a great bed time fantasy

and visualization is extremely powerful. We live in a world of unlimited possibilities. Let's focus on what we want.

[zann725]

40. Agreed!

I like the imagery!

[madison2000]

63. Do they grab Bush and haul him away?

In the fantasy I see him chimp smirking like it can't be true.

[SharonRB]

77. Great fantasy...

...I just hope it happens before the 20th!

[Senator]

38. About concession -- Jan. 6 -- "too late" -- and "evidence of fraud"

I would just like to remind everyone of a few basics that should be kept in mind when thinking/talking about what may or may not happen.

Disclaimer: No inside info here at all.

First, there is nothing all that substantive in a concession or un-concession by anyone. Kerry could well issue a de facto un-concession that includes the statement "I want to make it clear that I'm not retracting my concession." He could just ask that his elector slates by sent to Congress "as a precaution."

Which at this point is exactly what we should be demanding that he do.

Something must happen on Jan 6th. Even if that something is exactly what happened 4 years ago. I'd like to think that a repeat dereliction of duty becomes less likely with each passing day (of activism), but there is no compelling evidence either way.

As for Jan 6, or any date for that matter, being "too late." This is simply false. It really only begs the question "too late for what?," and whatever the "answer" is, any comment is pure speculation.

This is true because no actual "deadlines" exist for anything. And any process described in any law or document need not be adhered to by Congress. That exists as a simple political reality. Any session can be adjourned or delayed for cause. The simple lack of a quorum can see to that.

As for "evidence of fraud," and its existence, non-existence, near existence, pending discovery and/or revelation. These are subjective concepts. Any Senator or Rep is within their rights to object on any grounds whatsoever (theoretically, the grounds need not even be rational).

Those who are familiar with the Declaration of Intent that we have been asking Senators and Reps to endorse, have seen that we propose they simply cite the current lack of confidence in the results and the undisputed reality of poll-tax-lines to support objection to any state.

The simple question, "Are we going to tolerate a second racially biased election?" could well unite the public and the Congress.

It is doing so to some extent as we speak. But should we as a people once again answer in the affirmative, it will continue to eat through our society like an acid, as it has the past 4 years.

_____
www.thedeanpeople.org

[ahyums]

39. in answer for too late for what

- too late for Kerry to "unconcede" and have any hope of being inaugurated President on the 20th, certainly not too late to expose fraud and flaws in the system for which there truly is of course no time limit, in terms of a meaningful concession though there are unfortunately very real limits approaching very soon, once Bush is inaugurated I don't think there is any way of removing him short of impeachment in which case any malfeasance would have to be linked directly to him.

Of course evidence is (or can be depending on the evidence) to a certain extent subjective, but I think you can weight evidence as to how convincing it is to the public at large. Simply put irrefutable evidence of fraud would convince every single person who was aware of it and not totally blinded by ideology, that fraud happened, and that fraud would then become an accepted part of history along with Watergate Iran Contra and any other scandals from the past. I really think that's the level of evidence needed to change anything at this point, not to say of course that I think it's impossible that such evidence will surface, there is still a chance, for now.

[ConstitutionGuy]

51. You need to read before you speak.

Section 15 of Title 3 of the United States Code requires electoral vote to be taken on January 6th. That's not a suggestion, a wish, a guideline...it's a deadline. And on what basis do you say Congress does not have to follow any process laid out in law? That's not politics...it's anarchy.

[Senator]

69. What happens if I don't?!?

And while we're on the subject, what happens if Congress decides not to follow any law? Will they be arrested? What does this "anarchy" look like? Tanks in the streets? Dog and cats, sleeping together?

But since you like reading, perhaps you'll read us the part that requires Congress to finish the counting (not vote taking) on that day?

Or the part that denies the presiding officer the regular authority to recognize speakers, or forces the chair to limit their time?

Or the part that exempts this required session from regular quorum requirements? Or the procedure by which a quorum is produced by force? Does Tom Delay use Homeland Security to track down planes again?

Blind adherence to "deadlines" sounds more like fascism than anarchy, no?

___
www.thedeanpeople.org

[ConstitutionGuy]

72. Since you asked...

U.S.C 3, Section 15 specifically precludes recognition of speakers and open debate during the joint sessions convened for the purpose of counting the electoral votes. The objection must be received in writting, without debate and the respective houses immediately dismissed for their separate consideration.

"Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision;"

Once the two houses reconvene to separately consider the written objections received, U.S.C. 3, Section 17 specifically restricts each member of each house to speak for no more than 5 minutes and after a total of 2 hours, each house must vote on the question.

"When the two Houses separate to decide upon an objection that may have been made to the counting of any electoral vote or votes from any State, or other question arising in the matter, each Senator and Representative may speak to such objection or question five minutes, and not more than once; but after such debate shall have lasted two hours it shall be the duty of the presiding officer of each House to put the main question without further debate."

U.S.C. 3, Section 18 gives the president of the Senate the power to preserve order and prohibits any debate during the joint session and limits the presiding officer from presenting any question other than a vote for each house to withdraw for debate. I would presume the presiding officer's enforcement powers could extend to having the sergeant-at-arms forcibly removing any member who refuses to abide by the above rules.

"While the two Houses shall be in meeting as provided in this chapter, the President of the Senate shall have power to preserve order; and no debate shall be allowed and no question shall be put by the presiding officer except to either House on a motion to withdraw."

'nuff said

[Senator]

76. Nowhere near...

..."nuff said."

Unless of course you're just talking to yourself.

In fact, nothing said in response to my questions.

Perhaps you need to read before you speak?

___
www.thedeanpeople.org

[ConstitutionGuy]

82. I agree that I did not

answer every single particular of your objection. However, based on the quoted law, it's pretty conclusive that the deadlines are not, as you originally claimed, artificial or arbitrary. The timelines and limits on debate are clearly spelled out. And the procedures under the law specifially preclude any possibility of disrputive parliamentary maneuvering.

I guess you could paint a theoretical scenario in which the counting could go on for days. Let's see...50 states plus DC, written objections from a representative and senator to electors from each and every state, 2 hours of debate on each state...that's 100 hours, add in some additional time for receiving of the objections in joint session (without debate or argument), rest breaks, etc and it could stretch out for a number of days. But let's get real. Under any scenario you're likely to get objections on only Ohio and Florida, with perhaps one or two more. That means there's a potential for tying things up for somewhere between 4 and 8 hours, max.

Nor is there any opportunity for any debate other than that provided for under the terms of a written objection submitted in accordance with Section 15. The presiding officer is specifically prohibiting from allowing discussion or entertaining motions during the joint session, except for receiving written objections and dismissing each house to consider the objections.

Under Article I of the Constitution, a majority of each house constitutes a quorum. That's only 218 representatives and 50 senators needed to conduct business. I'll confess ignorance of what powers the presiding officer may have to enforce a quorum but if you believe there's a possibility that 50% of either house will boycott the proceedings you're dreaming.

Short of forcing attendance, the presiding officer clearly has the authority to enforce order during the proceedings.

My whole point along being that there are many posters who claim these dates, deadlines, and procedures are "optional" and need not be adhered to. I'm not sure what the avenue of redress would be if Congress chose to ignore the law and proceed differently...maybe nothing. But nobody can properly claim that in doing so that they would not be acting in a lawless and illegal manner.

[Senator]

83. Glad you agree...

... sorry it's with yourself again.

I did not say you "did not answer every single particular of {my} objection." I said you responded to none.

I also never "originally claimed" that any "deadlines are...artificial or arbitrary." I simply claimed they could be set aside for cause; which is always true, without exception.**

At least this time you confessed your ignorance. But the bulk of your post remains unresponsive.

The last bit though is just patently false: "nobody can properly claim that in doing so that they would not be acting in a lawless and illegal manner."

I have claimed it. And properly so, as there is no law you can cite that precludes what I have suggested.

_____
www.thedeanpeople.org


**This is because the law does not recognize "deadlines" as such, only competing interests. What you are claiming, in effect, is that there is some legal preference for a speedy result over a correct one. That is simply nonsensical. Wouldn't you agree?

--

[ConstitutionGuy]

84. Actually no I wouldn't agree

The preference is not for a speedy result but for a result that is arrived in accordance with the agreed to principles and procedures established under law. Results arrived at by setting aside the law will always be tainted by suspicion and doubt and thus have no legitimacy. Nor can one alleged illegal act ever be rectifed or justified by resort to another. What you perceive as a 'just' end can never be legitimized as such if it is arrived out by disregard for the law.

This is precisely the argument against the legitimacy of this election...that it was not conducted in accordance with the provisions of the law. Are we to operate by situational ethics? Do we claim that it's okay to set aside the law when my agenda is furthered but not OK when my agenda is damaged.


I've cited and quoted the law. It specifically addresses at least two of your issues...the fact that there are deadlines, that those deadlines are not moveable, and limitations on debate are both strict and enforceable. Res ipsor loquitor - the thing speaks for itself.

If you can cite for me a law or legal opinion that supports your contention, that deadlines in the law are meaningless, I will be glad to continue the discussion. But it seems your preferred method of debate is ad hominem attacks rather than reasoned debate backed up by facts and the law.

[Senator]

85. No matter how often you repeat...

...that someone is suggesting a law be set aside, it won't suddenly become true.

And as I've said, the laws you cited and quoted do not address the issues suggested by my questions.

Therefore there is no debate to which I can apply any "preferred method."

Also, since ad hominem attacks are forbidden on these boards, had I engaged in one my post would likely have been deleted.

So again, it's more like Res ipsor soliloquium.

__
www.thedeanpeople.org

[Lostnote03]

88. ,,,,Salient Points To Ponder....thanks...n/m

[Blue Shark]

41. How about if just Edwards Unconceeds...

...Let John Kerry continue to be "oh so coy" and we mail lots of pretzels to the Whitehouse?

I'm pretty sure Johnny Sunshine is up for the fight.

[bunny planet]

57. Excuse me, your frip is showing.

[Clark2008]

71. Hmmm....

Isn't a website on the right missing someone?

[wakemewhenitsover]

42. Are posters #10 and #14 questioning my sincerity?

Challenges regarding Christmas-Day Christmas parties?

"Enjoy your short stay here"?

Brrr. What a frosty greeting on a cold December day.

[Osamasux]

46. I noticed you disabled your profile

"ERROR: No such user profile
The user has disabled his/her user profile."

[bitchkitty]

47. So what site is in his profile?

I always come along to late to join in the fun! :(

[TrueAmerican]

48. Yup,

I was going to email/PM him/her but he/she disabled his profile so I can't go about this in mature way.

[TrueAmerican]

49. yes

now, that you ask

[valis]

53. I'll donate $50 to DU if this happens. Anybody wants to bet against me?

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

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

[ClassWarrior]

54. Wow, where was the party??

If it was in the heart of DC, that's big news. If it was in B.F.Egypt, not so big... (Unless of course B.F.Egypt is a RepubliCON district...)

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

86. You STILL haven't answered?? Hmmmmm...

NGU.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

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

[Turn CO Blue]

60. Nope. Myself, I enjoy watching it all play out in real time.

The speculation is half the fun. (But I admit that watching the evil-doers squirm as the days progress is also entertaining.)

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

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

[Turn CO Blue]

66. Hi Faye!

It's smells kinda funny here today, huh?

I try to ignore them, I really do, but it's "hard work"!

[New Earth]

68. lol

i think the mods need to bust out with some air freshener :hi:

[valis]

70. As I said: I have 50 juicy dollars for DU if Kerry unconcedes.

Consider that my bet. I would love it if he did. But I think it's extremely unlikely.

[peacetalksforall]

75. There is a certain amount of winning for the non-right no matter what

happens...

as tragic as a second illegitimate Bush 4 years can get with another Scalia, Rehnquist, Thoms, O'Conner or as bad as it will get for our environment and wild places or as bad as it will get for the lives and families of our youth or as bad as it will get for our rights...

another four years of a marionette on a microphone with his corporate operatives running our lives for the good of corporations will result in an absolute transparency of their agenda - even the sleepiest of citizens will get it, but like the sleepy Germans who looked away, they may not like the affect on their lives, especially when the rest of thw world descends to save us in some form or another.

There is a lot of work to do no matter what...

If Kerry gets the office...we cannot let our leaders keep taking that corporate money and betraying us and sending our young to die with an accompanying total disregard of innocent people whose country already lays in ruin.

If Bush gets the office without legitimacy (which looks totally inevitable as of today)...he goes down in history as the most reviled leader of our history and each day will bring the revelations of their (his string pullers) operations.

We cannot sleep no matter what. It's 'hard work' to convince the shoe shoppers and watch-TV-between-the-feet-couch-loungers. But, we have to make them know what happened in all those states and what is happening to our country, a country that held promise, but whose promise is being devastated by the right wing cabal and the bible interpretors who impose their interpretations on us through their crossover war to control government.

To wakemeupwhenitsover - usually ,people making a claim such as yours provide substantiation or context - they make a case for themselves on something so 'inside'.

[wakemewhenitsover]

87. Sorry, checked with my friends post-eggnog and...

Going into any further detail would result in ostracism in real life, which is, generally speaking, even worse than being called a troll on DU when one is an ardent Democrat; however, they are, perhaps unreasonably, quite optimistic themselves.

In future, there will be a self-imposed 24-hour waiting period before any posts after Christmas, New Year's,

or even St. Patrick's day parties....

[Asa Gordon]

80. "Kerry unconceding on January 6th"

To learn how Democratic Electors and progressives can challenge the electoral college vote on Jan. 6th without relying on Kerry or any Congressperson to act go to:

http://www.electors.us/

Asa Gordon,
Executive Director, Douglass Institute of Government
http://members.aol.com/digasa/dig.htm
Chair, DC Statehood Greenhood Party Electoral College Task Force
http://www.electors.us/

"Mal-Apportionment Penalty Civil Actions"
Douglass Institute of Government
http://members.aol.com/electorsus/map.htm

"A Color-blind Supreme Court?"
By Asa Gordon, February 2004 print issue of The World & I
http://members.aol.com/dignews/fdonct.htm

[valis]

81. Nice list! Thanks Asa!

[krag]

89. Democrats and Media Will Jump On This Story!

Once it is too late to stop Bush from helping himself to a second term. This gives them the best of all worlds:

1) Another Bush Presidency to kill lots of Arabs at the behest of Israel and terrorize ordinary Americans into supporting the whole project.
2) A rallying cry to slow the coming flood of defectors from the Democratic party as more disillusioned people realize it has become a fake opposition that can always be counted on in a pinch to help Republicans advance the corporate agenda.
3) Cover against charges they quiescently allowed the theft of yet another Presidential election.

Remember, this sudden wave of stories will only ever speak in generalities about a need to, "fix our broken election system", and will never hold anyone accountable for the single most blatent and shocking theft of American democracy in the history of the country.