"Stolen Elections? Get Over It" thread makes "Greatest": my response.

[Fly by night]

The title of this one is "I am conflicted about the perennial claims of stolen elections". Here's the link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1984380

These "move on" threads keep appearing like clockwork (orange) here on DU and one of them occasionally makes it to the "Greatest" page. It just proves that we Democrats really have a "big tent" with enough room for the non-cynical and the clueless to join in. Fortunately, most of the respondents to that thread feel the same way I do -- where the hell has the OP been for the past nine months? But I thought you folks might enjoy my response to him, written as always with my "usual" Southern charm.

A mind is really a terrible thing to waste, particularly here on DU and especially when the future of the country is at stake. Read my response, enjoy and comment yourself. Someone has to. Peace out.
---------------

Oh look, ya'll, it's Ground-hog Day all over again.

For those of us who have actually been following the 2004 election theft story (whose electronic vote-switching methods extend into the 90s and maybe up through this Tuesday), these puzzling but periodic DU threads questioning the propriety of a legitimate concern for "stolen elections" are beginning to look familiar. Here's why.

To begin with, they are invariably started by someone who appears not to have done any reading on the subject. The OPs seem completely unfamiliar with Freeman, Fitrakis, Conyers, Mitteldorf, TIA, Alter, Stewart, Gideon, Thiesen, Griscom, Hitchens, Miller, Windham -- their non-reading list (of which this is a tiny taste) is quite impressive.

Then they appear unable to have ever found the DU 2004 Election Results and Discussion forum, where there are now thousands of threads documenting the evidence for the 2004 election theft. Hell, if they even went to today's front page of the 2004 ERD and lingered a while, they would know more than they appear to know now.

And if they have ever found the 2004 ERD, they seem to have never had the time, interest or inclination to post there. I know, because I just did a simple search for your handle, and guess what? No posts identified in the simple search. Nada. Then I did an advanced search and found just one post from you on the 2004 ERD forum over the past year, that one last December. The pithy and provocative title? "It's 5:03 pm and I'm here." That's it. A single irrelevant post, with five irrelevant responses.

Yes, folks, we're dealing with a real expert here on the subject of election fraud, someone we should all take advice from in the "just get over it" arena. While we're at it, it might be fun to see just how many of your fellow travelers on this thread who have chimed in on your "move on" mantra have ever bothered to post on 2004 ERD. My guess -- fewer than there are seed-ticks crawling up my leg right now.

This thread reminds me of a coke-head Rethug county commissioner I had the displeasure of dealing with when I was on an extended public health assignment in north-central Wyoming a while back. Whenever some organization would come before the commission to ask for support, our skinny snow-man would get up and leave the room to go powder his nose. He would generally come back only when the organization members were finishing up their presentation, occasionally with a tiny bit of "frosting" still clinging to his nostrils. Then, when the chairman of the county commission would ask the other commissioners if they had any questions or comments, this pinsized-pupilled snow-rabbit would say, "I can't support this request for funds, because the organization hasn't presented enough evidence to me that they need the support." And he would say that every time with a straight face, under which dwelled some nervously grinding teeth. That commissioner was a fool and a knave -- rude, condescending and ignorant to boot. And in fairly short order, he was an ex-commissioner.

Before I take advice from anyone to ignore the importance of free, fair and verifiable elections or the Wind River Range-sized accumulation of evidence that our elections have been anything but for the past decade; I would want to know if that person knows his metaphorical ass from his elbow. On that score, by the evidence of your non-presence on the 2004 ERD over the past year, you fail the ass/elbow test. However. there's still hope for you yet. The 2004 ERD is still open for business (if you can find it) and there's still abundant evidence for the methods and the madness being used to steal elections, in the event that you, your ground-hog buddies and -- what the hell -- the leadership of the Democratic Party ever wants to visit.

'Til then, my suggestion is that you keep starting threads about telling time -- it does appear to be a subject you know something about.

[bear425]

1. I'm with you Fly.

It's not as if we can't do two things at once: clean up our elections and work smarter to get our candidates elected. Although, we must do the former in order to gain the latter.

[meganmonkey]

9. I agree completely - in fact, in the above-mentioned thread

that's pretty much what I told the OP (although in a much more drawn out way ;) ) Still waiting for a response....

It's really a matter of priorities and passion. Work on the issues you are passionate about, that you feel you can accomplish something- there is an issue for everyone and for a lot of us, Election Reform is key.

Never Give Up!

[CubsFan1982]

2. Maybe it's the hypocrisy.

Seems to me that if Kerry and Hackett had won in Ohio, we would not be complaining about "stolen" or "hacked" elections. On the night of the Hackett-Schmidt race, the general sentiment was that if Hackett won, the election was clean, and if Schmidt won, it was stolen. That's hypocritical in the extreme.

And I've looked over all the evidence for last November and have yet to see anything conclusive that suggests how an election lost by 150,000 votes could have been stolen.

[Fly by night]

5. Huh? Double huh?

I think many of us knew that the OH-2 race was going to be an uphill battle. The threads here and elsewhere in the last two days about the mysterious last-minute voting machine "glitches" in Clermont, with a seismic shift in the margin of victory in the last 22 minutes of the vote-counting (seismic enough not to trigger an automatic recount) in the same county where 2004 presidential ballots were tampered with before the faux recount (since you've read "everything", you know what I'm talking about) all look troublesome to me and many others. A Hackett victory would have been an upset in that very heavily Republican district. The circumstances under which it happened are troublesome indeed.

And which race are you referring to that was won by 150,000 votes? Not OH-2, where the margin of victory was closer to 4,000. Not Ohio in 2004, where the "official" victory margin was around 118,000 and the real margin (and the real victor) remains to be seen, pending resolution of the several pending lawsuits there. So -- you who have read everything -- which race are you referring to?

[Fly by night]

6. I'm heading to Nashville for an election reform meeting. Otherwise...

...I would stay here and reply to any stolen election neigh-sayers who showed up. I'm sure there are plenty of 2004 ERD reality-based warriors who can fill my size 10s admirably. Please do so -- I'll be back to the farm around 9:00 pm, Mid-South Humid Time, to jump back in, if there's anything to jump into.

And thanks for the votes to put this thread on the "Greatest" page. Turnabout is fair play -- unlike our Rethug-controlled elections these days.

[CubsFan1982]

19. OK, my numbers were off.

You can make a case for a stolen election with a margin of 537 votes. You can even make a case for a stolen election with a margin of 25,000 votes. An election lost by 118,000 votes is just too credible to doubt.

As for Ohio-2, it's pretty well established, or at least that's what I've seen, that Republican-heavy precincts were counted last. The "seismic" shift should not be that shocking.

Besides, ramblings on DU do not constitute "proof" of election tampering. I reiterate, I have yet to see CONCLUSIVE, SOLID, IRREFUTABLE proof that a) the machines were hacked; or b) that the election was in any other way "stolen". People hold up exit polls as the Holy Grail - well, exit polls can be wrong. They're put together by fallible human beings who don't survey every voter that comes out of the polling places. People forget that exit polls are of a statistical sample - they're not foolproof.

Give me conclusive, solid, irrefutable proof - not just opinions - that the election was stolen. Then maybe I'll take you guys more seriously.

[mod mom]

27. If you any doubts they messed with the machines, look at this:

Look at Lucas County (a major trouble spot). Remember David cobb only (supposedly)got 198 votes in the enitre state:

[driver8]

37. OMG!! That is absolutely amazing!!

Oh no...I don't see ANY problems with elections in Ohio. Everything is just hunky dory.

I will never understand why there is not more outrage from the Dems. After all, it affects all of them in some way...or it will eventually.

[electropop]

42. Freakin' AWSOME

It's just too disgusting for words.

[electropop]

41. Prove to me that the election was fair.

If you really believe it was fair, you will be only too happy to prove it with full recounts, audits, everything in public view. If you believe we should let these things continue to go on in secret, it's because you know that your side can only win by fraud.

The Pukes blocked voters from voting in the first place. So even without the myriad other forms of tampering that Blackwell sponsored, many votes didn't get cast, though voters showed up and tried. After 12 hours, some people have to feed their kids or go and pee. Go figure.

[rateyes]

22. And, you have to divide the vote margin in half...

for the number that would have swung the election the other way. 1/2 of 118,000---59,000.

[FogerRox]

25. And Ellen Conally had 235,000 more votes than Kerry---

SO Kerry w Really won ohio by 90 to 100k votes

[rateyes]

26. Only!

:)

[Blue Shark]

10. You have a marvelous...

...taste for irony. The picture you include could stand for the subtance of your whole post.

[CubsFan1982]

20. Sorry, dude.

I don't see conspiracies lurking around every corner. I don't deal with "what ifs" and "might bes". I'm a rational human being. Give me more than opinions, and maybe I might change my mind.

[Fly by night]

28. Welcome to DU 2004 ERD. Now read something (anything)

If I could get you to read just one thing, it would be the Conyers report. It's only 102 pages. Doable, even for a Cubs fan. And it provides example after example of hard evidence of a rigged election in Ohio -- precincts reporting impossible turnouts, 40 year residents of the same home finding themselves purged from the rolls, multiple reports of electronic vote-switching witnessed by the voters and always in Bush's favor. Just read it, won't you. Since we've never seen you on this forum, you may not know how to find it. But it is listed on John Conyers' homepage. If you can't find it, let me know.

If I could get you to read two things, you might visit www.bradblog.com and read Clint Curtis' sworn testimony that he was hired by Rep. Tom Feeney (a Florida Republican) to write program to hack the touch-screen machines. It only took 24 lines of computer code to accomplish it. Mr. Curtis has passed a lie detector test, Mr. Feeney has refused to be interviewed by the press "on the record" regarding the allegations, and both men are Republicans.

If I could get you to read three things, I would have you read Ellen Thiesen and Warren Stewart's paper about Presidential undervotes in New Mexico, which found that -- statewide -- over one in twenty voters who voted on Danaher Shouptronics DREs recorded NO vote for President -- in a very heavily contested battleground state. (In some Democratic precincts, the Presidential under-vote was more than one in every eight ballots cast. Right.)

If I could get you to read four things, I would recommend Fitrakis et al, "Did George W. Bush Steal the 2004 Election? Essential Documents" (available on www.freepress.org). This 700+ page book includes many of the affidavits and other hard evidence that Ohio judges have still not heard in a court of law, preferring to dismiss cases instead of airing this evidence.

If I could get you to read more, I would suggest you stick around, maybe go back into the archives of this forum for the November, 2004 - February, 2005 time period. Read TruthIsAll's and berniew1's posts in particular. The evidence is everywhere, once you open your eyes and ears.

And I haven't said anything about exit polls, now have I?

[AndyTiedye]

17. Many Of Us Felt that Blackwell Would Steal it for Schmidt if Necessary

so that Hackett could not possibly win no matter how many votes he got.

Seems to me that if Kerry and Hackett had won in Ohio, we would not be complaining about "stolen" or "hacked" elections. On the night of the Hackett-Schmidt race, the general sentiment was that if Hackett won, the election was clean, and if Schmidt won, it was stolen. That's hypocritical in the extreme.

Not at all. Who in Ohio is in a better position to steal an election?
Is it the Republicans, who hold every statewide office, or the
Democrats, who hold none?

[CubsFan1982]

21. That's hypothetical.

You're talking about theories. I'm looking for proof.

[AndyTiedye]

23. We couldn't rig an election in Ohio even if we wanted to.

Many of us felt that Blackwell would steal it for Schmidt if Schmidt was losing.
We don't know (yet) whether or not there was actual fraud in Tuesday's election.

You say it would be "hypocritical" not to talk about fraud if our guy won,
but our guys are not the ones running the vote-counting process,
we don't have access to the central tabulators or the code that
runs in them and the voting machines.

We couldn't rig an election in Ohio even if we wanted to.

[Fly by night]

29. See my post 28 above. And that's just for starters. If you want more, ask.

Just read what I put on your "plate" in that post first, 'k?

[FogerRox]

40. Cubs fan

I left NJ and worked for Kerry in Broward county FL.

I saw what happened. I saw voters being told -- you voted -- now leave-- as the voter yelled that the machine wasnt letting them vote for who they wanted- I spoke to too many voters who couldnt vote for Kerry and Castor (FL senate candidate) because the machines kept coming up Bush and Martinez.
PS I was in charge of southern Broward polling locations, early voting thru election day.

I watched the lines snake down the sidewalk--100, 200, 300, people.
WAiting for HOURS, because there were only 4 machines.
Meanwhile in DAde cnty-- 5 miles to the south they had 30 machines in one early vote location to my 6. A Republicam county.

I was at the scene of the one of the crimes.

[roseBudd]

51. You want proof? Break into every BoE in OH and steal the machines and the

ballots and examine them forensically. Can't do that you say?

Oh, gee maybe that is why we don't have proof. No one, not even the recount witnesses got to examine the machines or the ballots.

Computers count the votes so no one can see

[pacalo]

3. I'd like to think that the "Greatest" attribute was due to your response

as well as Peace Patriot's.

Well done to you both.

[bleever]

33. Agreed.

:)

[Donailin]

4. I started a mimic thread Tuesday night

in response to the thread asking folks not to jump the gun on the hacket race.

I'll say here what I said there. In short: you want me to believe that the republican party doesn't cheat, lie steal or in any way shape or form become corrupt. After almost five years of total lies, deceit, stealing and MURDER of innocents, I will never believe that they play fair and square. I pay attention, what the hell have you been doing?

[lvx35]

7. A lot of people are against the "vast conspiracy" orthodoxy at DU.

Its pretty apparent to me that the voting machines are not as secure as they should be, and that small scale, or even larger scale, fraud may have occured. I've even been an activist on these topics. However, I've also had arguments with people who suggest GWB's power is only there by vast conspiracy, etc, etc, and implying that like 80% of people would be dems if not for it. This simply isn't the case. For instance, Bush hammered the Dems in 2004 for small donations, even in lower income brackets. There are numerous things that suggest W is in power because a lot of people, for whatever reason, like him. This is a real issue that we have to face to be successful, and its an issue that the vast conspiracy folks are undermiming...So this issue isn't as simple as it appears.

[Fly by night]

8. Sometimes, even paranoids have real enemies.

Non-verifiable voting systems, controlled by Republicans and run with proprietary software that we cannot examine, and administered by election officials who (in the case of Tennessee) can also be paid consultants to voting machine companies while at the same time managing elections -- these are real problems and real enemies.

As one activist said at our National Election Reform Conference, "That's not a vast conspiracy -- that's a long-term (and very successful) business plan."

[lvx35]

15. Paranoids have enemies, and often, they are themselves.

Thank you for your response, but I see a real danger here. The first is making a election fraud reform a democrat issue, rather than a bipartisian one. IT used to be a big issue and freerepublic before 2004, but now its become "our" issue. Except in WA with Rossi vs. Gregoire, where it was bipartisian again. The second is claiming vast right wing conspiracy vs. pointing at "isolated criminals rigging elections" and putting the politics aside. The latter would garner a lot of republican support. The third is focusing on what might be rather than what is. Its rock solid that machines have security flaws (see the John's Hopkins report) but its incredibly iffy as to whether there is vast republican conpiracy controlling elections. I mean consider the former and the latter. Which is going to get press? Which will get republican and mainstream support? Which well get us called tinfoil hatters? Its pretty clear to me.

[Fly by night]

31. Welcome to DU. I see you've been here about a month ...

... (even though you already have over 700 posts) and I don't recall ever seeing you before on this forum. Glad you're here. Since you are new to DU (and brand-new to this forum), you would not know that I am the organizer of a grassroots nonpartisan group in Tennessee, Gathering To Save Our Democracy, that has members from six political parties, that has already obtained bipartisan support (and sponsorship) of bills to require voter-verified paper ballots and mandatory random manual recounts in our elections here and that has framed this issue effectively as a "small d" democratic effort. You probably also don't know that New Jersey Congressman Rush Holt's bill, HR550, has over 140 co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle and many of us (including me) met with both Republicans and Democratic Congresspeople to increase support for that bill (which we succeeded in doing). Of course, that still hasn't gotten the Rethugs who hold the reins of power from even allowing this bill a committee hearing in the three years it has been proposed. (If you know any Rethugs, ask them what they are so afraid of in allowing this bill a hearing, won't you.)

Once again, I am glad that this thread has brought several of you folks out of the woodwork who've never visited the 2004 ERD before. If you stick around, you will definitely learn something. But in the meantime, Google "Gathering To Save Our Democracy" and get a taste of our nonpartisan efforts in the Orange State. And then get busy in your home state supporting election reform. It is just as satisfying as posting 20+ times a day on DU; and a lot more useful to your community, state and nation.

[lvx35]

43. Outed! By election fraudsters again!

Oh no! You've researched my DU posting habits and outed me! That's right, I'm getting paid by right wing conspiracy guys to agitate election reform people. Seriously, Its shocking that you guys aren't aware of the paranoia that's seething from your every pore. It does not help in making you credible, friend!

[Fly by night]

44. It's not paranoia -- it's wanting to know who the "new kid" is.

Anytime I start a "conversation" with someone on DU, I routinely check their profile so I can put some info with a handle. It's not paranoia, just wanting to know a little about the person I am conversing with. I'm glad that DU makes that possible and also allows us to disable the profiles if we want to.

And it is interesting (and telling) that you have posted so much in such a short time. Though folks post at different rates, it is interesting to find someone ostensibly interested in election fraud who would post 700+ posts in a month and yet not visit this forum with any frequency (if at all).

Outed again, 'eh? Or just defensive. Either way, my initial comments still apply. Read something (anything) that is available to you on this forum to inform your opinions and then get involved in making changes in your own community to protect the vote. If you had been around here even a little bit, you would know that your advice to me to "get involved" was both uninformed and a tad bit precious.

Again, feel free to Google "Gathering To Save Our Democracy Tennessee" or do a simple/advanced search of the DU archives for our organization. There have been at least a dozen threads here on our activities. You might learn a little about what we're doing in Tennessee and begin to join the company of other reform activists who are present here from PA, OH, OR, UT, NC, CA, MA, CT, MT, MS and many other states -- there's lots of us here.

Or you could just keep posting merrily along, telling the Pope how to make the sign of the cross or Colonel Sanders how to fry chicken. We can often tell a newbie; sometimes, we just can't tell them much. And fortunately, they are the last group "we" look to to establish our credibility. We're DUing that every day with folks who matter: legislators, other elected and appointed officials and voters in our states. With those audiences clearly in view and engaged, it's kinda hard to see or hear you, or really to care.

Welcome again to DU. Just watch that carpel tunnel syndrome.

[lvx35]

45. Show me where I said "get involved".

Examine your post above. At what point in this post did I tell you to "get involved"? I've literally searched the thread and I didn't say that, so why are you saying I said it in quotes? Why is it that whenever I spit you my two cents at certain people invovled in election fraud they start arguments with things I didn't say? Can you SHOW ME where I said that?

Now regarding your comments on my posting numbers, guess what. Its not significant. The fact that you would study it, and calculate averages rather than just responding to my posts with your two cents shows me an obsessive mind grasping at straws. The fact that I am stuck sitting near a computer with Internet access surfing DU has nothing to do with you or election fraud.

Regarding your claims to being the KFC Pope of election fraud, I don't care. I don't care if you're the head of the DNC or DLC or whoever the fuck. Respond to points made when somebody makes their opinion, or ignore the points. Don't try to convince me how damn important you are because I am not impressed by titles. Election security is important, but its not an issue I am pursuing. Do not flip out when somebody puts in their passing opinion.

[Fly by night]

47. "I don't care..." Yep, that pretty much sums you up.

"Election security is important, but its (sic) not an issue I am pursuing." I apologize -- I didn't know I was perhaps communicating with a DNC official or Donna Brazile herseff. And I'm sorry that I may have confused you with another new poster with my response. I guess I was reacting to your newness and your tone, rather than to your (lack of) content.

However, you did tell another poster on this thread: "I'm ust (sic) saying you have to think about how you pursue these issues, how the public percieves (sic) you, and what information they are ready to accept and what information they are not ready for." Sir (or ma'am), you are newly in the presence of people on this forum who have been thinking about these issues, and acting on them, for quite some time now. And frankly, your rapid post count is a telling sign to me of several things, none of which need to be gone into now.

However, since you've not been to the 2004 ERD forum very much before and are likely not to stick around long enough to learn something (because you're not pursuing the "issue" for which this forum was established), since you appear to be an even angrier-type guy or even more over-caffeinated than me, since attempts at humor seem to just get you a little higher on your high-horse (or in your high chair), and since you are extremely defensive (about what? Are you what you claimed to be in a previous post? Don't answer that, 'cause I don't care); I think it is time to be thankful to DU again for the 'ole "snooze" button, and send you to Never(again)land. Bu-bye.

PS: Since your aggressiveness got me curious (it is also a very telling sign), I did a simple search on you and found that you have also picked fights on this forum with TruthIsAll, mod mom and Kip Humphrey (and have gotten similar 'get a clue' advice from them all); and you have posted unsympathetically in threads about Andy Stephenson. We don't know who you are or why you're here, in such a mad and manically posting mood. But I do remember two things my daddy used to say: "You can never win an argument with an ignorant man" and "You can always tell a true believer -- you just can't tell them much." Now, before I start guessing what your handle means (lvx -- "Lots of Volume eXhaled" perhaps?), it's time to put you back to sleep. Fade to black, s'il vous plait.

[lvx35]

50. Good!

I've heard enough out of you. I'm glad you put me on ignore. I didn't post unsympatheically on the andy stevenson thread, either.

EDIT: And you know what? To anyone else who reads this? This is like the 20th time this guy said "I don't know who you are." But all he did was try to figure it out from looking at my post counts, and formulating wierd theories. If you want to know who I am, just freaking ask. Send me an IM. If your nice, I'll happily give you my contact information, and we can talk about my life, including long hours spent tied to a computer with seldom an incoming call. Its not rocket science, be decent to people if you want to get to know them.

[Fly by night]

52. What a gift: when someone I've "snoozed" kicks this thread. Sweet.

I can't hear you, but that's o.k. with me. I thought this thread would start fading, but since you seem to be going for 1,000 posts by Monday, go for it.

If my new somnolecent non-friend said anything worth responding to, someone else take the bait, if you'd like. Me, I'm enjoying the peace and quiet. As, I am sure, TIA and mod mom are these days.

And I hope everyone here on 2004 ERD who does care about election reform (and not just arguing with those of us who do) will visit DemoDonkey's "live blog" thread from Atlanta today and thank her for keeping us informed while she endured the heat and humidity. 100,000 people rallying to protect our vote. Amazing.

Kinda makes snoozers with verbal diarrhea just a minor (and mime-like) annoyance.

[checks-n-balances]

11. Are you familiar with the Project for the New Amreican Century (PNAC)?

The neocons' plan that outlines their plan for asserting our military power to the rest of the world, beginning with the middle east?

If not, Google it and get yourself educated. These people have been planning for 40 years. How about the BFEE? Google that too, or go to Demopedia.

You're right, though, it's not as simple as it appears. Example: you stated, "There are numerous things that suggest W is in power because a lot of people, for whatever reason, like him." Lots of them like him because this country has been through a subtle brainwashing for the past 40 years to hate liberals, to think of their president as somebody they should go to a barbeque with, etc. One of the factors is the dumbing down that the right wing has promoted and benefited from. It's one element in their cache of weaponry.

Don't you know that a great rightwing ploy is name-calling, including "conspiracy theorists!"? We don't need to be doing that to one another here, no matter how subtle, thank you very much.

[lvx35]

16. Aww, hell, I'm a tinfoil hatter! ;)

I've just learned its a lot more subtle, and makes more friends, when I line the inside of a baseball hat with tinfoil rather than wearing it strait out where everyone can see it! ;)

Seriously, I mean no harm, or to imply that anybody is a conpiracy theorist. I'm ust saying you have to think about how you pursue these issues, how the public percieves you, and what information they are ready to accept and what information they are not ready for.

[checks-n-balances]

36. Sorry, and you have a good point. How one is perceived sometimes

can make a difference in whether you're listened to or dismissed out of hand. I quess my question is: when are people going to be READY to hear, understand, and accept how critically important it is to pay attention to the real truth??? When it comes into their backyards and hits them over the head and gets in their face??

[Pacifist Patriot]

38. I'd take it back 60 at least.

At least to the anti-FDR plot in which Prescott was involved. I don't think it is any coincidence that these business men were financially in bed with the Nazis.

[AndyTiedye]

24. It Wouldn't Take a Vast Conspiracy. Several Small Ones Would Do.

Its pretty apparent to me that the voting machines are not as secure as they should be, and that small scale, or even larger scale, fraud may have occured.

We seem to be in agreement so far.

I've also had arguments with people who suggest GWB's power is only there by vast conspiracy, etc, etc,

When needs a vast conspiracy when the Republicans own the media, the churches, and the voting machinez?

and implying that like 80% of people would be dems if not for it.

I don't think I ever saw anybody claim 80%. That people disapprove of Bush** by almost a 60% to 40% margin is shown by recent polls.

[Land Shark]

12. Rational defenders of current elections no longer exist after this

posted in General Discussion:

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4261988>

[Fly by night]

13. One kick before the mad dash to town

[Nothing Without Hope]

14. Bravo, Fly. Shall we "get over" the loss of democracy and the criminal

coup that toppled our government?

The "getting over" strategy is for things that can't be changed and that won't happen again. In fact, by suggesting this strategy, these assumptions are implied. That attitude should have no place here, no matter how big the "tent" is. It's hard enough to keep up the fight against such an array of horrible things without such whining defeatism dragging us down.

I refuse to meekly accept that a criminal cabal should be granted perpetual ownership of this country, a cabal whose brutal rule has been so horribly destructive and has led the nation into not only the unjustified war with Iraq but now is on the verge of a far greater war with Iran, all based on lies and greed. (BTW, please read this thread on the whole Iran war situation, it's URGENT: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4252778)

The people who want to give up on any possibility of reclaiming our country for the rule of law and decency have a right to their opinions. But they should have no place here for their whining negativism. This site is for a community of people who want to continue to fight for our nation's future.

And yes, I feel sure that some of these defeatist posters are either GOP intruders or representatives of the corrupt elements of the Democratic party. It certainly serves their purposes to shut us up so that their Poodle Press can dish out the Kool-Aid unopposed.

[adolfo]

30. LOL!

Poodle Press? That's a good one! :rofl:

[Nothing Without Hope]

46. If you like "Poodle Press," you might like where I propose using the term:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1668099
Thread title: Introducing a new name for the lapdog corporate media: THE POODLE PRESS!

It was a fun thread, and there are lots of surprising and satisfying ways to apply the term.

[autorank]

18. Fly by night,..you make me look tame. ROCK ON!!!

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Here is my response, nothing compared to yours though.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1984380#1985954

[Talismom]

32. Thank you Fly! I've been trying to say such things for days now,

but you do it better! It's bad enough when people around you who only get news from the corporate media call you a conspiracy theorist. But when you interact with people on DU, who supposedly care and take an interest in the world and this country and get the same response...it gets a bit depressing! Nice job!

[bleever]

34. Fly by night: you make autorank look tame.

Great, great post and series of responses.

Thanks for coming up with everything I would have wanted to say.


:yourock:

[grace0418]

35. I fully admit I don't read the 2004 ERD, yet I totally agree

with you. I know the research is there, and I know there are mountains of it. I sometimes peruse through it but mostly I find it just too depressing.

But I find myself really suprised by the number of people on this forum that refuse to believe election fraud happened in 2004. I posted about this recently.

After many replies I finally said " I guess what I'm getting at in my own, clumsy rambling way, is that you're free to disagree that the election was stolen. Really, you are.

But those of you who disagree that the election was stolen, can you PLEASE REFRAIN from calling those those who think the election was stolen lunatics, tinfoil hat wingnuts, blathering idiots, etc. or that their ideas are claptrap, bullshit, crazy, etc.?

I think most of us at DU can agree that BushCo is a bunch of criminals, so the fact that some of us believe that these criminals pulled off the crime of election theft is hardly farfetched. If you don't agree it actually happened, fine. But stop acting like it's absolutely out of the realm of possibility, because BushCo has proven they're not above ANY dirty trick."

To me it seems absurd to know as much as DUers know about Republican dirty tricks and then scoff at the idea that election fraud occurred.

[mirrera]

56. Exactly!!!

Why oh why would perfectly normal liberal people act like we have done something gauche because we suspect criminal behavior out of this bunch. Coincidence theorists...all of them!
Thank you for expressing it perfectly. It is fine if they are not certain, but to put us down for trying to get to the truth is counter productive. Truth has to be the goal. I WISH it was Democrats that had done the cheating, cause I am sure before my time they have. I wish it was them this time because I could point out all the irregularities and not be considered partisan...


http://NoBullshiRt.com

[Pacifist Patriot]

39. My Response

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1987350&mesg_id=1987350

[Comandante_Subzero]

48. Just Ducky

"Democracy dead? Get over it!" After all who needs democracy when you have "free trade", corporate welfare, & perpetual war!

[bleever]

49. Welcome to DU, Comandante_Subzero.

Great screen name.


Not. Getting. Over. It.

[Spock_is_Skeptical]

53. Thank you for this excellent post!

I tried to recommend, but it's already been 24 hours. ;)

[Fly by night]

54. Thanks kindly. Read the one I have on tonight ("party pooper" in title).

If you like it, you could recommend it. Just needs one more vote to start irritating the "Greatest" forum readers again with our 2004 ERD reality-based persistence that we start counting some votes, in Ohio and everywhere.

[Spock_is_Skeptical]

55. I did, and I did recommend it

they do need to count the votes.

[Amaryllis]

57. Go here, listen to this, and I defy ANYONE to claim stealing elections is

not an issue.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=387824&mesg_id=387824
Thom Hartmann & Paul Lehto: Corporate Takeover of U.S. Elections

Thom and Paul both make the point over and over that the point is WE HAVE NO BASIS FOR CONFIDENCE IN THE OUTCOME the way our elections are currently conducted, and private, for- profit corporations have no damn business inserting themselves between us and our vote.

Thom: "THe vote is the heartbeat of our democracy."

These two are INCREDIBLE at framing the issues.

And while you're at it, please kick the thread. It is VITAL info that needs to be blasted all over the web.