Kerry On

Internet provider problems here at Dashville (we're currently cadging offices in the secret mountaintop base of Captain Midnight and the Secret Squadron) as well as other activities are limiting our blogability, but here is yet another final word on the electoral debate of January 6. This is Senator John Kerry's statement as recorded in the Congressional Record:

Mr. KERRY. "Mr. President, free and fair elections are the foundation of our democracy. Thanks to the efforts of tens of thousands of citizens, millions more Americans registered and went to the pools this year. But despite this dramatic expansion in public participation, many voters faced barriers to casting their ballot. Disenfranchisement and barriers to voting are fundamentally undemocratic and should be unacceptable in the freest nation in the world.

On November 3, I conceded the Presidential election to George Bush and also expressed my commitment to ensuring that every vote in this election is counted. The questions being raised by my colleagues in Congress about the vote in Ohio are important. As evidenced by the media and Congressman JOHN CONYERS' report of the vote in Ohio, there were many voting irregularities in the November election that led to the disenfranchisement of voters. These included long lines at predominantly minority polling places resulting from the failure to provide sufficient number of voting machines; voter intimidation and misinformation; the restriction of provisional ballots in a fashion that likely disenfranchised voters; and instances in which malfunctioning voting machines transferred Kerry votes to Bush.

I strongly believe that we need to investigate this election and reform our system. However, while I am deeply concerned about the issues the questions and issues being raised by this objection and think they are very important, I do not believe that there is sufficient evidence to support the objection and change the outcome of the election and I am not joining their protest of the Ohio electors.

Despite widespread reports of irregularities, questionable practices by some election officials and instances of lawful voters being denied the right to vote, our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome of the election.

It is critical that we investigate and understand any and every voting irregularity anywhere in our country, not because it would change the outcome of the election but because Americans have to believe that their votes are counted in our democracy.

We must take action this Congress to make sure that the problems voters encountered in Ohio and elsewhere never happen again. We must make sure there are no questions or doubts in future elections. It is critical to our democracy that we investigate and act to prevent voting irregularities and voter intimidation across the country.

I strongly support the efforts of the civil rights and voting rights groups across the country that continue to investigate what happened in 2004 and how we can ensure it will never happen again. A Presidential election is a national Federal election but we have different standards in different States for casting and counting votes. We must have a national Federal standard to solve the problems that occurred in the 2004 election.

I am calling on my Republican colleagues to put election reform on the congressional agenda this year. The Republican leadership in the House and Senate must commit to make protecting voting rights a priority and commit to adding election reform legislation to the legislative calendar this year. One goal must be to eliminate barriers to voting, to encourage the greatest level of civic participation possible, and to restore confidence in the notion that every eligible voter will have the opportunity to vote and to have their vote counted.

I have spoken with Democratic Senate Leader Harry Reid and my colleagues in the House and Senate about my intention to introduce legislation this year to ensure transparency and accountability in our voting system and the need for the Democratic Caucus to make voting rights and electoral reform one of our top priority pieces of legislation. Election reform will be one of my top agenda items.

I will be meeting in coming weeks with key leaders on both sides of the aisle and from civil rights and voting rights groups across the Nation. I plan to use the information gathered by Representative Conyers in his report, and information from other investigations underway, to guide my legislation.

We must invest resources in our country to help State and local communities purchase modern voting machines and do research and development on safe and secure forms of voting. We must ensure that our voting machines enable voters to verify their vote.

No American citizen should wake up the morning after the election and worry their vote wasn't counted. No citizen should be denied at the polls if they are eligible to vote. As the greatest, wealthiest nation on Earth, our citizens should not have to be forced to vote on old unaccountable voting machines. And, as the greatest, wealthiest Nation on Earth, our citizens should never be forced to vote on old, unaccountable and nontransparent voting machines from companies controlled by partisan activists.

Together we can put the critical issue of electoral reform on the front burner in Washington and across the country."

Reflections on January 6

January 6 was a day that the Democratic party was saved to fight another day.

Senator Barbara Boxer saved the Democratic party today from losing one of its core constituencies, African-Americans. It's no accident that several black Representatives mentioned Michael Moore today. They told us that everyone---the media and their own party---ignored their concerns in 2000, and not until Michael Moore put their objections in his movie did many of us even realize they had made them.

If it had happened again, the rift would have been fatal. Some would abandon the party completely, others would lose enthusiasm, and some would find the right moment for payback.

In this connection, it is relevant to suggest that the media largely ignoring the substance of what happened today in Congress, and completely ignoring the Selma 1965 to Washington 2005 march and rally, was not only acting in Republican interests, it was de facto racism.

On the day this took place, George Bush was formally declared the winner of the 2004 election, with the lowest approval rate for a newly reelected president in memory, and under the cloud of a contested election outcome.

On the day this took place, John Kerry was in Iraq, being cheered by U.S. troops. Maybe they didn't get the memo about his "mixed messages." Maybe they didn't appreciate the Swift Boat liars attempting to question the medals and reputation of one of their own.

It was on this day that the Cameron Kerry oped appeared (see link below) which was interesting timing. It did not appear when it could have disrupted the efforts to get a Senator to make the objections in Congress. But it appeared in time to make Kerry's position---and the reasons for his absence-clearer.

Many believe that Kerry did win the election, but those in public office must maintain a standard of proof to preserve their integrity. So in the debate today Barack Obama and even Bernie Sanders announced they believed Kerry lost, though they also believed the election system needs to be fixed. They may suspect otherwise on the real outcome, but they can't say so.

We all have our parts to play. Those of us not in public office can act on preponderance of evidence, or even our intuitions. We can take to the streets, and make our case, and urge real investigation. That's what we must continue to do.

The seeds of a progressive coalition were planted in Ohio during this process. It largely went unnoticed, but organized labor joined the protest, and sent buses from Columbus to Washington for the march and rally today. Those seeds were given some nourishment today, thanks to Barbara Boxer. We will see if they grow and bear fruit.

What happens now? The people alive to this moment must continue to pay attention to the progress of court cases in Ohio and elsewhere, because frankly not many others will. We need to support these court cases to force investigations, and eventually get indictments and put some folks in jail. Then there will be reform.

We must support reform bills as proposed by Kerry, Boxer and others, assuming we agree with them. We don't have any illusions that they will become law. We should use them to continue to build coalitions for the future, and rebuild trust.

We can hope that out there somewhere is a news organization or more likely a foundation or two with deep pockets willing to finance a dozen or so ambitious reporters to dig into the election story, and produce a book or a documentary or both.

But basically this issue now gets folded into the attempts of the Democratic party to revive itself, and become again a truly progressive party. It may take a very long time. The Republicans may very well be able to cheat their way to victories in the next few elections. But we can hope that Americans are made of stuff as stern as Ukrainians, Czechs and Slovaks, and don't forget Poland---if any of you out there are old enough to remember Solidarity. Or, for that matter, Selma.

Senator Barbara Boxer objected to the counting of Ohio's electoral votes because of irregularities, forcing an historic debate in the U.S. Congress, reported around the world.

Senator Barbara Boxer's Statement On Her Objection To The Certification Of Ohio's Electoral Votes
January 6, 2005
"For most of us in the Senate and the House, we have spent our lives fighting for things we believe in - always fighting to make our nation better.

We have fought for social justice. We have fought for economic justice. We have fought for environmental justice. We have fought for criminal justice.

Now we must add a new fight - the fight for electoral justice.

Every citizen of this country who is registered to vote should be guaranteed that their vote matters, that their vote is counted, and that in the voting booth of their community, their vote has as much weight as the vote of any Senator, any Congressperson, any President, any cabinet member, or any CEO of any Fortune 500 Corporation.

I am sure that every one of my colleagues - Democrat, Republican, and Independent - agrees with that statement. That in the voting booth, every one is equal.

So now it seems to me that under the Constitution of the United States, which guarantees the right to vote, we must ask:

Why did voters in Ohio wait hours in the rain to vote? Why were voters at Kenyan College, for example, made to wait in line until nearly 4 a.m. to vote because there were only two machines for 1300 voters?

Why did poor and predominantly African-American communities have disproportionately long waits?

Why in Franklin County did election officials only use 2,798 machines when they said they needed 5,000? Why did they hold back 68 machines in warehouses? Why were 42 of those machines in predominantly African-American districts?

Why did, in Columbus area alone, an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 voters leave polling places, out of frustration, without having voted? How many more never bothered to vote after they heard about this?

Why is it when 638 people voted at a precinct in Franklin County, a voting machine awarded 4,258 extra votes to George Bush. Thankfully, they fixed it - but how many other votes did the computers get wrong?

Why did Franklin County officials reduce the number of electronic voting machines in downtown precincts, while adding them in the suburbs? This also led to long lines.

In Cleveland, why were there thousands of provisional ballots disqualified after poll workers gave faulty instructions to voters?

Because of this, and voting irregularities in so many other places, I am joining with Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones to cast the light of truth on a flawed system which must be fixed now.

Our democracy is the centerpiece of who we are as a nation. And it is the fondest hope of all Americans that we can help bring democracy to every corner of the world.

As we try to do that, and as we are shedding the blood of our military to this end, we must realize that we lose so much credibility when our own electoral system needs so much improvement.

Yet, in the past four years, this Congress has not done everything it should to give confidence to all of our people their votes matter.

After passing the Help America Vote Act, nothing more was done.

A year ago, Senators Graham, Clinton and I introduced legislation that would have required that electronic voting systems provide a paper record to verify a vote. That paper trail would be stored in a secure ballot box and invaluable in case of a recount.

There is no reason why the Senate should not have taken up and passed that bill. At the very least, a hearing should have been held. But it never happened.

Before I close, I want to thank my colleague from the House, Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

Her letter to me asking for my intervention was substantive and compelling.

As I wrote to her, I was particularly moved by her point that it is virtually impossible to get official House consideration of the whole issue of election reform, including these irregularities.
The Congresswoman has tremendous respect in her state of Ohio, which is at the center of this fight.

Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones was a judge for 10 years. She was a prosecutor for 8 years. She was inducted into the Women's Hall of Fame in 2002.

I am proud to stand with her in filing this objection. "

Debating the Vote

A few quick comments on today's historic debate:

Senator Barbara Boxer stood alone among Senators in objecting to the Ohio vote, which was sufficent to force this debate. A handful of other Senators, including Sen. Hillary Clinton, spoke in support of those who are deeply troubled by the chicanery, the cheating that has been established and that is suspected with cause in the 2004 presidential election. These Senators had their reasons for not joining Boxer in voting against the validation of the Ohio electors, but once again Democrats leave themselves open to the charge of trying to have it both ways.

The speeches in the House and even the calls on C-Span demonstrated the deep, deep feeling among voters that there was cheating in this election, and that it may have been rigged.

The U.S.media, that institution of shame and sham, continued to ignore this crucial issue. The media failed to report fully the outrages on election day, and they remain complicit with Republicans in covering up what happened, so that whatever evidence remains will disappear. Only when ANY threat to the integrity of voting, and every voters right to vote and have it counted, is given prominence and reported as a major story, will the sanctity of elections be more than a sanctimonious if not cynical lie.

If people around the world, and even their fellow Democrats, didn't understand what voting rights mean to African Americans, perhaps today will leave a more accurate impression.

The challenge gave the White House the opportunity to support efforts to correct deficiencies in the electoral process, even as it denied there was grounds for contesting the election. To no one's surprise, they passed on that opportunity to be conciliatory and recognize that elections are at the core of American democracy. Clearly, among the things that Republicans hold sacred, voting does not qualify.

Finally, this observation: can't anyone pronounce "electoral"? There is no "i" in it. It doesn't rhyme with editorial. Somebody should do a study on GOPer mispronunciation patterns and their psycho-social significance.

Keep On Objecting

John Nichols column in The Nation

The Online Beat

Every Vote

Cameron Kerry, John Kerry's brother, has a commentary in the Boston Globe which for the first time lays out the reasons that the Kerry campaign did not more aggressively challenge the outcome of the election, especially in Ohio.

The commentary ends with a strong endorsement of electoral reform, and ends with this specific proposal:

"It is time to make vote suppression a violation of civil rights laws and adopt national standards that ensure that all voters have equal access to voting machines and ballots without the kinds of technical obstacles that call to mind Jim Crow laws. And trust in the system requires that it be transparent; whether inside local election board offices or inside the code of electronic voting machines, the counting of votes has to be public and nonpartisan."

Next time the electoral votes are tallied, every American citizen should be able to know that his or vote has counted."

Boston.com / News / Politics / Presidential candidates / Counting every vote

To which we add, it is past time to make vote suppression a violation of civil rights laws. We assume that this will be part of the legislation Senator Kerry will introduce.

Selma March 1965 

Challenge Supported by Organized Labor

Link to a message in support of Congressional challenge to the 2004 vote. Several unions are participating in the Selma to Washington march, including buses from Columbus, Ohio. This is the 40th anniversary year of the Selma, Alabama march that was instrumental in gaining support for the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963 was organized by a coalition of black Civil Rights groups, organized labor, churches and political organizations.

In 1965 African Americans marching to get voting rights were met with billy clubs and tear gas. In 2005, African Americans marching to protest violation of their voting rights are so far being ignored.

Why the Vote Count Challenge Matters :: ILCA Online :: Making Labor Media a Force to Be Reckoned With

Challenge the Vote

march poster

How It’s Shaping Up: Congress January 6

A little more than twelve hours before Congress convenes to accept or reject the presidential electors, here’s how it looks:

Keith Olberman has reported that up to six Senators may object to accepting the Ohio electors, joining at least several House members who have announced that they will do so. It takes just one member of each house to force debates. The debate may only be for two hours, but it could be a crucial two hours to the credibility of democracy in America.

A diary on Daily Kos by a woman who called 45 Senators on Wednesday---all the Democrats plus Jeffords the independent and a sympathetic Republican--reports that several of them have received tens of thousands of phone calls on Ohio, and their staff members were on the verge of nervous breakdowns. Among those whose staff told callers were actively considering objecting were Barbara Boxer of CA, Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton, who had lawyers going over the evidence. Others report after-hours message boxes full for a number of other Senators.

John Kerry emailed the 3 million supporters on his lists to urge them to support election reform and investigation, saying he will introduce legislation, but to say he would not join those contesting the 04 results. He is currently on a fact-finding tour of the Middle East.

So what do the Dash brothers make of this?

1. If one Senator objects, more than one will. And it may be that only if more than one will, any will. Either this is being coordinated right now, or staff for several senators are preparing remarks in case some other Senator objects, and their boss decides to join.

2. If no Senator objects, Kerry's absense will hurt him politically. If at least one Senator objects, and even better the six that are rumored, Kerry's absense will help him politically. So it's possible he knows what's going to happen. Note that his email said he wasn't going to join the objectors---this could mean the House members who've announced they will object, or it could mean that he knows someone will in the Senate. The fact of his email can be read either way: being with them without being there, or making the best of a bad situation.

It is even possible that Kerry was told that other Senators would not object unless he didn’t, because they don’t want to be seen as simply sore losers.

In any case, if other Senators do object, his absence will actually help keep the focus where it should be: on the credibility and integrity of the vote, and on the need to hold accountable those who violate it.

At this point, the moment is bound to get some air time even on our timid befuddled news media (currently exploring whether the tsunami is evidence that God is angry---we’re not kidding, it’s on Scarborough right now), and it will get a more serious airing if it is an historic moment, when the debate is mandated by objections from both houses of Congress.

Up until now the demonstrations in various cities haven’t gotten any coverage to speak of. Perhaps if there are Senators objecting and the debate happens, larger and more visible demonstrations will occur afterwards. It's one thing--and a very dramatic thing---for members of congress to engage, but also very important for ordinary people to do so, VISIBLY. TV can't show people writing emails and making phone calls, as crucial as these are. And make no mistake---if any Senators object, it won't be primarily because of the evidence but because voters are upset.

photo by Pgh independent media center: Save the Vote demonstration, downtown Pittsburgh, PA

Credibility, Integrity and January 6

This is a version of something I posted on the daily kos site. Partisans of this blog are familiar with the sentiments but maybe I’ve got a new point or two in here somewhere.

The debate at kos, while mostly of sociological interest (or blogological) does reflect a larger issue bearing on the question of why more prominent Democrats, and more of the media, aren’t paying much attention to the questions of the integrity of the 2004 election, and the possibility that the Bushies self-selected the president yet again. The issue is credibility. Just as Marcos, the owner of Daily Kos, doesn’t want to associate himself or his site with weirdos making wild accusations, establishment Democrats are loathe to do so for the same reason---the people whose opinions they care about will laugh at them and roll their eyes. Here is my rejoinder:

Is one's credibility damaged by being associated with incorrect assertions, and the people making them? Maybe. But in the case of questioning the integrity of the 2004 presidential election, I believe there is a more important credibility issue.

No one wants to be associated with the pathological and dishonest. But what of excessive assertions weak on proof and wild in speculation, perhaps clouded by feeling? Where do they cause damage? Who are the keepers of credibility we are worried about? The major media, eager to single out weirdness in the threatening blogosphere? Political professionals and others who make a tidy living off the Zeitgeist?

In certain arenas, this kind of credibility matters. But in the larger arena of America, there is a question of credibility that trumps these concerns: the credibility of the integrity of the voting process.

What the past two months have shown is that many people---many voters--- have found enough reason to seriously question the integrity of the 2004 election.

The overwhelming majority of them are Democrats and those who voted for Kerry, although there are Republicans actively asserting that the integrity of the vote was seriously violated, and something should be done about it.

While this partisanship weakens their claim to national attention in an objective sense, it is unavoidable. Partisans of the declared losers are just more likely to be upset than partisans of the declared winner, be it in the Ukraine or the U.S. People upset about the credibility of the vote are upset about the integrity of their vote, not just in general, but because of who they voted for.

Those of us who talked to voters before the election know how passionate many were about its importance. We saw them stand in line for hours in the rain in Florida in the week before November 2, and for many hours in Ohio and elsewhere.

Those of us who have talked to voters since the election know how passionately they believe the election was not conducted fairly, that it was manipulated beyond the bounds of the law by Bush partisans.

The integrity of the vote is the most basic element of not only our form of government and our whole political life, but our identity as a society.

I won't repeat the issues, except to say that in my view there is pretty solid evidence of voter intimidation and vote suppression, enough evidence to investigate fraud in particular places and enough circumstantial evidence to investigate the possibility of fraud and conspiracy on a larger scale.

There are a number of scholars who don't wear tin hats who have raised significant questions about the integrity of the 04 vote, including the count.

The control of voting machines by partisans of the party in power is itself such an obvious threat to that integrity and credibility that few in major media or politics would consider an election in another country as legitimate under the same circumstances.

The credibility of the vote comes down to this: what kind of dummy is going to stand for hours in the rain to vote in 2008?

Of course, evangelical Rabid Right Republicans will.

There is another level of credibility to consider. The strongest voices calling the integrity of the election into question are those of African Americans and their leaders. They consider this a voting rights and Civil Rights issue. This will be symbolized in many ways in the coming days, from Columbus to Washington, D.C.

They have the right to define it as such, and there is enough evidence, especially from black precincts, that their definition is credible. The question is, does the Democratic party have any credibility with this community, with other minority communities, and with its own conscience, if it does not support them?

Black members of Congress protested the 2000 vote and no Senator joined them, as we all saw in Michael Moore's film (many of us for the first time.) This shameful lack of support repeated in 2004 would be devastating to the Democratic party.

The Senator who objects will instantly become a party leader.

Credibility of the vote for everyone requires investigation. It is also a matter of justice. When wrongdoing goes uninvestigated and with no trial or accountability, credibility in the system is undermined, if not overtly shattered.

I believe we also need to be aware of the dangers of factionalizing. It's one thing to want to distinguish oneself from apocalyptic evangelicals and professional liars, but perhaps more care is in order in purging those who vote the reality based ticket but have beliefs and points of view that seem odd or threatening.

At a certain point, timidity in making the assertions mostly for the reason of appearances may suggest vanity, in being afraid to be seen to be excessive, or wrong. We are all plagued by self-importance and vanity. We all need to keep an eye on ourselves.

But instead of factionalizing and purging people with excessive views, or choosing up which front page leaders we are going to call our daddy or mommy, shouldn't we be supporting the people who are outraged by attacks on the integrity of their votes?

Besides, we aren't talking just about ourselves. People questioning the vote include members of Congress and electors from several states. There have been or will be demonstrations in Pittsburgh, Nashville, Columbus, San Diego,Boston, San Francisco, and a symbolic march from outside Baltimore to Washington, D.C.

I should not be spending time on this. I don't make a living from politics and I'm neglecting other work. I will post this tonight and by the time I check in sometime tomorrow, it will have disappeared. But I am writing this now for one reason: January 6.

Like it or not, the only significant opportunity for voters to express their outrage at any credible suggestion that the integrity of the vote---which means their votes---will be today, tomorrow and January 6. In this particularly, I endorse the points made in the latest diary by boo: the integrity of the vote must be addressed in the 2004 election, and people held accountable for violating it; and January 6 is crucial to this.

I differ in that for me and I suspect for a lot of voters, the issue does includes voter intimidation, suppression and local fraud. It all bears on the credibility of this election, and the integrity of future elections.

A strong challenge must be made to the outcome of the 2004 election in Congress, and in the streets. In the streets, the issue of who should be there and who shouldn't becomes one of behavior, not credibility. Nobody cares or should care that the crowd includes people who think local Republicans cheated, and those who think there was a national conspiracy, and those who believe that Kerry really won, or in a fair election, had the votes to win.

The issue is focused on the credibility of the vote, based on the lack of integrity in the 2004 election.

For the reality based, let me remind you of the reality of passion, and of pain, and of the uses of intuition along with arguments based on facts, statistics and precedents.

I speak as, in a small way, a veteran of the Civil Rights and antiwar movements. I remember the Chicago Seven: the intellectual Tom Hayden, the Black Panther Bobby Seale, the Yippie leaders Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, among the young lawyers and veteran activists. It was a remarkable crosssection of the times, especially since it was selected by hostile prosecutors. But it represented the kind of coalition that was needed, and in fact reflected reality: they were all really against the war and racism.

For what they are worth in this debate, I recall the words, many years later, of Abbie Hoffman: "We were reckless, we were headstrong, we were impatient, we were excessive. But goddammit we were right."

The Morality is Save the Most Powerful

What is the operative definition of morality for this Bushie administration? Be santimonious about issues which seem to protect the innocent, but come down hard on the powerless without knowing or caring if they are innocent or not. It is a morality of exquisite cynicism, designed to appeal to the worst in everyone: selfishness masked by denial.

There is so much that is basically immoral about the Iraqnam debacle that to single out the worst is difficult. But high on the list must be the utter disregard for people whose only crime might well be that they are powerless. Not only has the Bushie government indiscriminately swept up people into prisons in Iraq and Cuba (along with suspects who might be legitimate if they worked a little to prove it), and kept them imprisoned without trial or even charges, but now they apparently want to make permnanent incarceration without charge a policy. There hasn't been a greater threat to basic human rights in the democratic West for more than a century.

The idea that you keep some bad guys from doing harm while the odds are you are unjustly imprisoning a lot of innocent but powerless people is the mark of cowardice, as well as the injustice of totalitarianism. All for dubious political insurance, and out of sheer arrogance, fear, contempt and laziness.

In effect you are declaring war against your own people in order to protect them. But of equal importance, you are affirming the terrorist analysis that in America only the powerful matter, and the way to challenge American power is to go after it with equally effective violence. That's the inevitable effect of a policy that says that justice and rules of conduct come a distant second to naked power of the most powerful and arrogant but apparently most cowardly.

With a policy like this, stated or unstated, it's time to call Guantanamo by its correct name: an American concentration camp.

Top News Article Reuters.com

For those with a Washington Post subscription, the original article is here.

New blogifying:

our friend at Blue Voice has posted a couple of year end pieces. Nice pictures, too.

one of a growing number of protests of voting fraud leading up to January 6 

The Baltimore to Washington March

Save Our Votes March
"From SELMA to WASHINGTON: 40 Years Marching For Our Voting Rights"
Jan. 4th, 2005 through Jan. 6th, 2005
Savage MD to Washington DC
Begins Tuesday at 10AM, January 4th, Arrives Thursday January 6th at the Rally to Defend Democracy at the Federal Capitol in Washington DC.
Ohio Election Fraud (Formerly "Fairness")

Other events: Rally for the Republic events at 7 p. in Boston on Jan. 3 (there is an ongoing vigil outside Senator Kerry's house in Boston right now), rallies in San Diego and Nashville on January 2, and in addition to the rally in SF noted below, a Rally for the Republic in SF on January 4. The above link is probably a good source for ongoing info as this gains momentum.

And San Francisco!

On January 3, a rally and press conference at noon to urge
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer to join House members in challenging the 2004 presidential election results. Petitions with thousands of signatures will be presented to a Boxer deputy. Several civic organization leaders will speak at the rally.

JANUARY 3 NOON 1700 MONTGOMERY ST. SAN FRANCISCO
or meet at Embarcadero transit stop at 11 a. and walk together
For more details:

Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club

This is the same day as the rally in Columbus, Ohio, which is shaping up to a big gathering, with union participation. Also in Columbus on the 3rd and 4th, the launching of the Freedom Winter project, which will climax on the 4th as buses leave Columbus for the rally in DC.

"We are not whining for a lost election, we are crying out for a fair one!" Rev. Jesse Jackson

Let Them Eat PR

The Bush administration has dispatched a major official---well, at least they hope he will be in 2009--Jeb Bush, plus a promise for a geometrically increased pot of money to aid tsunami victims in Asia, which the media is in the process of dutifully reporting.

Let's hope they also report on whether this amount of aid actually gets there. Usually the Bushies count on them not to. So they could announce their sweeping "No Child Left Behind Act" and then quietly de-fund it, or their tremendous aid against AIDS in Africa in a Rose Garden lovefest, and then neglect to allocate the bucks.

Their record in general is pretty poor, as reported by the This Modern World blog:

"According to a poll, most Americans believe the United States spends 24 percent of its budget on aid to poor countries; it actually spends well under a quarter of 1 percent.

Bush administration officials help create that perception gap. Fuming at the charge of stinginess, Mr. Powell pointed to disaster relief and said the United States "has given more aid in the last four years than any other nation or combination of nations in the world." But for development aid, America gave $16.2 billion in 2003; the European Union gave $37.1 billion. In 2002, those numbers were $13.2 billion for America, and $29.9 billion for Europe.

Making things worse, we often pledge more money than we actually deliver. Victims of the earthquake in Bam, Iran, a year ago are still living in tents because aid, including ours, has not materialized in the amounts pledged. And back in 2002, Mr. Bush announced his Millennium Challenge account to give African countries development assistance of up to $5 billion a year, but the account has yet to disperse a single dollar."

This Modern World

D-Day the Sixth of January

Representative John Conyers has formally announced that he will object to the counting of Ohio's electors:

As you know," writes Rep. John Conyers in his public letter, "on January 6, 2005, at 1:00 P.M, the electoral votes for the election of the president are to be opened and counted in a joint session of Congress. I and a number of House Members are planning to object to the counting of the Ohio votes, due to numerous unexplained irregularities in the Ohio presidential vote, many of which appear to violate both federal and state law."

In an interview quoted in the following report, which summarizes many of the problems with the 2004 vote, Conyers says he is "confident" that Senators will join in the objection. Stay tuned.

San Francisco Bay View - National Black Newspaper of the Year

It's Not Just Ohio Anymore

More than 80% of the presidential votes in 2004 were made on or counted by machines owned and operated by two companies run by Republicans with strong ties to GW Bush. That's the U.S. presidential election.

Among the conclusions of a new study of exit polling and voting in 2004 conducted by two professors at the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at University of Illinois at Chicago:
"In an accurate count of a free and fair election, the strong likelihood is that Kerry
would have been the winner of the popular vote."

That's the POPULAR vote for the entire country. Details of this study can be found in the daily kos diary linked below:

Daily Kos :: The 2004 Election Was Stolen

Who's your president?

Who is leading the western effort to aid the nations hit by the earthquake and tsunami in the Indian Ocean? Is it Bush? No, he's clearing brush and riding his bike in Texas on vacation. Is it his buddy in Britian, Tony Blair? No, he's on vacation in Egypt.

But there is a president on the job. Name of Clinton. President Bill Clinton. He's in England, and has spoken out on the disaster, and offered concrete plans and leadership on how the rich western countries might respond. The EU leaders are responding to his ideas, and are organizing accordingly.

Eventually Bush got the message. Nothing like Clinton envy to get the heart started. So a little while ago Bush finally made a public announcement and set some wheels turning on organizing aid.

Some observers are pointing out that some of the affected nations are predominately Muslim, and an opportunity to show compassion is being lost, which only reinforces the image of the U.S. as selfish and self-centered. We lose 3,000 on 9-11 and the world shakes, and it affects an election more than three years later. Upwards of 120,000 die because of a single event elsewhere, and our government's response is affectless, stingy and late (though American individuals and even some corporations are responding quickly and generously.)

Guardian Unlimited The Guardian Clinton puts onus on the wealthy

Your January Social Calendar

Protests are being organized in several cities in early January to draw attention to the abuses in Ohio and elsewhere of the integrity of the vote.

The one with the most definition at the moment is in Columbus, Ohio on January 3. Jesse Jackson and his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition is behind this one, and a bevy of organizations are signing up, including Moveon.org. It starts at 2p., at the Riffe Center across from the Ohio State Capitol. More info from Rainbow/PUSH.

There's a rally at Fanueil Hall in Boston also on January 3. San Francisco is just starting to organize one for January 4. And Washington, D.C. will hold a noon rally on January 6, the day Congress is scheduled to say yea or nay to the election of GW Bush. Info on these as they develop can be found at ReDefeat Bush, which is organizing a counter-Inaugural in DC on January 20.

If you can't be in DC on the 6th, I'd be hanging around the TV set, tuned into C-Span. There are unconfirmed reports that at least 14 Representatives will refuse to validate the Bush victory, and several Senators have received thousands of emails requesting that they do the same in the Senate. It takes just one member of each house to open debate.

At the moment it seems unlikely it will get any further than that, and the GOPer majority will prevail, but even debate will be an amazing thing. One assumes that as this becomes a serious possibility, elements of both sides are quietly but feverishly strategizing on all that could happen that day.

The likelihood of something significant happening may depend on how many people turn out for these rallies. The media needs faces to take pictures of, and politicians need to know they've got supporters and political cover.

And this younger generation badly needs some new leaders out there, holding their elders' feet to the fire. So far they don't seem to understand that cyberspace isn't visible to TV cameras, let alone the public. Better camera fodder than cannon fodder, boys and girls.

Tsunami

The news continues to develop concerning the magnitude 9.0 earthquake in the Indian ocean that generated tsunamis responsible for some 60,000 deaths and counting in several Asian nations. It is a disaster unparalleled in recent times and will test the responsiveness of the world in preventing the death toll from rising due to disease from bad water and lack of healthful food. Already the UN humanitarian aid chief has criticized wealthy nations for being stingy in their first response. But as the news trends towards showing that many victims were American and European tourists, the efforts at rescue and relief are apt to intensify.

In the coming weeks, as the world begins to absorb the dimensions of the effects, there will be some sober assessments of what's needed both to warn populations of danger (the tsunami took several hours to reach shore) and to organize response and relief. It should be a wake up call, though there's no guarantee much will be done about it, once the story is displaced or descends into soap opera about individual victims and the video they left behind.

It may perhaps provide some imagery to the warnings of scientists about the effects of global heating as sea levels rise in some places, and storms become more frequent and violent, and show up where they are not expected, like the rains that would otherwise be making headlines now pummeling central and southern California.

But it will probably be a long time before people begin to wonder why the nations of the world, especially the richest and most powerful, are so intent on pouring resources and expertise into vast armies and armadas and technologies of destruction, when that effort, that organization, that commitment and those resources are needed to provide relief and anticipatory protection from the many kinds of destruction that don't require the direct participation of humanity in causing them, though indirectly we contribute to them or even precipitate them.

Here in the U.S., it might re-focus our attention on what it means to be sending our National Guard troops away from where they are the traditional resource for disaster response, and further what the sharply declining enrollments in the Guard because of Iraqnam will mean to the future, when the tsuanmi hits these shores.

Investigate the Vote

Here's today's link to a blog, which uses the same template as this one so don't be freaked out, that explains the significance of the latest move by the Kerry-Edwards campaign to support court fights to challenge and investigate the vote in Ohio. He does a nice job of putting it all in context, suggesting that while the votes involved are enough to turn the election to Kerry, it's likely that the investigation will extend far beyond the upcoming official awarding of the election to Bush, and become Bush's Watergate. (Unfortunately, that would leave us with Cheney instead of Kerry, if the analogy holds.)

Election Scam-o-rama

There are other intriguing events unfolding in Ohio, including the attempt of the secretary of state in charge of the election there to avoid answering any questions about it, under oath or otherwise.

So what needs to happen next? There's the possibility of something breaking before Congress convenes to validate the results in a few weeks, resulting in some high drama on Capitol Hill. But in the long run, while the Kerry people stay low-key and the major news media do likewise, what's needed is (1) some youthful rabble-rousing, some twentysomething leaders to emerge at the head of vast numbers of demonstrators, to give the media something to take pictures of, and (2) some hungry young journalists eager to make their names by exposing election fraud and corruption in the dark heart of Bushness.

What would Buddha do? Happy holidays 2004

A Christmas Message
from Phineas Dash

Here in far northern California it is sunny and warm, the air is like spring. There are birds everywhere, feeding for the oncoming winter.

It is getting warmer and drier here year by year. Short term it's good. An unusually good crab season offshore. But in the longterm the wildlife, the flora and fauna, aren't built for this. The place will change, and there will be traumas.

The effects of global heating, whatever they will be, are now inevitable. There is always the possibility of some mitigation, and though time may clarify the specific problems, its passage may also render possible remedies either impossible or beyond the resources and will of that time.

If global heating were all we faced, if we were a society up to that kind of challenge as it appeared even a few years ago we could be, then the future would be less bleak. But the election last month revealed to at least this observer that America is truly in the grip of something that transcends science and politics, and reason. Not even religious differences explain it. History is being shaped by psychological forces that perhaps only Jung approached understanding. He contended that the apocalypse of this civilization was inevitable, though he could not predict the form. But his dreams towards the end of his life weren't comforting. He was, however, reassured that his dreams told him that at least some members of the human race would survive.

I try to discount the waning of hopes inherent in my advancing age. But of course I cannot. Yet it seems to me the signs are there. The decline of civilization has been going on for some time. At the same time, advances in understanding were being made, and spreading to more people. Europe, the source of so much violence in the 20th century, moves awkwardly yet insistently towards a political unity based on reasonably sound principles, and should be the hope of the world.

But America's fall may trump that force. There have been many periods of crisis and troubles in human history, but there are a few things different now. First, the power over life is much greater, and is in a small set of uncertain but arrogant human hands. That's the life of individuals, of groups, of human civilization and of at least the "higher" forms of animal and vegetable life on the planet. Second, we are as individuals more dependent on interlocking phenomena that we don't understand. The grid. The system of food distribution. Water. Few Americans or citizens of other westernized countries are close to basic resources, or have any experience in obtaining them directly. Societal breakdown does not have to be very large to be incredibly extensive and costly in human suffering and human life. A house of cards is far too simple an analogy, yet it is apt in the sense it gives of a precarious interconnection.

What are we to do? Perhaps we will have time to work on the answers. In preparation, I'd say, tend to your psyche, learn to help each other---and this is perhaps the greatest threat to us as individuals, that we are so separate---and keep representing what you believe in. Perhaps our convictions and actions will help. Perhaps they will be remembered as an example to those who survive.

In my generation we've been expecting sudden apocalypse, instant karma, since the late 1960s. In a sense the last 30 years or so have been a bonus, and we may have 30 more, who knows? But the fact that some have cried wolf before doesn't mean the wolf won't finally come. The signs are here. It may be more of a slow motion apocalypse, though things do bend before they suddenly break. Hope is a committment, so we work in hope. But for those who are enjoying this Christmas in relative prosperity and peace, it's worth taking a moment to appreciate it more fully, more sharply. Because next year may be very different.

Christmas Horror Story
as told by Theron Dash

In case you missed it, here's a heartchilling tale to contemplate, as we Wal-Mart our way to the bottom.

There are 3,066 counties in America; just about all of us live in one. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, an American who works full time at the federal minimum wage cannot afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment in 3,062 of those counties.

So except for three counties in Illinois and one in Florida, a minimum wage worker, on his or her own, with or without a family to support, will likely be homeless.

That's assuming that 70% of the income goes to trivialities like food, clothing, transportation, medicines, etc. The rule of thumb used to be that housing should take no more than 25% of total income, but the government figures that 30% is good enough.

This is the United States of America. Not just the country where social justice became a political principle. But the richest nation in the world. The richest nation the world has ever seen.

And it only gets worse. Rent and utilities for a two-bedroom apartment---crowded, but enough for a mother and father and a couple of kids---requires three fulltime incomes at minimum wage. Which is probably how many families do afford it: one parent works 80 hours, the other 40.

We aren't talking here about the unemployed. Or the underemployed. We are talking about the overemployed, the dead on their feet. And with two people working, that's even more for transportation, and then there's daycare.

As for the single person, good luck. Sleep in a ditch and dream of being one of that glorious top 1% that has seen its income rise by 200% since Reagan's election. Die without health care. We don't actually care. Come back as an "unborn child", then we'll talk.

Our evangelical moralists apparently don't believe in Darwinism when it comes to nature, but they sure seem to believe in it fervently when it comes to their fellow Americans.

This story would make Scrooge cry. But not our Republican rulers and their rich and morally bankrupt friends. For them it is the best of times.

May they and their bankers meet the ghosts of Christmas Past (say, the Great Depression) and Future (the Bush Apocalypse). Not that the threat of a sparsely attended funeral cuts any ice with them. They'll be Raptured by then, right?

It's a far, far righter thing we do than we have ever done before.

In the meantime, everybody enjoy The Little Match Girl on Christmas night. Just be sure you're looking at the TV set, and not out the window.

Cause next year you might be looking in the window, and into the mirror.


The Seattle Times: Nation & World: Report cites scarcity of low-income housing

Man of the Year?

After a brief boost after the "election," GW Bush's approval rating is once again below 50%, according to GOP-favoring Gallup.For the first time, more than half of Americans surveyed say the Iraq invasion was a mistake. Most disapprove of how the Bushies are mishandling Iraqnam now.

Now the Civil Liberties Union has uncovered FBI emails referring to an Executive Order that suggests our moral values prez ordered "inhumane interrogation techniques"--i.e. torture, of prisoners in Iraq.


American Civil Liberties Union : FBI E-Mail Refers to Presidential Order Authorizing Inhumane Interrogation Techniques

Void the "Vote"

"The epic legal battle over Ohio's presidential vote count is back in the state Supreme Court, with an election challenge claiming George W. Bush was wrongly declared the winner on Nov. 2 and seeking a court-ordered reversal of that victory. "

"Meanwhile, efforts to recount Ohio's vote may have been fatally tainted by the Republican Party, raising questions of what the GOP has to hide, and prompting demands for criminal prosecution. "

The Free Press -- Independent News Media - Election 2004

In the mood for a grumpy Winter Solstice column? A Letter from the Dead Novel office? Try Blue Voice. (Prohibited where void.)
Neat photo, too.

In case you missed the SF Chronicle review of James Hillman's A Terrible Love of War, selected as a Best Book of 2004 by the SF Chronicle, you can find it along with many other fine reviews at Books In Heat. Neat photos, too.

example: election racism in Ohio

Ohio and the Future

by Phineas Dash

The Ohio recount is proceeding, and reports are that the bureaucrats are doing their best to subvert it. I learned the ways of petty bureaucrats while serving on the faculty committee on student affairs as a token student representative. They wear you down. They use technicalities when it suits them, and ignore the rules when it suits their purposes. If there is a hue and cry and something gets passed they don’t like, they accept it quietly, and when everybody is exhausted after the fight, they subvert it, then change it back at the next opportunity.

So it goes in Ohio. You expect that from bureaucrats. But there has to be some countervailing power. There are activists there. Apparently some of the Democrats are gaining respect for the sheer stubbornness of the Greens. Greens certainly can be stubborn.

But the activists have lives and eventually they have to earn livings, take finals, feed the baby. The bureaucrats are forever, especially when the Republican fat cats finance them.

Where are the leaders? You might well ask. They are arguing over whether Ohio is worth it. Some say Ohio is the past. It’s time to organize for the future. The real fight is over the party chairperson. Reform in the state parties. The election is so over, so last month. Time to get serious about the nitty gritty, the block chairperson, the state blog.

The conflict is in some ways just the usual reflexive either/or. Some people are appropriately concentrating on organizing for the next elections. They're obsessed with who the next chair of the Democratic party will be. Other people are fighting it out in Ohio, with many supporters obsessed with what's going on there. There's plenty of people to go around.

But there's a more crucial point, and it has many facets. It is this: Ohio is the future.

As someone said in a daily kos diary comment, what's the point of party reform if the votes aren't counted?

There is nothing more important in American politics than the integrity of the vote. It all starts there, it all ends there.

It is a question of justice. It is specifically a question of civil rights, and even more specifically a question of voting rights for African Americans.

At this point I mention for those who don't know it, that although Republican crimes may have been very widespread, at the moment it is particularly clear that it was concentrated in the African American neighborhoods and precincts in Ohio and in Florida, and other less publicized states. That's why you're seeing a black congressman, John Conyers, leading the fight there, and one of the last of the 1960s Civil Rights leaders, Jesse Jackson, who still speaks with the authority of someone who was at Selma, when he says this is the same as Selma.

The Democratic party committed itself to fighting for voting rights for African Americans many years ago, certainly in 1963. It was a political decision, and it was a principled decision. The Kennedys knew that if they supported voting rights, the Democrats would lose the South for a generation or more. They did it anyway.

But if the effort stopped there, it was in vain. If Democrats don't fight for voting rights in 2004, in Ohio, in Florida and elsewhere, then we dishonor our past, we dishonor ourselves, and incidentally, we throttle the future of our party.

I say this as a non-African American Democrat, who as a teenager marched behind Martin Luther King in Washington in 1963. One reason I marched was so that my President would know he had political support to do the right thing. He did.

We keep a focus on Ohio because justice demands it. Injustice in the recent past becomes the cause of the present, and if we don't rise to this occasion, we subvert the future.

We subvert the future in another, very practical way, for those of you who are concerned with the nuts and bolts of the Democratic Party's future. Here in California we begin to see the future that the rest of the country will soon see. There used to be a majority called white. But today there is no majority. And there will be no majority race in America pretty soon.

We are a multiracial society, with a growing number of people who are themselves multiracial. If we can't consciously commit to a common cause of justice regarding African Americans, who have been subject to injustice for most of our history, we aren't going to be ready for that future.

Moreover, if the Democratic party does not aggressively recruit more leaders of many racial backgrounds, we will be a party of only the past.

Ohio is crucial to our credibility as a party, with the African American community and with other communities outside the usual power structures.

It is crucial to the party's credibility with voters of all races who cared so much about this election. I made phone calls as a volunteer for the Kerry campaign, and talked to people in battleground states in every region. People were passionate. They were doing everything they could. They were absolutely determined to have their vote count.

We pay attention to the 2004 vote for the people who stood for five hours in the rain in Florida to vote early. We pay attention to Ohio for the people who stood for ten hours and still didn't get to vote on election day.

We do it for the people who were told at the polls by men in dark suits that Democrats vote on Wednesday, come back then.

We do it for people who don't speak or read English well, but who have the same right to vote, but who were either badly served or more likely, taken advantage of.

We do it because America deserves better than the scandal of a banana republic, where the voting machines are owned and operated by a partisan of the party in power.

We do it because all of this was wrong. And we do it because the people who were determined to vote and were denied, are the future.

And we must do it. I don't know why more prominent Democrats aren't visibly in this fight. I do know the impression it is leaving with people: that the Democrats must have committed just as much fraud as the Republicans, so they are afraid of being exposed if they question what Republicans did.

But as important as celebrity voices these days in capturing media attention, we should not depend on them. We are a little too dependent on daddy. If it's not Daddy Clinton then it's Daddy Kerry. Sometimes I think so many people voted for Bush, not for President (because they would have had to consider competence) but for Daddy.

We don't have any daddy. I admire John Kerry, and I wish he was more visible on this issue, but he seems to feel it isn’t appropriate, or at least not yet. He’s done some things, but some things are never enough. Because one problem with depending on daddy is that daddy can never do enough. If he issues statements of support, then daddy should go to court. If he goes to court, then daddy should go on television.

When we marched on Washington in 1963, JFK and RFK could look out the window and see 300,000 people, and they knew that the world could see them, too. When we marched on the Pentagon in 1968, LBJ ignored us. When we marched on Washington in 1971 behind John Kerry, Nixon circled the school buses around the White House. But in 1963, JFK invited the leaders of the March on Washington into the White House. That was the difference. That was the leadership.

Of course we hope that the efforts in Ohio would lead to a just change in the outcome, because our country's future would immediately be brighter if John Kerry were President. But if this election wasn't stolen, there were serious attempts made to steal it. The crime is in the commission, not in its success.

In 2000 we left it up to daddy to fix the problems before 2004. But our quiet only enticed our cynical adversaries whose only morality is that their side wins.

There’s a march scheduled in New York this weekend. I hope people show up for it, and there are many more. Maybe we should all march to Ohio. Kent State would be a good place to meet.

We have to let them know, we won't be fooled again. That's about the present, and the future.

The Faith-Based Missile

While global heating threatens the world, and Homeland Security can't even agree on a list of places to protect from terrorism, at least we've got a missile defense system.

Apart from no missiles it can defend against, the system has another notable flaw:

It don't work.

Yesterday there was yet another test of our Star Wars shield missile. It failed.

What's new about that? You might well ask, since every test has failed.

Well, those were tests of missiles in development. This was a test of a missile like the ones that are already in the ground. Yes, there are seven of them. It's part of the new strategy, probably learned from those friendly pharamaceutical companies, of putting the stuff on the market before it's tested for effectiveness and safety.

The Bushies have poured $15 billion into this so far. That's a lot of armor some guys and gals didn't get over in Iraqnam.

The test alone cost $85 million. That's your Social Security right there; yours and all your relatives.

The world's most expensive scarecrows. And they're buried in the ground.

A whole other meaning to faith-based.

$85-million U.S. missile test goes nowhere

The U.S. Leads the World---Towards Apocalypse

With evidence mounting that global heating is leading to disasters even faster than predicted, with costs in disaster relief, reconstruction, etc. mounting rapidly as well, the latest climate conference seems poised to do...not so much. (As Jon Stewart would say.)

The conference is divided into two camps, this report says, the U.S., and everybody else. But among everybody else are those loathe to offend the nation with most of the bombs and missiles, which is also a big greedy customer for oil. So the world burns.

Science News Article | Reuters.com

Investigate the Vote: Alerting the FBI

Rep. John Conyers has requested an FBI investigation into possible tampering with voting machines prior to the Ohio recount.

This link is to a dubious site but the letter is reproduced in full.

The Blue Lemur - Progressive Politics and Media News ? Conyers? letter to FBI in response to allegations of Triad tampering

It's Not Who Votes That Counts

It's who counts the votes.

This link is to a diary on the daily Kos blog site which summarizes the main suit filed in Ohio alleging purposeful fraud, and maintaining that Kerry won the state by nearly 150,000 votes.

Further down in the comments you'll find several people involved in the suit or even tangentially in support of it who have been threatened by right wing goons, and in one case, apparently followed and forced off the road by well-heeled goons who seem to have sophisticated survelliance equipment and skills.

The establishment politicians and media ignoring it, evidence of serious wrongdoing and efforts to expose it championed by marginal figures, threats and intimidation...it has all the earmarks of the kind of scandal that eventually will define this time. It's Love Canal, Karen Silkwood and Watergate rolled into one.

Daily Kos :: Arnebeck Lawsuit: Summary, Explanation

Brother Sites News

Star Trek fans may want to check out the review of the first episodes of Enterprise this season, plus an account of a visit to the Enterprise set, and further down (below the June 30, 2004 entry) an essay on the first Star Trek feature film, which begins the Trekalog of all 10 Star Trek features. It's all at Soul of Star Trek.

(Brother Morgan Dash works on that site, under a pseudonym. Don't tell anybody.)

This is what your God wants?

The last great trees hundreds of years old, the anchors of one of the last great forests in northwest America, "one of the richest terrestrial ecosystems in the hemisphere," are to be cut down for the short-term gain of some big company? Trees that cannot be replaced for many centuries, especially if the forest that sustains them dies, all for money and politcal gain? All made possible by the Bush administration's deliberate changes in environmental and forest management policy.

This is the new moral order, bringing God back into policy making? This is what your God wants?

New sales reignite timber battles / Bush allows harvest of larger, older trees in northern counties

And while other nations are working to stop harming the last whales with loud noises used for military sonar devices--these creatures, the closest species to humans in the ocean, who depend on sound like we depend on sight--- when there is no war on any ocean, nor any active ocean-going enemies, but the U.S. refuses to cooperate or to stop its own damaging practices---this is what your God wants? Trees don't matter, forests don't matter, ecosystems don't matter, whales don't matter, the oceans don't matter, Iraqi children don't matter, not even American soldiers matter---Republican fat cats are the only species that matter. This is what your God says?

Testimony of David Cobb, Green Party prez candidate, to the Conyers committee, which includes allegations of apparent tampering with voting machines before the recount.

At the very least, this account deserves thorough investigation, and reporting by our alleged Fourth Estate.

Cobb Testifies Before Congressional Forum in Ohio: Reveals Shocking Allegation of New Evidence of Intentional Tampering with Voting Machines

Or are "dissident groups" of African Americans and progressives the only ones who care about the integrity of voting in America?

Investigate the Vote: Ohio Testimony

The Free Press -- Independent News Media - Election 2004

We were perhaps giving the American media too much credit. The 2004 election was stolen in Ohio, but that's not important enough to cover today. Not when the Scott Peterson verdict is in.

If and when these facts become recognized, it will perhaps also be remembered that GW Bush made one last campaign stop, on election day itself (a rarity for any candidate, if not unique), and that was to campaign headquarters in Columbus, Ohio.

If there is any justice left, there will be indictments of election officials in Columbus, at the very least.

not like those corrupt countries where the voting machines are owned and operated by partisans of the party in power...

Investigate the Vote: Kerry Requests Investigations in Ohio

It's just after midnight, and this is the first story coming out of Ohio, but this is likely to be making news all day: Through his lawyers, today John Kerry will request of the election officials in Ohio that they investigate a total of 11 separate kinds and instances of possible voting irregularities, questions and procedures involving the 2004 election. Though the statement says the outcome is not expected to change, the total number of votes in question is sufficient to change the outcome.

ONN. Ohio News Now: Kerry lawyer asks for visual inspection of some Ohio ballots

Morality x 4

Four articles in the Sunday San Francisco Chronicle illustrate different points worth making on the difficult subject of morality in relation to political decision-making.

The first is an Insight piece which lays out the evidence behind a point of view that's well known in certain places (like San Francisco) but which may come as a surprise elsewhere. I first heard it from a gay man who was a Biblical scholar: it disputes the interpretation that many accept that the Bible specifically forbids homosexuality, or calls it immoral; and further, it points out many other injunctions in the same book of the Bible that fundamentalists often cite, that are clearly not considered moral, such as slavery.

This provides an opportunity for those who believe homosexuality is ipso facto immoral to examine the text, so here's a chance for this evidence to get beyond San Francisco.

That being said, the accompanying picture---of two big, pretty ugly men kissing---is the kind of in-your-face assertion that may sell papers in San Francisco but is precisely what alienates people who might be willing to concede the point that in today's world, in Red states as well as Blue, homosexuals are thoroughly integrated into society, and are in most respects just like everybody else. They might then be willing to concede that the Biblical evidence on the morality of homosexuality is at least unclear. But what they understandably react against is being forced to see behavior that is essentially private, and they'd rather not see; so they regard those pictures, with some justification, as having their noses rubbed in it.

And let's not pretend the Chronicle's motives in running this picture are entirely noble and idealistic. Like other media, they do it to mollify some readers and provoke others. It may well be that the Democrats lost this election when the first pictures of same-sex couples kissing after their marriage ceremonies in San Francisco were endlessly repeated on network and cable news, not because of news value but for sensationalism sake.

In some ways the support for gay rights as a Civil Rights issue is akin to the decisions of Kennedy and others to support Civil Rights and the Voting Rights act in the 60s, knowing full well that Democrats would lose the South for generations. But in other ways, it was just bad timing. However, let's both sides face the reality. It's the pictures that did it. The rest we might actually be able to reason about.

The Bible tells me so / Religion in the Heartland is more complex than those of us in the blue states sometimes think

The article linked here is about teaching evolution and/or "intelligent design." This is one of those subjects that gets discussed on a purity vs. purity basis, and so goes nowhere. The scientific purity says Darwinism is 100% correct, while the fundamentalist purity says evolution is 100% wrong.

The indefensibility of both positions is what has provided an opening for the Intelligent Design theorists. For example, in this article the I.D. proponent turns the tables on the scientists and says they are the dogmatists, not those who cite the Bible. He has a point, which many scientists acknowledge, though they'd never admit it in this particular debate. The neo-Darwinists have been attacked by other biologists for a number of dogmatic statements. It appears, for instance, that strict Darwinian natural selection may not apply below a certain threshhold of lifeform: to bacteria, for instance, or molds. And even in more apparently complex lifeforms, there may be other factors involved in what gets passed down, what is selected, and on what basis. The dogma of the so-called "selfish gene" is questioned by reputable scientists, for example.

On the other hand, the idea that the earth is 4,000 or 6,000 years old, as somebody says the Bible says, or that humans didn't evolve from other animal forms, is so antithetical to everything science says and does, that anyone who believes this will find themselves unqualified to get into a non-fundamentalist college or get a job even remotely having to do with science. This is the true tragedy of extending this debate into the schools.

There's more to be said on this subject at another time, but for now let's use this article to illustrate that it's not dogma versus the scientific method every time. That this person cites the Bible in defense of his intelligent design theory is not in itself non-reality based, if he cites it as evidence of past observations (as one cites an indigenous legend) or point of view. But citing it as Divine Truth makes it religion, and not in the realm of knowledge. So while he says the scientists are defending a religion (and metaphorically, this is accurate---though fundamentalists are not big on metaphor), he is trying to pass off faith-based theory---religion---as science.

That's how tricky this all gets, partly because both sides insist on extreme and oversimplified positions. It's the Crossfire of consciousness, our substitute for informed debate.

Teaching evolution as theory not fact / Intelligent design booster speaks out

You have to give this much to the Bushies---they know which buttons to push. Lots of mediaheads thought Bush had gone off the deep end when he devoted part of his State of the Union address, not to Iraq or prison torture or the economy, but steroids in baseball as an important political issue.

Recent so-called revelations (stories based on alleged Grand Jury testimony still under seal) started a firestorm, more or less led by the less than Red State advocate, the San Francisco Chronicle. Talk about leaping to conclusions and making a broad accusation of immorality, either out of sincere outrage, or to sell papers or get votes.

Does anybody actually know what steroids are, what the substances involved actually do, what the health risks actually are, etc.? Why do people go balllistic over some substances they call Drugs but not others which are also potent drugs, but which are advertised on TV as miracle cures, though most of the commercials consist of recitations of awful side effects---drugs that may be really unsafe when used as directed, even more unsafe when used as a cure-all, and are basically untested by anybody outside the employ of the company that profits from their sale? Why is marijuana the devil's weed and people go to jail for it, and even known medicinal purposes are outlawed, and to make it even more absurd, the entire substance known as hemp, which for centuries provided paper and fiber that nobody got high from, is also outlawed? While alcohol and cigarettes are legal, when they kill hundeds of thousands of people a year, including people entirely innocent of using them, and we all know this?

Let's get a little sane on the subject of steroids. In the very same newspaper on the same day as its editor defends its anti-steroids in baseball crusade, a column by Joan Ryan gives another point of view which ought to be considered. Perhaps a truly informed debate on steroids and health would be in order?

Let's get real about sports and steroids

Finally, something for Christians to consider, as well as those of other faiths. The word "values" implies assigning a number, a priority, to a particular act or issue. What do you value? means What do you value more than other things? If you value X, do you value it over Y, or are they equally important?

So while one thing may not be "more moral" than another, we do set priorities. Those priorities are often the first thing we forget in the emotional firestorm of controversies. Suddenly the issue of the day seems the most important. Other priorities, even higher ones, are forgotten, much to the joy of those exploiting these controversies for their personal gain or political agenda, or both.

So the move currently underway among some progressives to redefine their issues in terms of values and morality is not some radical idea, or even some cynical re-branding technique. It is an attempt to remind us of the moral dimensions of issues, so we can decide which we value, and in something like what order.

For example, this story on the morality of poverty. There are political questions involved---unregulated capitalism vs. government support---which may be pertinent, but may be smokescreens, or simply not as relevant as they appear. Because the question might well be, what is more important as a moral issue? Somebody's sexual behavior? Or poverty that could be allievated fairly easily, with a little attention and commitment? How often, for example, did Christ talk about helping the poor, versus condemning any sexual practices? In fact, the term "bleeding heart liberal" comes from the bleeding heart of Christ, bleeding for the poor and the sick and the suffering. What kind of a morality ignores that, and in fact makes fun of it, makes it into a curse? Some of us who voted Blue would like to know.

Pushing poverty into 'moral-values' debate / Some religious leaders trying to broaden discussion beyond abortion and marriage

Investigate the Vote: Kerry on the Case

What happens to conspiracy theory when there may be an actual conspiracy? You have to start taking each theory separately and seriously. Here's a very interesting theory as to why the assault on Fallujah began just after the election. Not to keep casualities off the news on election day (keeping casualities off the news has never been a problem for the Bushies) but to forestall questioning of election results as unpatriotic when Americans were going into battle. Well, maybe. But apart from the theory there is the welcome evidence that the Kerry people are aggressively investigating the vote steal in Ohio.

Inside The Election Fraud Battle - Think Kerry Is Not Involved In This Fight?

Rumors are also floating that a number of lawsuits will be filed in Ohio on Monday, and claims are being made of dramatic news to come from them. The mainstream press does seem to be paying a tiny bit more attention to the story. Clearly the effort must achieve results and a high profile before early January when Congress makes the election results official.

Right now it seems certain that when the time comes, black members of the House will object to Bush's legitimacy, as they did in 2000 (actually 2001.) But then they lacked even a single Senator to also object, which they needed to be effective (as we all saw---most of us for the first time---in Michael Moore's F 9/11.) There has to be enough evidence and enough outrage to inspire a Senator to take the political risk. Of course the highest possible drama would be if that were to be Senator John Kerry. But if this all gets that far that fast, there will be more than one Senator speaking out.

Investigate the Vote Update

The "forum" held by Rep. John Conyers on voting fraud in Ohio got very little coverage, either in the press or the political blogs. Yet there is nothing more important happening in America than exposing the fraud that gave George Bush the presidency, again.

But it's not over. Conyers is holding hearings in Ohio, and there are demonstrations scheduled in the state. The heat on the Ohio official in charge of the election (and shades of Katherine Harris, co-chair of the Bush campaign) is becoming intense, and there are reports that a former member of Congress, Dan Greenberg, and his wife were arrested for tresspassing while attempting to present a letter to this official.

Two organizations, People for the American Way and Common Cause, have jumped into the voting issue, and they present their own research and point of view on their web sites.

This link is to an AP report, the clearest we've seen so far on the outlines of what's going on. A couple of other links follow in separate posts.

Northwest Indiana News: nwitimes.com

This is a link to a blog covering the Conyers hearings. Much of it is uninformative but there are at least three very interesting bits here: an interview with the lawyer who maintains there are enough votes in question to change Ohio's outcome, a list of "coincidences", some of which reads like conspiracy theory but much of which makes a great deal of sense as the personnel for stealing the election, and the assertion that this isssue, and these hearings, are forging a new coalition of black activists and progressives (mostly white), not seen since Civil Rights days.

truthout, Conyers Hearings on Ohio Vote Fraud Coverage

A Guardian story on the Conyers stolen election hearings, focusing on Jesse Jackson.
Jackson considers this a civil rights issue, as important to deal with as Selma and voting rights for blacks in the 60s. In this he is not alone. Members of the Congressional Black Caucus were virtually alone in protesting the Florida swindle in 2000 on the floor of Congress. Minority precincts were targeted for abuses in Ohio, and so this is becoming the central political issue for African Americans, while the press and everyone else dozes.


Guardian Unlimited US elections 2004 Jesse Jackson: In Cleveland as in Kiev

Rum Deal

Hey, I wouldn't have signed on for another term if I thought I was going to be held accountable.

Donald Rumsfeld didn't exactly say that, but it might have crossed his mind as his feel-good "town meeting" with soldiers in Iraq turned into actual questions about their equipment, their pay and the stop-loss policy that's keeping some of them there beyond their tour or even enlistment.

It's not Rummie's fault, of course. Those damn nuisance insurgents, and Iraqi citizens who love freedom but would like to have the electricity and water they used to get. Besides, even though the Colonel there supported his soldiers and said that 95% of their vehicles don't have the proper armor, Rummie's generals protested they knew nothing about it.

Maybe they should limit the town meetings to Republican soldiers who sign a loyalty oath to George Bush, Dick Cheney and Rummie. You know, like during the free election campaign over here.

Here's the New YorkTimes/Washington Post story linked from the SF Chronicle:

Troops confront Rumsfeld, ask for better battle gear / Challenges from National Guardsmen bound for combat unnerve Pentagon chief

Other stories are even grimmer. Like veterans of Iraq already showing up at homeless shelters. More complaints about inadequate medical care for the injured when they return. And some soldiers ordered to Iraqnam with what John Kerry called the backdoor draft are suing the government. Army recruitment is at about half its targeted level, and nobody is real eager to join the National Guard anymore. There's some suggestion that medical personnel are already in short supply.

So who can Rummie go to? The reality-based problems are coming home to roost, and the faith-and-PR-based Bushies have got nothing. Except faith in their immoral war---immoral for the destruction of Iraq, the killing, maiming and stunting of Iraqi men, women and children; immoral for sending young people into crazy violence without the proper equipment and apparently with inadequate training and leadership (it's hard to read the new revelations about the horrific fate of Pat Tillman any other way), and with heartless treatment for them and their families when they're back.

Rule by Fear: Social Security is the New Terrorism

Over the next several months we're going to be hearing a lot about the Crisis of Social Security, as the Bushies push their latest privatization scheme for soaking the anxious middle class to benefit the rich and incompetent. We'll hear scary numbers and complex sounding analyses. But just about all we need to know about all of it is contained in a handy few hundred words of Paul Krugman's column in the New York Times linked below.

It turns out to be quite simple. There's a problem but...

"But it's a problem of modest size. The report finds that extending the life of the trust fund into the 22nd century, with no change in benefits, would require additional revenues equal to only 0.54 percent of G.D.P. That's less than 3 percent of federal spending - less than we're currently spending in Iraq. And it's only about one-quarter of the revenue lost each year because of President Bush's tax cuts - roughly equal to the fraction of those cuts that goes to people with incomes over $500,000 a year."

The Social Security scare has much less to do with economics and more to do with the Rabid Right agenda. Nor is there really an issue of fairness here: the media drones feed the perception that younger people are going to get hit up for the retirement of self-indulgent baby boomers. The truth is that middle class baby boomers have been paying higher payroll taxes for twenty years, so their retirement funds are paid for, despite the fact that the wealthy got their first round of tax cuts at about the same time---you know, in the 80s, the first time that Supply Side Economics failed horribly.

Why is sowing fear and making Social Security the domestic equivalent of Osama bin Laden so important to the Bushheads? Here's Krugman's conclusion:

"For Social Security is a government program that works, a demonstration that a modest amount of taxing and spending can make people's lives better and more secure. And that's why the right wants to destroy it."

Link to this column, copy it, and refer to it many times over the next year. It'll keep you sane. (The NY Times requires registration, but it's free and doesn't take long, and it's worth it just for Krugman's columns.)

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Inventing a Crisis

Abu Ghraib Continued

Documents reveal that the abuses continued at Abu Ghraib after the photographs of tortures stunned the country, scandalized U.S. allies and confirmed what U.S. adversaries said about American morality. In the throes of Hypocracy in America, we're about to see one of the architects of the torture policy be nominated for Attorney General.

Senator Patrick Leahy says he will make this an issue during the confirmation hearings of Albert Gonzales:

''The Bush administration circled the wagons long ago and has continually maintained that the abuses were the work of 'a few bad apples,' " Leahy said. ''But we know that the photos from Abu Ghraib do not depict an isolated incident. Abuses have occurred in many locations, including Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay, and in a number of other facilities within Iraq. I have long said that somewhere in the upper reaches of the executive branch a process was set in motion that rolled forward until it produced this scandal."

This story in the Boston Globe details the revelations, which come principally from the FBI:

Boston.com / News / Nation / Interrogators objected to tactics

Investigate the Vote

There are some major charges zipping around the Internet, of major GOPer malfeasance in multiple kinds of vote fraud and voter suppression, in charges made by an unidentified and unconfirmed RNC employee, and an indentified man in Florida with specific charges of soliciting ways to con the computerized voting system in Florida, made, he said, by a FLA Member of Congress of GOPer persuasion.

But all that is in the realm of let's see how it plays out. What's happening now is that the Ohio vote is now official, and Bush still leads but by approximately 20,000 fewer votes. (It's now about 119,000.) So now the official recount can begin, and it's going to.

Meanwhile there are stirrings in Washington: Congressman John Conyers is holding what would be congressional hearings to investigate the vote, if the Democrats had a majority, which they don't. And current DNC chair Terry Mc is committing the Democratic party to support investigating the 2004 election, with all necessary funding. The details are here in the Keith Olbermann blog, which is essentially his script on the subject for last night's show.

MSNBC -

In this connection, I'll impart a thought that I awoke with today. It's not exactly the strangest dream, but it did come out of that land of sleep thought. I woke up thinking of Nixon.

I woke up thinking of 1973, less than a year after Nixon's re-election. The first stories on Watergate had been published before the November election, but Americans choose to ignore them, and really did give Tricky a mandate---to the tune of 49 out of 50 states. (Hence the bumper sticker I pasted onto my guitar case which read: "Don't Blame Me, I'm From Massachusetts.") But after his re-inaugural, and in all his imperial presidential glory, the whole sorry mess started unraveling and by 1974, he and his entire administration were gone in disgrace.

So I wonder what we will be waking up to in 2005 and 2006.