Proving election fraud is not a one man job.

[Vektor]

I'd like to see the entire Democratic Party stand up for Kerry, and do their part to expose the fraud as well. We were ALL robbed when the Repukes stole the election (again) and subsequently, our democracy. Kerry has never failed to stand in defense of a fellow Democrat who has taken a hit. Just read his speeches in response to the Clinton impeachment proceedings, or the RW attacks on Murtha.

Kerry alone screaming "FRAUD!" especially with the proverbial "smoking gun" still yet to be found, would not have the effect that the whole Dem party standing in unity would.

As I told a friend recently, I knew the second the polls "reversed" on election night that we were being robbed. The following morning when Kerry conceded, I had no idea if he knew about the blatant thievery or not, but accepted his decision, mainly because I remembered how much of a pariah they made of Al Gore when he fought the "result" of the 2000 election, despite Gore's case being so very clear cut. They stopped the recount in FL when Bush and Gore got within 500 votes of each other, and the Supreme Court handed the boy chimp the presidency! How obvious can you get? Gore had every reason to refuse to accept that, but he was marginalized and called a sore loser just the same.

Fast forward four years, and now the Repukes have gotten a LOT more clever about how they steal elections. They pad the popular vote a little here and there in every state...they put more "paperless" voting machines in key swing states...they disenfranchise Dem voters in various locations, purge the voter rolls, deny provisional ballots...etc...

They stole the election, for sure, but they did it in so many ways and so many places, that the "smoking gun" that can successfully and irrefutably account for the 100,000 some-odd votes Bush "won with" in Ohio, and all the Kerry votes that mysteriously vanished, is an elusive prize indeed. Did they mess with a central tabulator somewhere? Was there tampering with individual machines? Did they disenfranchise enough Democrats to make "the difference?" Did they switch a tiny percentage of votes in multiple locations to add up to a "Bush win?"

You bet. And proving ALL that beyond a shadow of a doubt may be impossible, sadly. At best, it will take years.

I at least have to give Kerry the fact that there is no way he could have had that "smoking gun" gathered by the morning of Nov. 3rd which would have justified crying fraud. All those years spent as a prosecuting attorney have taught him all too well what stands up in a court of law, and what doesn't. So, he conceded, rather than draw any further negative attention to himself. He showed up at Bush's inauguration, and despite being booed by classless Bush supporters, he showed tremendous bravery, and did not falter. That took balls of steel.

My biggest source of bitterness about the stolen election is the fact that the ENTIRE DEMOCRATIC PARTY did not stand up and defend John. He himself screaming "ELECTION FRAUD!" would draw nothing but jeers from anyone listening. We saw it happen to another good man, Al Gore. Al was right when he said he was robbed, and still to this day, some call him a sore loser. Which is horse crap.

John Conyers has raised the subject of election fraud. He has been a true champion. Barbara Boxer was the ONE Senator who voted "NO" on certifying Bush. My hat goes off to these two patriots.

Unfortunately, that's not enough to drown out the noise machine. The whole entire party should have stood behind him, and demanded that the election result be questioned. Kerry was the one who put up a grueling campaign, weathered BRUTAL attacks on his character, patriotism, military service, and his FAMILY to get Bush out of office.

When he was robbed of the Presidency, very, very few stood up for him.

But still, he continues to stand up for others.

As an aside, I was recently part of a group of 12 DUers who had the pleasure of meeting the Senator last month, and talking with him at length regarding a number of matters. I don't wish to betray any confidences or run the risk of misquoting anyone, but I did bring up the subject of election fraud. (Did ya think I wouldn't?) :-)

Suffice it to say, it is surprising what we at DU see as common knowledge that our prominent politicians do not have a clue about. We told him about DU, about how many members we have here. We told him a little about what we talk about here, the good and the bad. (He wanted to know!) Suffice it to say, he was pretty surprised to learn that there was a community of 80,000+ strong that KNOW the election was stolen and would back him wholeheartedly if he came forward.

The following week, he did THREE radio interviews where he brought up election fraud and the issue of "hackability" in voting machines. (Ed Stephens, Bill Press, David Bender) Granted, until the MSM takes this seriously, it probably won't catch on, but Kerry is being vocal. More so now, after talking with some of his supporters.

I see where each and every one of you are coming from when you express outrage and frustration regarding the concession on Nov. 3rd. I understand your bitterness over our country being hijacked by criminals. I do have to say, that while I see things a little differently than some of you do on this matter, I respect the fact that many of you, like Khaotic did just today, expressed your feelings about the concession without resorting to name calling and insults toward Kerry. It is so much more effective to be respectful when opening up a line of dialog. Though I support Kerry, I appreciate those of you who have been civil in your criticism. Election fraud is a HUGE problem, and we all have a right to be upset. And we SHOULD talk about it. A lot.

I, too, am keeping my fingers crossed that he blows the lid off of this whole thing, and I pray the party as a whole stands behind him, because he is going to need all the help he can get.

Just my humble opinion. Flame away if ya need to... :-)

Edited to add a quotation mark.

[Seedersandleechers]

1. kicked

[Vektor]

2. Thanks, KC.

Hope some get to read it before if gets buried. GDP is jumping tonight.
:hi:

[TayTay]

79. Just one tiny, tiny nit to pick

He did the interview with Ed Schultz. Scroll down on this page to find the link. The stuff on election fraud happens in the last 3 minutes or so. http://www.wegoted.com/dailyAudio/index.asp

The AAR interview was very specific:
December 25, 2005 Johnnies Be Good - Kerry & Conyers for Christmakah!
My special guests today on our holiday edition of Politically Direct are Senator John Kerry and Congressman John Conyers. Topics include Kerry's response to Mark Crispin Miller's assertion that he's privately said the 2004 election was stolen and Conyers' House resolutions that would censure Bush and Cheney for...well, the list is too long to post here.Enjoy the show and best wishes for a happy, healthy new year! PS: Listen for a song from the best vocal band in America -- Venice -- at the end of today's show. You can listen to it here: http://shows.airamericaradio.com/direct/
The comments about fraud are about 12 minutes or so in.

[New Earth]

3. i'm so glad you mentioned it (election fraud) to him

i would have loved to have been there. i just choked up when i read that part.

[Vektor]

4. I did, and I said it right.

ELECTION fraud!

I guess the Senate is kind of a "bubble." The stuff that we "constituents on the ground" talk about often takes a long time to reach their ears. Not that he hasn't heard people bring this up, but I do think he has/had no idea HOW MANY see the stolen election as fact.

Without public support, he might not get far, but if he knows that we all know...

That might help.

[sendero]

5. In order for masses to follow..

... someone has to lead. I really don't think it is going to be Kerry.

[LittleClarkie]

6. He strikes me as a behind the scenes investigator type

I think there are others who will stand up if he digs up something conclusive. Dean for instance.

[sendero]

7. I'm sorry...

... but if he was going to do anything about this it would have happened long ago.

Anyone who still holds out hope for real action from John Kerry is way more optimistic than I am, I've watched him closely now for a couple years and IMHO he is nothing less than the epitome of "a day late and a dollar short".

[LittleClarkie]

10. What about the lawsuit in Ohio?

That's still pending.

[sendero]

13. The courts are nice..

.... but it is going to take the "court of public opinion" to solve this problem.

Until, in the minds of the Average American, there is suspicion that there is no integrity in elections - nothing will change. Winning a lawsuit where there is basically no result will not do anything.

One has to strike while the iron is hot. The iron was hot in November of 2004. Even if it is conclusively proven now that there was massive fraud, what is the practical result? Reversal of the election? Not hardly.

I guess I should come clean - I will NEVER respect Kerry after the way he rolled over in Ohio in November 2004. We ALL KNEW that election was stolen, and now that the proof is coming in, it is too little too late to have much meaning. The very best we can hope for is that in the next election, people will be perched with binoculars looking for this stuff. But given the fact that we all knew that it would happen in 2004 and nobody did jack shit about it, color me less than optimistic that 2006 will be any different.

[Vektor]

16. I'm sorry to hear that.

I have looked at it from his perspective, and I can understand how and why it is so hard to blow the lid off of a scandal of this magnitude, and how much time it takes.

I understand your being upset, but I had to ask myself, "Could I prove a stolen election if it were up to me, alone?"

I'm not sure I could.

Would I concede to save face if I KNEW I had no proof, and everyone would call me a tin-foil wacko?

I might.

I'd still keep nosing around to try to prove I was right, but I'd probably stay pretty quiet until I had irrefutable proof.

I agree that something NEEDS to be done before 2006. Or this will keep happening. What do you suggest we do? I've been doing the letter writing and the activist stuff, and yes, talking to Senators (ok A Senator, give me time:-)) to get the word out... Hammering this home with anyone who will listen. We definitely need to do this grass-roots style.

We all need to participate. The more people speaking, the louder the voice.

[sendero]

23. Well...

... here's the thing. Stuff like the huge discepancy between the number of newly registered Dem voters of record and the number of votes should be an immediate red flag. Yet, we are just now getting to the bottom of it.

I remember hearing about "teams of lawyers" and special funding that was donated and earmarked for exactly this purpose. HOW FUCKiNG HARD CAN THIS BE?

If you set up serious exit polls in random locations I ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEE YOU ELECTION RESULTS WITHIN .1% FOR EVERY PRECINCT POLLED, this is simple statistical science. Why wasn't this done? With this simple measure, Kerry could have known ON ELECTION NIGHT that something was up. He wouldn't have to have the total proof of how it was done, simply that votes in did not equal votes out END OF STORY.

No, my real problem is that there are too many pollyannas out there who are in denial about just how far these people will go to maintain their power. Pollyannas belong anywhere but politics and Kerry is a pollyanna.

[Vektor]

27. Like I said, I'm sorry you feel that way.

I disagree, but that's ok. You seem to have a pretty good analysis of how it all went down, and how easy it would be to fix the problem. I beg you, for all our sakes, to go public with your outcry and make them throw Bush out of the White House.

If all it takes is Kerry saying what you just said to get the election overturned, then you do it, since Kerry is too much of a "Pollyanna."

Crazy of him to not know that screaming bloody murder on Nov. 3rd would have reversed the whole election!

I'm glad you are confident that simply pointing out discrepancies between votes in and votes out would be enough.

Many have tried to do that but no one in the MSM has listened.

Maybe they will listen to you.

If you can blow the lid off the stolen election singlehandedly, I will vote YOU for President in 2008.

Seriously.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

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

[Vektor]

113. Wow, that's pretty insulting, and really unnecessary.

Why on Earth do you feel you need to be offensive? This is hardly an attack thread, and I've been nothing but civil to you. What you have just said is nothing but rude name-calling and not at all constructive.

[ProSense]

38. So every member

of Congress on the Democratic side, who witnessed the 2000 election and the 2004 election, every one who ran on the Democratic ticket, since no one raised the issue that the election would be stolen, are all Pollyannas in your opinion. You also indict every Democrat planning to run for office this year and in 2008.

Boxer voted no on certifying the elections, but ran for office and won reelection in 2004. Is she a Pollyanna too?

Conyers has done everything possible to raise the specter of a tainted election, but he did not do it prior to the election. Is he a Pollyanna too? Since the election, he has produced one of the most damning reports about the election problems, but concludes that the problems cited don't definitively prove the election was stolen. He, as a member of the Congressional committee that has the power to initiate impeachment proceedings, concedes that the evidence isn't there.

Conyers' report, the DNC's report and the GAO's report have been out there for some time now. Not one person in any official capacity, elected or aspiring to be elected, in this entire country has taken these reports to mean that the election was stolen. In a non official capacity, one could say the election was stolen, but what would that person then use to convince the courts, the media and the public?

edited to revise "proceedings"

[sendero]

74. Yes....

... the whole bunch of them. You know why?

It was common knowledge around here by 2003/ early 2004 that there were some definite shenanigans going in in Georgia and Florida. This wasn't wild speculation, the evidence was very strong.

But, the Dems, seemingly every damn one of them, have been slow on the uptake about the Bush administration and the depths they will go to since day one. How many years do you get to get a clue?

I never expected anyone to prove the early stuff. I just thought that by 2004 we'd be ready. And it is clear, they stole Ohio RIGHT UNDER OUR NOSES and there is just NO DAMN EXCUSE THAT I CAN ACCEPT.

Sorry if you find my position unreasonable, I think it is beyond reasonable. And what really sucks is that I'm doubtful that we'll stop them even in 2006. And there is something about that that fails the smell test.

[ProSense]

80. OK, but if you went to the polls and voted, what does that say? n/t

[sendero]

81. It says..

... that hope springs eternal :)

[ray of light]

180. Hi, are you aware that HAVA was not initiated by Bush until Jan 04?

That left less than nine months for the election to be "fair".

Though Help America Vote Act was agreed to sometime after the 2000 election, it wasn't until January that Bush officially placed the 4 representatives from hava.

Then google HAVA and discover WHERE our fine HAVA representatives were on election day 2004.

The problem is both parties, but not an individual person, except for GWB. Because BUSH is the only one who could have demanded the HAVA get done immediately. But the bigger party issue was the Republicans who utilized the fraud and obstructed efforts to get fair elections. And the other side of the coin, the democrats were too fearful of being smeared to stand up and take a strong stance. The media had some of it out there about the paper trails, but they neglected to tell the full story too.

[karynnj]

61. Not true -

Kerry would have needed far more than a statement that the exit polls indicated a problem.

The sample design for the exit polls is not simple random sampling as you assume. The main purpose of the exit polls was never to verify the election but to define trends and patterns in the vote. Therefore the precincts are choosen to insure that all categories are adequately covered.

[blm]

101. The Dem powerstructure should have been on that - Kerry was doing HIS job

and in his matchups with Bush, he bested him in every way.

It was the Dem infrastructure that collapsed under the assault by the GOP powerstructure. And those who were part of the Dem powerstructure like Clinton, MacAuliffe, Carville and Richardson REFUSED TO CONSIDER MACHINE FRAUD as an issue BEFORE or AFTER the vote.

[sendero]

119. That..

.... is a fair charge, there should have been more support. But, it's hard for the general to get the troops to charge when he is retreating.

[Vektor]

121. Hold on now...

How is he the one "in charge of the troops?"

First off, he is not retreating. In fact, he's been a vocal critic of our failed elections process since day one, and more so today. But he can only do with whatever proof he has, which is none, or this would be all over the news, despite their RW bias. Irrefutable proof of a stolen election would be hard to ignore.

Second, if someone robs your house is it up to you to find and apprehend the bad guys all by yourself? Or is there law enforcement involved to assist? If someone robs Kerry of the election, the whole Democratic congress needs to be the "cops" investigating and bringing the bad guys to justice. The victim of a crime cannot be expected to act alone to apprehend the guilty party.

Kerry has "led the troops" every time another Democrat or Democratic value is attacked.

Now that he has been attacked, who has his back? Someone should. Lots of "someones."

Where are they?

And why don't you have the same rancor toward EVERY OTHER Dem who isn't raising a stink?

[sendero]

126. This whole conversation...

... has veered off into nowhere. My point, and the reason I do not hold Kerry in the great esteem his defenders do, is simple.

There was an election. It was for president. He was our standard bearer. He apparently did not take the possibility of fraud seriously enough to take any reasonable measures to stop it.

Yes, it was his fucking job, it was his fucking election, I gave him my fucking $$ and I expected him to USE IT TO OBVIATE THIS KNOWN RISK (instead he kept 15 million in the bank) and not only did he run with his tail between his legs in the face of strong evidence available THAT NIGHT, to say that he's now doing something doesn't impress me that much. He's always doing shit when it is way too late.

Sorry if you don't think that is fair, I'm not a Republican, I actually expect my leaders to be exemplary, not ordinary and the whole issue is 2008, where I hope he remains a senator and lets someone who will fight get in the ring.

The time to do something about Ohio was within a couple days of when it went down. The perpetrators of this fraud had their tracks cleared within days. All these lawsuits that are going down now are going to accomplish jack shit and you know it. We've already won a handful of them and what did it get us?

I'm tired of rehashing this so y'all can have the last word. But this party is never going to get the Repug foot off our necks with the likes of Kerry at the helm, and nothing you can say will change my mind about that.

[Vektor]

151. It has gone into nowhere, you are correct.

You have a deep seated hatred/prejudice/bias against Kerry and no amount of reality is going to cure it. You will continue to revel in every opportunity to bash him because you have cancerous bitterness and anger that YOU own, and has nothing to do with Kerry at all. Maybe you preferred another candidate and that person did not get the nomination, so you will continue to attack Kerry until the end of your days because you'll never get over it.

This conversation went into nowhere because you lost your cool end exploded when you received dozens of reasons why your misguided anger and hatred was wrong and baseless. You were forced against your will to really examine the fact that this is NOT KERRY'S FAULT, BUT THE FAULT OF THE WHOLE PARTY, even *your favorite candidate* and you couldn't deal.

I'll accept that and let you go on having to live with your rage.

[sendero]

168. Yeah...

... thank you Dr. Freud. When the argument cannot be refuted, just attack the arguer.

You bet I'm angry at Kerry, as I would have been at anyone who failed to deal with clear and obvious reality so abjectly. They started stealing Ohio well before the election. Nothing was done. If it wasn't Kerry's job, just who's was it?

And as long as the party accepts these losers we are getting nowhere. Deal with that Dr. Freud.

[ProSense]

169. Nobody is good enough for you.

Remember this exchange?
(It starts here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2347869&mesg_id=2348015)

2348015, So every member
Posted by ProSense on Wed Jan-04-06 04:42 AM

of Congress on the Democratic side, who witnessed the 2000 election and the 2004 election, every one who ran on the Democratic ticket, since no one raised the issue that the election would be stolen, are all Pollyannas in your opinion. You also indict every Democrat planning to run for office this year and in 2008.

Boxer voted no on certifying the elections, but ran for office and won reelection in 2004. Is she a Pollyanna too?

Conyers has done everything possible to raise the specter of a tainted election, but he did not do it prior to the election. Is he a Pollyanna too? Since the election, he has produced one of the most damning reports about the election problems, but concludes that the problems cited don't definitively prove the election was stolen. He, as a member of the Congressional committee that has the power to initiate impeachment proceedings, concedes that the evidence isn't there.

Conyers' report, the DNC's report and the GAO's report have been out there for some time now. Not one person in any official capacity, elected or aspiring to be elected, in this entire country has taken these reports to mean that the election was stolen. In a non official capacity, one could say the election was stolen, but what would that person then use to convince the courts, the media and the public?

edited to revise "proceedings"

(This encompasses everyone---the nine Democratic candidate, current members of Congress, elected official across the country and even candidates on the political horizon.)

Your response:

2348293, Yes....
Posted by sendero on Wed Jan-04-06 12:45 PM

... the whole bunch of them. You know why?

It was common knowledge around here by 2003/ early 2004 that there were some definite shenanigans going in in Georgia and Florida. This wasn't wild speculation, the evidence was very strong.

But, the Dems, seemingly every damn one of them, have been slow on the uptake about the Bush administration and the depths they will go to since day one. How many years do you get to get a clue?

I never expected anyone to prove the early stuff. I just thought that by 2004 we'd be ready. And it is clear, they stole Ohio RIGHT UNDER OUR NOSES and there is just NO DAMN EXCUSE THAT I CAN ACCEPT.

Sorry if you find my position unreasonable, I think it is beyond reasonable. And what really sucks is that I'm doubtful that we'll stop them even in 2006. And there is something about that that fails the smell test.

My response:

2348330, OK, but if you went to the polls and voted, what does that say? n/t
Posted by ProSense on Wed Jan-04-06 01:34 PM

Your response:

2348337, It says..
Posted by sendero on Wed Jan-04-06 01:47 PM

... that hope springs eternal :)

So really what's your point? Nobody is good enough, not even you, but hope springs eternal?

[sendero]

171. I can think of two..

... people who I'd support 100% for the nomination right now. So much for that argument.

[ProSense]

172. Two who changed American elections for the better after 2000, no doubt.

No argument, those were your own words.

[Vektor]

183. Ah! The truth comes out.

Many people who have their little heart set on another candidate feel they have to ATTACK the one/s they don't prefer.

Seen it way too many times...

I'd ask you who you support, but chances are, unless they are Repukes, I'd never bash them.

That's classless, divisive, and non-constructive after all.

[Vektor]

184. You were clearly the one attacking, repeatedly.

And I think you know that. But nice try.

I was civil and reasonable with you for multiple posts, and the more I tried, the more you exploded, until you finally started swearing and printing in all caps, and name calling.

Your words:

"I gave him my fucking $$ and I expected him to USE IT TO OBVIATE THIS KNOWN RISK"

"HOW FUCKiNG HARD CAN THIS BE?

"mealy mouthed overwrought pendantic gibberish."

"As long as the party accepts these losers"

"Deal with that Dr. Freud." (Thanks for that - I AM quite smart, and a very good judge of character. Uncannily so. Hurts, doesn't it?)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Name call much?

Oh, and let's not forget your one post that was DELETED for being a personal attack as soon as you stepped onto this thread!

Don't you DARE distort the truth by accusing me of being the one attacking. I was nothing but civil to you and you posted attack after attack. The more civil I was, the meaner you got. So to twist it around and say I did not have a good argument, and attacked you, is simply you projecting your wrongdoing onto me. Unsuccessfully, I might add, since the proof is in the thread.


I think it's pretty clear the only argument that can be refuted is yours, since about 30 people have successfully done so, and all you have done is name call in return. Reread the thread...

You are the one attacking.

You want to keep this up? Ol' Dr. Freud's got all day.

[ProSense]

122. Kerry is taking the issue seriously, but it's not about Kerry alone.

Voters and everyone running for office needs to be concerned. In fact, everyone up for reelection in 2006 should be leading the charge to expose election fraud.

[blm]

127. Wrong analogy - Kerry was an allstar quarterback with NO FRONT LINE to

protect him. The DNC was junior varsity.

Bush was worse than a 3rd string arena football quarterback with a HUGE front line of murderous hitmen aided and abetted by a complicit media acting as referees who looked the other way when they used their arsenal of lies.

[blm]

110. Pollyannas don't stick out a 5yr investigation with NO HELP from the party

the way that Kerry did on BCCI.

He could have folded at any time and just as most Dems WANTED, but he trudged through until he could get that case noticed.

You may not care, but the historic record is in place thanks to Kerry and his willingness to persevere during unpopular investigations.

[fedupinBushcountry]

163. So easy to blame

Do you take any blame? I do.

Where were we the PEOPLE ? If we thought it was stolen, why the hell weren't millions of us out on the street on Nov. 3rd.

We are so lazy, and let so much crap just continue because we the people refuse to counter it. Supposedly Bush got 3 million more votes Why? Because many in blue states knew Kerry would win, or in red states many figured why bother Bush will win, my vote won't make a difference, Kerry would of had a much better chance. If we the people took the streets like the courageous Ukrainians and demanded that our votes be counted, they did not let their man take it on by himself.

So, go ahead, continue the blame game, it is so much easier and lazier, and so pollyanna.

[blm]

100. NO Democratic lawmaker or figure came forward on machine fraud before

or after, not just vote fraud, but MACHINE FRAUD. So, I guess you respect NONE of them.

[ray of light]

174. You said the KEY part right here...

Ohio in November 2004. We ALL KNEW that election was stolen, and now that the proof is coming in



A "gut instinct" just doesn't cut it in the real world. My gut instinct tells me I'm going to win the lotto each week, but it never happens. I also knew all the answers on the test I took at school too, but I just didn't write them down right. Yep, I knew that too. But somehow the "C" grade stands. A test is the proof the teacher needs.


The KEY is proof. Proof for the voters and proof for the courts.

[Vektor]

12. The thing that sucks is,

it takes FOREVER to investigate these matters. Example: I was hit by a drunk driver in a traffic accident in 2000. He had a huge bag of weed in the car.

AND

He was wearing a morphine pump.

He was arrested for operating a motor vehicle under the influence, after he struck my vehicle at 70 miles an hour while I was stopped at a red light.

There were 7 witnesses in the intersection.

Pretty cut and dry, right?

It took three years to conclude the case, and for me to receive my restitution.

The legal system is a bitch, and with a case this complex...it takes forever and a day, and a hell of a lot of manpower. We could get a lot more done with the whole party working together. Even then, holy challenge, Batman.

And, the Repukes KNEW that when they pulled this off. Even if we do find that smoking gun, Bush will have probably left office by then.

(Hopefully impeached and publicly disgraced!) :-)

[blm]

99. Name one person who is more willing to even LOOK into the machines.

Plenty of high profile Dems COULD HAVE taken this issue on BEFORE the election, but NONE of them did.

[Vektor]

9. I'd like to see a group effort.

Kerry does lead on a lot of issues. Sadly, it might appear self-serving is he is the most vocal critic on a subject that is "all about him."

(We all know it's about all of us, and our nation, but there are those who would say "Of course he's complaining, he 'lost.'"

I'm hoping Kerry will be able to see how many would stand behind him, that might make a difference.

I genuinely believe he has no idea just how many of us are right there with him in saying the election was stolen. He has no idea the number of people who do NOT think that it's a conspiracy theory...

Heck, he didn't even know about DU, until he met us.

[sendero]

24. Believe me...

.... I am, as many Americans are, looking, hoping and praying for someone to come forth and LEAD us out the the dead end the Republican are heading us towards, because I will get behind them in an instant with my time and my money.

So far, there seems to be a leadership vacuum in the Democratic party that I really do not understand. And no doubt, my frustration with that fact is readily apparent :)

[Vektor]

31. It's ok...

I am frustrated too. Really. I definitely don't hold any one man responsible. I still support Kerry, because I know I like the guy for a LOT of reasons. He has served my home state of MA very well for a long time.

I think the BIGGEST problem we have is that the Corporate Media doesn't report anything that doesn't kiss Bush's ass. Any blurb about election fraud gets buried by the latest candy-coated reports about Bush's "progress" in Iraq, or Condi's new shoes.

Even if Kerry appeared on CNN, dressed in ashes, a sack cloth, and a crown of thorns, and threw himself upon his sword right after producing a video tape of a giggling Rove sitting in a computer room somewhere switching Kerry votes to Bush ones, it would quickly be buried by multiple stories about a bug-eyed bride fleeing the altar, or a pretty white girl vanishing.

Kerry's number one challenge would be getting a single network to listen to him, period.

[sendero]

76. Sorry...

... the networks don't run Kerry because all he says is mealy mouthed overwrought pendantic gibberish.

Don't get me wrong, I think Kerry is right on the issues most of the time, but the man could not construct a conscise hard-hitting statement if his life depended on it.

As for the "one man" solving the problem, here's a thought for you. It will eventually be solved, and it will be the efforts of one person (not necessarily a man) who will be largely responsible when it happens. That's the way things work.

And Kerry was in the catbird seat in 2004 to be that man, and he blew it. Hey, I don't "blame" him, I just get green around the gills when I have to read talk about him running again. Sorry charlie, you failed the test. Stand aside and let the man come through.

[karynnj]

83. Read Kerry's reponses to Bush actions

on Bolton's nomination, Bush's Katrina speech, Bush's invasion of Iraq (We need regime change here). He is very quick and very witty.

He WILL give long detailed answers when asked a detailed question - he has substance. But, he also is a very eloquent speaker. (Read his Senate press releases - they have more verve and style than other Senator's I've read.) (I loved his comments on the Omnibus bill roughly this time last year. The Senators had less than a day to examine 900 pages. Kerry, who voted against it - compared creating legislation this way to painting a room in the dark. You don't know what it will look like when you're done - but you know it will be a mess, and this bill is a mess.

In answer to a question at Georgetown, Kerry said as a throwaway aside - other than love, citizen is the most important word in the American language. An original, concise, thoughtful concept, that becomes more interesting as you think about it. It encapsulates so much of Kerry's talk of service and activism into a very beautiful comment.

Kerry is one of the most eloquent speakers of my generation. The media did two things - they said repeatedly that he was long winded and boring and they rarely let people hear him.
I don't know who you support, but of the 2004 candidates - Kerry was by far the best. (Edwards had one very very good stump speech and was very articulate.)

[sendero]

84. Written eloquent..

... and TV eloquent are two very different things. And if you can't get on TV and make your point in a hurry you are not going to win elections.

That is America. Not how it should be, how it is.

[TayTay]

86. I liked this one at the SBA hearings

It was covered in the press, I'm sure everyone heard it because the media was in attendance at this hearing and it got wall-to-wall coverage on tv, just like all Dem comments do, right?

The SBA hearing from Nov 8th, 2005 is up on the SBA site. http://sbc.senate.gov/hearings/109hrgs.html This is a video of the hearing that is archived at the SBA Committee site.

Sen Kerry gestures to Sen. Snowe: "You and I have worked diligently with this committee to get an emergency hurricane response. It passed the United States Senate 96-0. It's been sitting in limbo between the House and the Senate and just last Friday it was cut out of the CJS, cut out of the CJS conference by the Republicans. It has an emergency response, emergency lending. It has what we need and was cut by the Republicans. I just want to make that absolutely clear. I raised this issue with Sen. Frist on the floor last week and we get this talk about how we are going to look around. It's all politics. Politics as usual in Washington DC is screwing a lot of Americans. And they deserve better." (About 43-44 minutes into the hearing.)

I thought that was pretty concise and to the point. Maybe it wasn't eloquent, but it said what needed saying, IMHO.

[sendero]

87. I agree...

... but that is not typical Kerry rhetoric IMHO. Yes, that is to the point.

[TayTay]

88. It is in committee

It is not in formal speeches. They are different formats.

[sendero]

90. My point...

.... is that Kerry is not a compelling television speaker, and that is PART of the reason you never see him on TV.

He is generally way too wordy, and not able to condense his ideas into the simple, hard-hitting frames, talking points and sound bites that are crucial to influencing the public in these times.

To be fair, few Democrats are as good at this as Republicans are, Dean being a notable exception.

[karynnj]

92. Did you watch his Matthews interview in November

on Iraq. He was concise on each of his points- clearly captured Matthews attention and was able to get some respect from a talking head who rarely gives any.

During the campaign, Kerry on Letterman was asked what he would do in Iraq. In about 30 seconds, he listed and explained the 4 core things that he would do. It was a very consise, clear and substanitive summary of his earlier in the week NYU speech. He even used his fingers to count out the points. (The longer NYU speech was longer, not to be pedantic but because it more fully explained each point. In fact, without the NYU speech the Republicans could have twisted the Letterman points. The difference, the order and the place for each were well thought out.

I heard Dean and Kerry side by side in the primary debates - Kerry was better.

[sendero]

96. I did not..

... I never watch anything on Fox, CNN or MSNBC, EVER. I do listen to what people here say about what was said.

I'll take your word that he was good. :)

[karynnj]

203. How can you criticize him (or the other Democrats) for not speaking out

when they are - when you are not listening. Kerry, very stragegicly invited Matthews and Blitzer to interview him in his Senate office. THe office background lent an air of dignity that the cable shows don't have. It also had a warmer feel, because there were photographs etc in the background. Obviously what he said is what is important, but the setting gave him home court advantage and somehow Blitzer's mike was too low for him to cut Senator Kerry off - though I would assume CNN could have remixed it.

[TayTay]

94. That depends on the interviewer

TV is odd. Sometimes Dean is too hot for TV and it is too easy to distort what he says. Then the distortion gets all over the news as what Dean said. Sigh! This is no less fair when it happens to him than when it happens to any other Dem, including Kerry.

Some of this discussion is 'you say to-ma-toe, I say tom-mah-toe.' I prefer Kerry's mode of speech and I find tht he comes across well. This is subjective by nature. We get the impressions we get. I like the way Kerry speaks, in formal and informal speech. He seems very clear to me.

[ProSense]

95. Here's a hard-hitting statement:

John Kerry Calls for Election Reform

Below is a statement from Senator John Kerry on election reform. Today, he will participate in a press conference on Capitol Hill at 12:45 in Russell 188 with Senators Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio).


“Free and fair elections are the foundation of our democracy. In the last year, millions more Americans registered and went to the polls than ever before. We saw millions in Iraq and Afghanistan vote for the first time in their lives. Yet, thousands upon thousands of Americans still fear that when they walk into the polls to vote, there is a very real chance that their vote will not be counted or they will lose the opportunity to vote at all because they are forced to stand in line for hours due to a shortage of machines.


“Faulty voting machines have no place in the greatest democracy on earth. Barriers to voting are an insult to the freest, greatest nation in the world.




http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/cfm/record.cfm?id=232268&

[beachmom]

97. He was on IMUS on 12/9 and he was awesome.

I saw it on MSNBC so it wasn't just radio. He was funny, witty, made fun of himself a little, yet he was able to get all of his points across. I wish you could have seen it, because it shows that when he is relaxed and truly himself, he does indeed light up the TV screen. Imus mentioned this after JK left (he knows Kerry personally, and said the way he was on his radio program is really HOW HE IS). I mean, I was smiling when I was watching it. I agree that this is an area where he needs to improve, but his appearance on IMUS PROVES that he can do it. JK is someone not afraid of working on something like this. When you look at credentials I don't see anyone as good as JK in the race for '08. If he can up his likeabilty numbers by working on his TV persona (and it's about him being himself, not playing a part), then he has more than a better shot.

[karynnj]

91. When he is allowed on TV, he is great

Most of my examples WERE off the cuff comments.

[Vektor]

114. I can't even believe what I am reading.

You cannot voice your criticisms without juvenile name calling? I, and several others have spoken to you on this thread in completely civil terms despite disagreeing with you. With each passing exchange, I am seeing more and more outright insults. What is it about a constructive, respectful discussion that causes you to become so inflamed that you cannot keep from resorting to outright rudeness? Nobody attacked YOU or called you names. You cannot voice disagreement with the topic without personal insults?

What gives?

[Tuesday_Morning]

98. Thanks Vektor

Highlights the need for an active, focussed DU Activist Corp, doesn't it?

I wish we'd all stop being such a bunch of wankers and realize there's a lot we agree upon here and a helluva lot to do.

[Vektor]

115. I know, me too...

Regardless of who your choice is for candidate, the main focus needs to be advancing Dems and ousting Repukes.

Not fighting with each other. It's a waste of vitriol that could be used to take the country back instead.

[guidod]

201. I agree that it shouldn't be Kerry...

Gore should be in his second term.

[elshiva]

8. Thanks!

[New Earth]

11. hate to go somewhat off topic

but did he ever get our birthday cards? did you all who went to his bday party give him the cards?

[LittleClarkie]

15. Yes they did. He was very impressed and touched

and wanted to know about all the postmarks.

The two things dovetailed, the cards and the Kerry DU group going to the fundraiser/birthday party. They were presented by Teresa, who'd gotten wind of our plan, as a sort of birthday present.

[Vektor]

18. Yes!

He was extremely impressed! He was astounded by the mileage on the card, and all the postmarks...

[LittleClarkie]

14. And they had a beer with him, I'll have you all know!

And so can answer the "who would you rather have a beer with" question with some inside knowledge.

It was a very nice story they told when they got back. They met him at a fundraising/birthday party (his) where they gave him two birthday cards that we in the Kerry group had been passing around for a few months. Then when the Kerry DUers headed off to the pub afterward, lo and behold the dude showed up! They said he was very warm and friendly. We were simply agog in the Kerry group for at least a week.

[New Earth]

17. omg!

that is so awesome. i looked around for threads from after his birthday, i didn't see anything mentioning this back then :(

i wish i could have gone. drinking a beer with Kerry? I would have been crying (happy tears) the whole time :blush:

[Vektor]

20. Maybe next year...

Rumor has it we're invited back. ;-)

[New Earth]

21. we'll have to celebrate my birthday too then

mine's the day after Kerry's. it's a whole year away :(

[Vektor]

33. Mine's Dec. 5th.

We would have a HUGE bash.

[LittleClarkie]

22. There were threads in the Kerry group, if you look back a bit

No kidding. I don't know how I would have taken it either. But still, TayTay made it clear that the 12 or so who went represented us all. They tried hard to tell him about all of us. And he loved the cards. So you were there in spirit, my dear.

I was alittle green with envy myself. But it was good to find out that most of our impressions of the guy turned out to be on the money.

[Vektor]

19. He was really cool...

Definitely the guy I'd "want to have a beer with!"

Very down to earth, and funny as all get out.

[globalvillage]

36. What a great time.

Absolutely a guy you want to have a beer with.

[ebayfool]

25. Thank you, Vektor ...

I can't speak or write like this, but you've summed it all up beautifully!

One man can't bring down the election fraud machinery - it'll take all Dems working together ... elected & grassroots! People can't have it both ways - if they agree it was stolen, then they can't say he didn't run a good campaign. After all, if he really won ... then it was obviously the right campaign!?

I appreciate the fact that he hasn't just curled up & 'gone away' - he's still got alot of work he can accomplish.

I also don't turn on someone when they don't 'place first' ... fair weather voters.

TY!

--------
on edit: rec'ed - so more eyes can see this!

[Vektor]

37. Thanks, DJ...

You wrote pretty darn well, actually. I appreciate the sentiment. :hi:

[AtomicKitten]

26. Thank you for your post. n/t

[globalvillage]

28. Who is talking about election fraud issues

other than Kerry, Conyers, Boxer? There is some legislation that's been introduced, but few co-sponsors.
You would think the recent Diebold hacking test in Florida would have generated more noise.

S.391 : A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit certain State election administration officials from actively participating in electoral campaigns.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. (introduced 2/16/2005) Cosponsors (5)
Committees: Senate Rules and Administration
Latest Major Action: 2/16/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.


S.1975 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack (introduced 11/8/2005) Cosponsors (4)
Committees: Senate Rules and Administration
Latest Major Action: 11/8/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

[LittleClarkie]

29. Kerry mentioned Florida on Ed Schultz, almost dragging the conversation

in that direction. Big Eddie just sort of skipped over it.

[globalvillage]

30. On Bill Press, too. Same day.

Or was it Politically Direct? I know he mentioned it on at least two of the three talk shows he did right around Christmas.

[MH1]

82. Note the paltry number of cosponsors.

Lots of posts here at DU fragging Kerry, what about all the other Dems who aren't even cosponsoring this important legislation against election fraud?

Boggles my mind, sometimes.

[blm]

85. I really trust that Dean knows and would work WITH Kerry to expose the

issue.

Kerry couldn't count on the old DNC hacks, but, I think the new machine can be used to fight the corruption WITH like-minded lawmakers, not against them like the old guard did.

[bpilgrim]

32. Thank you Vektor for sharing your personal experience, wisdom & insight

with all of us :toast:

This is really what the DU community is all about, sharing and coming together so that we , united, can actually make a difference, because without unity we are truly lost and certainly playing right into the neoCONs divide&conquerer PLANS.

Thank you very much for so eloquently reminding us of that vital fact. :toast:

peace

(on edit: k&r)

[Vektor]

39. Hey, bpilgrim!

You've come a long way, baby!

Thanks.

:hug:

[zulchzulu]

34. Finishng up a film that will address that very issue

The film focuses on the 2004 election and the MSM, rare footage of Kerry, efforts in the grassroots and some of the dots that need to be connected and made extremely familiar to the American voter...voter fraud is examined...it will be out soon.

[Vektor]

40. Is this a film that you are working on?

I'm eager to see it!

[zulchzulu]

44. Here's a trailer

Windows Media:
http://www.kerrysupport.com/media/kerry_grassroots.wmv

QuickTime:
http://www.kerrysupport.com/media/kerry_grassroots.mp4

The film has a lot more animation and other content than the trailers as well as a new soundtrack (more classical), but it gives you a general idea.

[Vektor]

49. Oh my god, that looks AWESOME! Please keep us all posted...

I will bookmark your site right now.

Can't wait to see this film in its entirety.

[ProSense]

52. That's incredible footage.

I can't wait to see this in it's entirety. Awesome!

[Vektor]

67. It looks great, huh?

I can't wait until it's done. Should be awesome.

[karynnj]

89. cool - but it makes me want to have the ability to go back to Oct 2004

Great film

[zulchzulu]

93. I hope to have a Bittorrent version by 3/17...

It would be nice to have a part where Rove is indicted added in.

:bounce:

[New Earth]

45. please, not voter fraud

election fraud. please don't say voter fraud in your video. the elections are fraudulent, not the voters :(

[zulchzulu]

48. I meant "voting" fraud...BBVs...

Yes, there is always some voter fraud. But this past election is all about election and voting fraud. I have some footage from when visiting Ohio just before the election where some Kerry staffers were very worried about the impending cheating that DID occur.

[New Earth]

51. the word vote shouldn't even be in the phrase

ha i am a broken record with this sorry. vote fraud/voter fraud anything having to do with 'vote' and 'fraud' is the Republican talking point for election fraud. they blame the voters, yeah, the one in every how many million who voted twice. it is to keep people away from the real issue, which is, as a whole, election fraud.

it is all in semantics, but i warned people for months that 'voter fraud' was going to be the Republicans' term - I was right!

Don't worry, I know all about the election fraud of '04. :P

Your video made me cry :(

[BlueIris]

73. EXCELLENT.

Nice. I may have to pm you later.

[ray of light]

179. not voter fraud. Election fruad & suppression by election officials

It's not the voter, it's the machines and the Secretary of States.

[diamondsndust]

35. I posted this on another thread last week, but dont know how many saw it

The American vote count is controlled by three major corporate players, Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia, and a fourth, SAIC, Science Applications International. All four are hard-wired into the Bush power structure, the Bush crime family. They have been given millions of dollars by the Bush regime to complete a sweeping computerization of voting machines that were just used in the 2004 election. The technology involved had a trial run during the 2002 mid-term elections. Georgia had Diebold machines in every precinct. As a result, a popular Democratic governor and senator were both unseated in what the media called an "amazing" 16 percent swing.

Diebold's Walden O'Dell, a top Bush fundraiser, publicly committed himself to delivering his home state Ohio's votes to Bush. At Diebold, the election division is run by Bob Urosevich. Bob's brother, Todd, is a top executive at "rival" ES&S. The brothers were originally staked by Howard Ahmanson, a member of the Council For National Policy, a right-wing steering group stacked with Bush true believers. Ahmanson is also one of the bagmen behind the extremist Christian Reconstruction Movement, which advocates the theocratic takeover of American democracy.

The four companies are interconnected; they are not four "competitors." Ahmanson has large stakes in ES&S, whose former CEO was Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. When Hagel ran for office, his own company counted the votes, and his victory was considered "an amazing upset." Hagel still has a million dollar stake in ES&S.

Sequoia is the corporate parent of a private equity firm, Madison Dearborn, which is partner in the Carlyle Group.

Meanwhile, SAIC is referred to a "shadowy defense contractor." They have gotten into the vote count game both directly and through spinoffs by its top brass, including Admiral Bill Owens, former military aide to Dick Cheney, and Carlyle Group honcho Frank Carlucci and ex-CIA chief Robert Gates. SAIC's history of fraud charges and security "lapses" haven't prevented it from becoming one of the largest Pentagon and CIA contractors, and will doubtless encounter few obstacles in its entrance into the vote counting business.

The mad rush to install these unverifiable computers is driven by the Help America Vote Act, signed by Bush. The chief lobbying group pushing for the act was a consortium of arms dealers including Northrup Grumman and Lockheed Martin.

When you hear people saying, 'take a deep breath, we will pull through this,' 'we need to work harder,' 'we need to organize'-no. We will not. It's over. Unless electronic vote tabulation is history, and these companies are driven out of business, it's their country. Not ours.

Nobody knows, and no one will ever know, what the actual vote count was. There are no checks and balances left. The US Senate now has 55 of these Republicans. When they hit 60, which is what will happen in 2006 mid-term elections -- trust me -- that means that no matter what Bush and the crime family want to do, they can do it. The House is gone for the next two to five generations. It's gone.

The last thing rational people in this country need right now is this whistling-past-the-graveyard horse hockey. Nothing is going to happen; it's going to get worse. There will never again be a legitimate election in this county. Until we get rid of the machines.
source: Mike Malloy, Nov 2004
Any more questions????? Take the Bush Crime Regime DOWN! visit http://www.offrampbums.com/bushbum.html and send YOUR message to Washington

[Vektor]

41. Welcome to DU, diamondsndust!

Great post, and thank you for adding that. It needs to be seen. We need to take our democracy back.

And everything you said, I believe it. Scary as hell.

[diamondsndust]

46. Thanks for the welcome

one thing it didnt clearly point out, and when I find it again, I will post it. is the fact that all four of these companies are tied to Poppy Bush and The Carlysle(sp)Group.

[Vektor]

50. Bit of a conflict of interest, huh?

Partisan groups should never be allowed to own and control paperless machines that "count" our votes.

I believe that until these machines are removed, they will ALWAYS have Republican puppets in office.

[LittleClarkie]

42. Well, after that message up top, what's the use of doing what your

last two sentences say. How do we take them down if it's hopeless. What good will sending a message do?

The last thing rational people need in this country is to run around in a circle with their hands in the air screaming "We're doomed! DOOMED!!"

What would you have us do? Curl up in a ball?

[diamondsndust]

47. I never said we were doomed...

I said SEND A MESSAGE... I have, I send one of these a week to washington, and i'm hoping the big black trucks show up at my house or it makes the news... what have YOU done??

[LittleClarkie]

54. Your message seemed to be that it's hopeless, We've already lost.

Or is it that we WILL be lost unless we fight the machines? In which case I don't think it's whistling past the graveyard to say "get organized".

What have I done?

Small things:
Proofing the County Dem newsletter
Networking with Dems at a monthly grassroots breakfast so that we can get more Dems elected on a local level.
Phonebanking for a Dem candidate in the special election coming up this week in WI.
The weekly peace vigil on Sunday, come rain or shine or holiday. I was there Christmas day.
Promoting the candidate who will oppose Sensenbrenner come 2006.
Promoting the candidate who will oppose Paul Ryan, who is up to his ass in the Abramoff scandal.

Sorry if I reacted out of turn, but your post seemed to be saying give up, no hope. And that got on my last nerve.

[diamondsndust]

55. sorry if you got the wrong impression

but if you look, I state that this is an article from Mike Malloy in Nov 2004 ---> The last thing rational people in this country need right now is this whistling-past-the-graveyard horse hockey. Nothing is going to happen; it's going to get worse. There will never again be a legitimate election in this county. Until we get rid of the machines.
source: Mike Malloy, Nov 2004 <--- see? The machines are easily manipulated and yes, they can be hacked or programmed to miscount votes. They NEED to go! If it's a computer, it CAN be manipulated. I'm not here to fight, except for the common cause we are ALL here for... to regain our DEMOCRACY and return our great nation back to ourselves "WE The People" not "We The Sheeple" cuz brother, the meek aint gonna inherit diddly squat!

spelling edit DOH!

[LittleClarkie]

57. Here is something you might be interested in from my home state

http://washburnsworld.blogspot.com/2005/12/results-from-wednesday-november-30.html

The final results of interest to election integrity activists are:
Diebold: Not approved at this time.
AccuPoll: Approved for use in Wisconsin
ES&S Automark: No exception to the requirement to get a 2002 NASED nubmer first.

So far so good with Diebold.

[diamondsndust]

59. hmmmm...

interesting...but scarey too! MSDOS and Windoze!! (hack cough hack hack) did you look into the next article down??
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Diebold_CEO_resigns_after_reports_of_1212.html

here's part of it...

The chief executive officer of electronic voting company Diebold who once famously declared that he would "deliver" Ohio for President Bush has resigned effective immediately, RAW STORY has learned.

"The board of directors and Wally mutually agreed that his decision to resign at this time for personal reasons was in the best interest of all parties," the company's new chairman said in a statement.

[TayTay]

77. Someone at that Boston event did mention

That what was needed in 2004 was not '10,000 lawyers on the ground,' but programmers who knew their stuff and knew how to trace out fraud and how to secure those machines. That's what needs to be done going forward. That is the responsibility of the Democratic Party going into all future elections. That is one of the 'real' things that needs to be done going forward. I don't remember who said this, but the point was made that we sort of attacked the wrong problem last time. Not enough people in the structutre of the Dem campaign knew or understood the problem of electronic fraud on those machines and it was not given the proper resources. Sigh! I do know that the point was made that the Dems have to take this seriously and give election fraud serious time, effort and resources going forward.

That plus the media has to get off their 'bended knees' and report on what the hell is going on. Without the confirmation of an independent press and independent observers, complaints about the viability of our election system look like 'sour grapes' and can be ignored. We have to have some support from our supposedly 'free press.' I have some hope that things are beginning to change after the fawning over the Bush Admin that 9/11 caused, but the press is still too lazy and uninterested in issues of fundamental fairness and accountability. It's going to be a long battle. I do get the impression that the Dems are taking this much, much more seriously now. (Yeah, the grassroots were there first. Like this doesn't happen all the time. The grassroots contain people who know their stuff on security and fraud in electronic systems. A lot of staffers did not. That job description has to change I guess. We need a whole side of the official campaign structure that deals seriously and consistently just with fraud and obstruction of voting rights, in all forms. That needs to be a mandatory part of the campaign structure. That much is pretty obvious.)

[Vektor]

116. Well said, and totally accurate as always, TayTay.

Man, you know your shit! Thanks for enhancing the thread.

[eridani]

43. It should have been the party, not Kerry

The theft goes way beyond the presidential race and includes Congress as well.

We don't even need to gripe about stolen elections--just come down hard on the side of publicly accountable and transparent elections and against vote suppression, every chance we get. Investigations are going to have to be done state by state anyway.

[Vektor]

53. What a long, arduous process that will be.

Ouch. State by state election reform. Those machines have GOT to go. They are truly robbing us of every last shred of Democracy we have.

[TayTay]

78. We need some permanent staffers at the DNC

We specialize in security and in electronic fraud. This needs to become an ongoing part of the process. It just does. Once we have some people in place nationally, then we have to train locally from the statewide level down to the most local level. It's too damn chaoitic and catch-as-catch can now. That is no way to prevent anything.

[blm]

108. That is the BEST point I've heard reDNC and machine fraud.

.

[Vektor]

117. Have you submitted this very good idea...

To the necessary parties?

[TayTay]

139. Will do.

And I think it is time to press for that as a mandatory thing for the DNC to do. Now, if only we could find our champions who will also press this case to the DNC. right BLM? We, as the vaunted and treeasured 'netroots' have to start to apply pressure directly to The Powers that Be in the Dem Party to get this done.

I have hope for this. We trained how many people to be poll watchers in the last cycle? Well, we have to train people to spot things and train them to call in experts when something seems wrong. We have to do this. It's one of the ways to get election fraud off the liberal boards and onto the national agenda.

[blm]

202. You should fine tune both of your posts on this and repost as a thread.

I think the DNC does need guidance and need to be petitioned on this issue. Can two petitions be created - One for the DNC to put a crew in place, and one for our best investigators to step into the issue?

[Blaukraut]

56. Thank you, Vektor

For putting into words what so many of us feel and hope for - that the Dems will be united in their efforts to uncover the election fraud and implement measures to stop it from happening again. Like you, I still have faith in John Kerry and believe he was robbed. The election was stolen, and it was done in such an efficient and improved way since 2000, that there was no immediate smoking gun. John Kerry's hands were tied. He had to concede.

I also believe that on the morning after the election a large number of high profile Dem officials, who should have stood by John Kerry in case he decided to fight, got out of bed with their own agendas. They were already planning their own campaigns for 2008.If there was to be any serious investigation into election fraud on their parts, it would not be under John Kerry's banner.

So this is what we are all up against. Too many of our so-called leaders who were, and are not interested in unifying behind John Kerry because they have presidential ambitions of their own, and had them since before JK got nominated; a media not interested in reporting the truth so much as being a republican mouthpiece; and a voting public who is not being informed properly.
So the question is; how do we overcome these obstacles? What can we do to assure fair and honest elections for the future?

[Vektor]

58. Ah-ha!

"...on the morning after the election a large number of high profile Dem officials, who should have stood by John Kerry in case he decided to fight, got out of bed with their own agendas. They were already planning their own campaigns for 2008..."

So, you think so too, eh?

It would DEFINITELY be harder to beat an incumbent Kerry than win in a clean race, fresh off fire from eight years of Bush hell.

So they "let it go..."

I fear you are right.

[diamondsndust]

60. you are so right

there is so much division WITHIN the party also that it makes it easier for the repugs to stick together. Thats one thing they DO have going for them... kinda like "honor among thieves". Our party has GOT to stick together and stand behind whoever it is that gets the nomination and not worry about their own agendas. Pull together guys, and take our country back before it IS too late.

[LittleClarkie]

66. I fear that was part of the problem in 2004

I think some folks in our party had already decided that 2008 would be the year we could retake the presidency, and went into autopilot.

[jillan]

69. Welcome to DU!

Great posts.

[diamondsndust]

105. Thanks again for the welcome!

I'm glad I found this site! With enough "like minded people" we can start the process of taking back our democracy and freedoms. Honestly, I think the Democratic Party needs to become a grass roots movement again, get together as one and move forward! I come from a staunch Democratic 3rd generation UNION family.. Support America, Buy American Products! I hope it's ok to do a little shameless plugging of my site too :P LOL
http://www.offrampbums.com/bushbum.html I've been working on some new materials, which I hope to have posted by this weekend, so check it out and check back often, even if just for a laugh!

[Blaukraut]

62. Absolutely

I would also go so far as to say that if there had been any shred of evidence readily at hand, and John Kerry had stood up and fought, he would have stood alone. I will even go one step further and say that he would have been stabbed in the back by many of those with their own agendas. I still remember 2000. Al Gore was called a sore loser and told by many of our own party leaders to just 'give up gracefully'.
I can only imagine how John Kerry would have fared in the same situation. I believe he was fully aware of the fact that almost none of these people had his back.

[Vektor]

63. And that's sad...

that he cannot even trust some of his own. But I think we all know that he can't. There are those who would love to see him fall, so that they may advance their own agendas. There truly is a lot of "penis envy" in Congress.

And I don't just mean literally. :P

[blm]

102. In 2000, Kerry went on Larry King to speak up for Gore's position.

Few did.

[jillan]

104. I did not know that!

wow - Kerry is amazing.

But that just proves Vektor's point - where were the dems supporting Kerry???????

[robbedvoter]

132. Because there WAS A GORE POSITION. WTF was Kerry's position

in 2004? I'm not saying that what he did in 2000 wasn't great, but why didn't he fight his own war?
Consistency is sorely missing from this man's life.

[blm]

135. Back up is sorely missing in his senate career. He didn't get back up on

IranContra for a year - he had to do all the work himself and then when he had the evidence the senior Dems took the issue away from his perview.

Then he got CRAP from the party for investigating BCCI instead of help and cooperation.

Face it - the DNC and the Dem powerstructure wouldn't give Kerry back up on machine fraud and probably told him that BEFORE the election. They didn't believe it before and still act as if they don't believe it now.

And there is no way anyone could convince me that Gore would have contested under the same circumstances as Kerry. If Gore had a perceived popular vote loss of 3million, there is no way he would have contested, especially with a party not interested in the issue of machine fraud.

But, guess what robbed? I believe that Kerry WILL come forward on this. And he will do so with all the ducks in a row. I wish like hell that Gore would work with him on it. I have no doubt Gore is aware of the problem and could be of enormous help.

[robbedvoter]

137. His moment was when all eyes were on him. democracy is gone by now.

By the time his ducks will be in a row, we'll be all toast.

[karynnj]

138. Raising the issue without having all the ducks in a row

would kill it forever and likely prevent any changes going forward - because no one would believe it's a problem. This is something people don't want to believe. So, if it's presented poorly with inaccurate or no backup - it will be discredited.

[robbedvoter]

143. Man, that's the longest preparation for a presentation I heard of!

It better have slides! :shrug:

[Vektor]

155. I hope so too...

A little eye-candy goes great with side of CROW.

[blm]

177. There were clear signs of that in 2000, and Gore and his people knew it

but they chose to not make it an issue with the DEm party.

Listen, robbed, there are elements in the Dem party who are actively working AGAINST the issue. Unfortunately, some of them have been in control of the party for the last decade.

I will trust the ones I trust.

[Vektor]

158. But not in yours!

You CONSISTENTLY bash Kerry every chance you get.

Must be exhausting...

Kerry is consistently defending every other Democrat in the world.

Someone needs to step up to the plate for him.

[karynnj]

140. That really shows Kerry's character as well

that he did this after Gore relesed the names of potential VP candidates, including Kerry - putting them in the an awkward position. In Kerry's case he could even think Gore would pick him after Gore gave him a Kerry 08 tee shirt at a St Patrick Day's breakfast.

Actually - that could come in handy - does giving someone a tee saying (candidate X) (yr) constitute an endorsement???

[kerrygoddess]

64. Great Post Vec!

Voted & Kicked! You Rock!

[Vektor]

65. Thanks, KG!

Much appreciated! :pals:

[jillan]

68. Awesome, awesome post Vektor!!!

I didn't know that Kerry was talking about the fraud on all of those interviews.

One thing I have learned about Kerry, is that he IS NOT afraid to speak up.

K&R for you:)

[Vektor]

72. :-)

Thanks, Pirhana!

[stickdog]

70. What? Still crying in your teacup?

Just kidding ...

[Vektor]

71. Hahaha...

No, not crying at all. Quite steely and determined, actually. :-)

What you're seeing is a firm resolve...

Edited to add: If I were to cry into anything, it'd be a frothy mug O' Guinness!

[ginnyinWI]

103. Thanks for this post, Vek

You speak for a whole lot of us out here! ;)

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

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

[ProSense]

133. And you have one in yours: denial.

Same old arguments based on false information. Kerry stated that the efforts are ongoing, but you prefer ignore the facts. And calling people names doesn't change the facts. It would be one thing if you were engaging in name calling and presenting facts, but that is not the case. All one has to do is go to the volumes of information linked to real sources in the election forum to debunk your last several post. Like this claim:


Lawyers bound to Ohio were called from the tarmac because party bosses
decided that they'll look like cry babies if they go with this. So, they chose to me men and piss it all away - hafter having bragged about lawyers, money and will to fight.
This info came out on Air America withing a week - Mike Papantonio on Ring of Fire reluctantly admitted it.
Tha making of that decision is the crap in which we wallow now. Ignorance, powerlessness and oportunism.
It was one last chance for democracy - and they let it go just so as not to look bad....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2347869&mesg_id=2349598


Here peruse these too sites as well:

http://shadowbox.i8.com/

http://www.ohiohonestelections.org/

[Vektor]

159. I've seen this sort of thing before, actually. It's quite tragic.

There was once this HORRIBLE, VILE woman who used to torment me relentlessly on DU.

(Before I go on, let me add this disclaimer, I do not normally enjoy making fun of people, or putting them down, I don't need to...I'm also a pretty reasonable person with healthy self-esteem who can talk things over rationally with even the nastiest of nasties...unless they are completely wackadoo, and unable to get a grip on reality.)

HOWEVER.

I have a fuse of only a certain designated length, and after a certain number of personal, unprovoked jabs, I will then see fit to tear someone a new corn chute, or several, and will do so with great zeal. There is, as they say, no fucking mercy after a certain point. When some poor bastard has reached that ill fated point, I'll call a spade a spade, and will let them know exactly
what I think of them - and their mother.

Ok, well, this vile woman used to chase me from thread to thread ATTACKING me personally every chance she got. It was always REALLY nasty, bizarre stuff that was kind of psychotic and out of left field. (She has since been banned.)

She was a total Kerry hater, and would always go off about really weird shit like his grooming habits, and how they offended her. (????) (I think she was just upset because she wanted his wang. Stand in line, BEEYOTCH.)

As an example, there was one thread on which a number of us were discussing the recent television appearance of a different politician altogether. There were about 150 posts on this thread, and next thing you know, that crazy woman appears and replies TO ME, where I had said something innocuous like "I saw that too..." and starts ripping me one over Kerry and how much she hates him and what a loser I am for liking him. Needless to say, I was pretty flabbergasted. This pattern of random attacks went on constantly, and no matter where I went, she would show up and zero in on me.

I began to feel as if I had a stalker, and did alert on her, but I'm not sure what came of those alerts. She was around for a while.

Well, later on, I start noticing that she is making digs about a lot of people's APPEARANCES in general, and most of the comments about Kerry are more appearance related, and less about politics.

This raises a red flag.

Then I notice that she likes to show up on "post your pic" threads in the lounge and make "anorexic barbie doll" comments about any woman who is even remotely attractive.

So, I do a little "research" and find an image of this nasty, mean, rotten, woman, and LOW AND BEHOLD....


Bitch is uglier than a bag of smashed assholes!


And when I say that, I remind you again, normally, I do not resort to using appearance related digs as a tactic, not even against the Bushes, but I do believe the ugly on this woman came from the inside out. Like a flood. And she was HORRENDOUSLY ROTTEN to me on a constant basis. So, all's fair, I say.

So it all makes sense. Though I was tempted to call her on it, I refrained. But I knew...she was mean and horrible because she clearly suffered from self-loathing.

Eventually, she disappeared from DU, and I hope she has gone off for some silent introspection, and scrutiny of her own self-hatred, and finds a way to fix what's broken.

In just about all cases, the real nasty haters are just very unhappy people who hate themselves more than they do their victims. Nobody with a healthy outlook on life, and feelings of self worth could ever be as toxic as this woman was. And for the most part, I do feel sorry for people like that.

Until they target me one too many times. There comes a time when they have to accept that I'm not their fucking voodoo doll, so they need to do themselves a favor, and take that shit elsewhere.

Lucky for that woman, she did. I hope she is able to heal someday.

[Vektor]

152. Actually, that person was kidding, as he said.

I, unlike you, can laugh at myself. Because my self-esteem is intact. I don't need to put others down to feel better about myself either.

I see you have resorted to childish insults.

Teen magazine, huh? I'll take that as a compliment! That means I'm pretty. Thanks.

Is that what you do when you're proved wrong too many times? Name call?

Your entire last post was just a nasty tirade against me, totally personal.

SO. LOW.

And sad!

Oh, and, I can't be an apologist. There's nothing to apologize FOR.

Edited to add: OOPS! I failed to mention how heartbroken I will be that you "no longer take me seriously" you know, because I consider your opinion so valid and all. It might take me, like, a whole five minutes to get over it.

Tick tock, tick tock...

Hey, I feel better already! Wow, that took even less time than I thought.

:hi: Thanks for stopping by!

[robbedvoter]

130. Go to my profile and find out. My voting right is no joke to me.

[Vektor]

153. Your anger is no joke to me.

It's a little unsettling.

[pat_k]

106. It is ALREADY Proven. We just need to assert the truth. Kerry Won. Gore Wo

Kerry won the 2004 election. Gore won the 2000 election. We did not elect Bush.

We don't need to explain. We don't need to justify. We don't need to cite exit polls.

We just need to assert the truth with Confidence.

Asserting truth, simply and directly, is far more powerful than all the reasoned explainations in the world.

We KNOW Kerry Won. We KNOW Gore Won. Any attempt to prove otherwise is laughable. (Particularly since the "experts" made it impossible to audit DREs). If anyone insists on proof, just point them to Mark Crispin Miller's "Fooled Again" -- no need to cite the overwhelming list of horrors.)

We must break through the denial that infects people who should know better (The Nation, Mother Jones, ACLU, and so on). The more of us that call them on their cowardly denial, the sooner we will break through. And when the folks on "our side" are speaking with one voice, we will be heard.

It doesn't matter if they call us names. We don't need to be defensive. Just open our mouths and tell the truth. Let them sputter and defend. When they do, they are on our turf.

[TayTay]

109. This doesn't make any sense at all.

Of course you need to explain it. Most Americans have never heard of the issues surrounding election fraud. It has to be explained, one by one to each person. It has to be done over and over and over and over until it sinks in. Just stnading there and saying, "I believe in election fraud, I do, I do, I do believe in election fraud" won't get anything done. Change happens when persistent people don't give up, not when they just stand there and smugly assert that they are right and the other person is a coward for not believing.

This is a recipe for irrelevance.

[pat_k]

111. No. Already proven. See "Fooled Again," Mark Crispin Miller

People who operate on believe are not swayed by knowledge-based arguments anyway, so with many people, you will just be wasting your breath when you lay out the case. We know the facts. We can present our conclusions and point to resources that have compiled the facts. The rest is up to the listener.

We "knowledge-based people" have a terrible problem. We never just tell the truth. We don't assert our conclusions with confidence. We make cases, and think others will see the same truths we do. This is fine if we are talking to a person that thinks like we do, but it is an approach that is doomed to failure with many. Many people just plain don't think like us, and the ones that do will seek the facts on their own, so there is really no need for us to make the case at all. There is more than enough information out there. "Fooled Again" is perhaps the best compilation.

People who operate on belief (I use "belief people" as a short hand) come by their beliefs by looking to others. They adopt conclusions and don't need to know the basis. Beliefs are beliefs, not theories. Belief people adopt a belief because people they identify with believe it. They are influenced by the beliefs of people that "cut to the chase." They are more likely to be influenced by people who accept and respect them as they are than people who look down on them.

"Knowledge people" are doomed to frustration when they try to influence "belief people" by giving them the information that would lead another knowledge person to reach some knowledge-based conclusion. A belief person doesn't adopt their beliefs in that way. They know what they know and arguing details with them does little to change that.

Certainly, some belief people may change their beliefs when enough information is thrown their way, but most don't budge until others around them do. When "everybody knows" something, they join right in. Doesn't matter what they believed yesterday, they just adopt the new beliefs.

When dealing with belief people, knowledge people need to learn to simply assert their conclusions with assurance. No need to muck up a general truth with qualifications. No need to provide the details that led them to their conclusion. Listen to Rush for a short time. You'll notice that he just spouts a series of conclusions. Whys and wherefores are rare.

Ever wondered why polls sometimes turn on a dime? I think those giant swings are belief people flipping. Beliefs can turn on a dime. There is no need to spend time reconstructing the basis to reach a new conclusion. When some critical mass is reached and enough people have adopted a belief, that belief spreads like wildfire.

"Kerry Won" and "Gore Won" are factual truths that will spread like wildfire if we just open our mouths say what we know.

Before you start laying out the facts behind the conclusion, you better make darn sure you are dealing with a knowledge-person, or you are just wasting your time.

[ProSense]

134. Then take it to court.

I'm sure MCM is connect to some big time lawyers. Take it to court. I'll celebrate when the case is won.

[pat_k]

149. On this, the Court is the Court of Public Opinion, and MCM is winning big

Gore Won. Kerry Won.

These are facts.

[LittleClarkie]

161. If MCM was going to win on the court of public opinion

shouldn't the public know who the hell he is? Otherwise it's kinda hard to have an opinion. Most of the people I know don't believe in the fraud and wouldn't know MCM from Adam, facts or no.

[pat_k]

185. Who said anything about keeping anything to ourselves?

Perhaps you overlooked my explanation above.

As I said in a post to another thread, we need to get out there and assert the truth, and do it with confidence. (Which is the opposite of keeping it to ourselves.)

"Start the Mantra" means assert the truth at every opportunity: "Kerry Won. It is a fact." You don’t need to wait for, or make opportunities to "make the case." You can just SAY IT, and do so at every opportunity.

You'll get one of two responses. Agreement or Denial. Point the deniers to MCM's "Fooled Again." They'll try to engage you. Don't bite. Let them sputter. Reassert the truth. Point them to MCM again. More often than not, if you do bite, and engage in argument, you give a denier all sorts of "outs" -- ways to hold onto their denial. The "outs" they find may not be logical, but they are no less effective. When you let yourself get pulled into arguing, you stand a good chance of reinforcing their denial.

When you forcefully assert a truth -- no ifs, ands, or buts; no lengthy explanations needed -- you plant the seeds of doubt in the minds of even the most stubborn of deniers. When you don’t get pulled into arguments, you leave them with all this churning energy on the subject. If they are stirred up enough, they'll run off and try to prove your wrong on their own -- and they will fail.

THAT is how you change minds.

[TayTay]

141. This is a poltiical board. It deals with poltiical problems

And the election fraud is a poltiical problem. We need to treat it as such. We must involve Joe K. Voter in this, as it is Joe K. Voter who is being robbed. And it is Joe and Jane Voter who send their tax money off to Washington to be spent by the people they elect. And it is Joe and Jane Voter who allow their kids to join the military and serve in the cause of protecting this nation and spreading the goals of democracy.

It's about us. The argument has to be made to the people. And it has to be made again and again and again until it sinks in. That's what you do with political problems, you work them to death until you achieve that tipping point in public opinion that signals that you have achieved a critical mass of belief. It doesn't matter if a small group of people believe or read MCM's book. That will never be enough people to achieve actual change.

We have to change tactics and make it about the people who pay the bills, fight the wars and do all the work in this country. Cuz that's who it is about. We will fail miserably unless we begin to talk about this in terms of basic democracy and the very American notion that voting matters, elections should be fair and that votes should be counted. It's about us, "We the People" and what kind of country we want to live in and what values we truly respect. That's the argument, that's how it needs to be framed and that's what it truly is about. It's a political challenge, not a textbook reading.

[pat_k]

150. "Kerry Won" is not a political problem. It is a fact. n/t

[TayTay]

166. It is not a fact for enough people

What changes in the current system has this 'iron-clad' fact produced? Is the vote any more secure now that you have this knowledge all to yourself and people who believe like you do? How do you use this knowledge in the greater world?

What good does it do if a few people know this? What actual difference in the real world does that make? How has this advanced your cause?

That requires a political solution.

[pat_k]

189. ??? "Not fact enough?" ???

Not fact enough??? Not fact enough for what? You've lost me. You seem to have overlooked my reply to you above.

You ask "What changes in the current system has this 'iron-clad' fact produced?"

Unbelievable changes. People are engaged in politics across this nation who have never been engaged before. The efforts of citizens, with little or no help from the big "good government" groups, are winning battles against DREs across this nation.

The fact that Gore Won is behind the massive surge of energy and activism in the center/left -- energy that has been building every year since Bush v. Gore. Any time a candidate or officeholder even alludes to the stolen election, they bring down the house. "Gore Won" and "Kerry Won" are the most powerful facts we have in our arsenal.

You ask "what good does it do if a few people know this?"

The truth has a way of spreading, all by itself. But your question points out the obvious: the more who know the truth, the better.

When the people who know the truth get out there, and assert it with absolute confidence, the truth begins to spread like wildfire.

[ProSense]

190. Well a lot of people believe the Iraq war is wrong.

And there is no end in sight. Why? Action is needed, steps have to be taken and a lot of people have to join forces to ensure that it happens. The war is a situation where no proof is needed.

Even if a majority of the public became suspicious of the election results, a majority of them would want definitive proof. Without it, the case would go to court and be thrown out. Some suspicions would linger, but it would be over and most people would then move on.

[Vektor]

191. I do believe there is more credibility in a collective voice.

Not that it should be that way, necessarily, but that's how it is. If you have a group consensus, all suggesting the same point, it gets noticed. And that's all I'm saying with this thread.

Maybe it is not impossible for one person alone to blow the lid off this thing, but one person shouldn't HAVE to go it alone. We all have a vested interest in seeing the whole party stand up and fight.

I am unsure as to why this is such a foreign concept for a select couple to grasp. When you tirelessly single out one person to blame, you accomplish nothing but exhausting yourself. You miss the big picture at the same time.

It's difficult to understand how or why anyone would take offense to the suggestion that the Democratic party should stand together on this one. (????)

[pat_k]

192. I refer you back to my posts above.

You seem to be arguing with things I have never said.

[ProSense]

194. The more people who know the better.

Still, knowledge must lead to action. That, as I stated, would be proving the election was stolen. Without that proof, that validation in a court or other appropriate venue, the stolen election will go down in history with the rest of the Bush family conspiracy theories. They may be true, but the actions to set the record straight never materialized, whether by obstruction or spin.

I do believe that it is important to convince more people that the elections were fraudulent, but it will take time, and that has always been the case. Screaming it was never an option, IMO, because doing so may have resulted in making more people aware more quickly, but the next step would have been what I outlined in the previous post: going to court without definitive evidence...and so on.

I am glad there are those patient enough to pursue and spread the truth. Something good will come of that, at the very least these efforts will elevate it in the mainstream from a conspiracy theory to something that really happened. Things are changing, we'll see.

[pat_k]

198. I have a very different view on a number of points.

Still, knowledge must lead to action. That, as I stated, would be proving the election was stolen. Without that proof, that validation in a court or other appropriate venue, the stolen election will go down in history with the rest of the Bush family conspiracy theories. . .

You may be unnecessarily connecting different tasks.

The fact that Kerry Won in 2004 and Gore Won in 2000 does not constitute a case for action. Internalizing the fact that our last two Presidential elections were stolen may prompt a person to act, but one doesn't need to know the elections were stolen to be prompted to act -- i.e., Knowing that Gore Won in 2000 or that Kerry Won in 2004 is not a prerequisite for action.

We are faced with a few separate tasks. These tasks are interrelated, but successful execution of one task is not necessarily dependent on the others. Different people can focus on different tasks.

We need to:
=> Confront people with the fact that Bush lost the last two elections.
=> Make the case for action.
=> Challenge rationalizations that are blocking action.
=> Promote specific actions.

To accomplish the first task, we do not need to engage in argument. An army of people have compiled the evidence. Now that it is out there in digestible forms (like Mark Crispin Miller's "Fooled Again"), we can simply assert the truth, with confidence, no ifs, ands, or buts. We can point to the evidence when faced with denials, but, as I point out in the post above simply "cutting to the chase" is extremely powerful.

We'll be far more effective if more of us "keep it simple" and just assert the facts: Gore Won. Kerry Won. Our elections are extremely corruptible, and they have been corrupted.

There are a number of reasons this approach is so powerful, not the least of which is that we have many, many more opportunities to interject a brief comment than to make a lengthy case. When you focus on tossing in one or two sentences, rather than making a lengthy case, you might be amazed at the increased number of exchanges you'll have on the topic.

And every exchange puts another dent in the national wall of denial.

There are not many of us who hold all the evidence in our heads, and even those who do have a good handle on the evidence rarely find themselves in situations that lend themselves to laying out the whole case. But we all have many, many opportunities to simply assert the fact that Bush lost the last two elections.

Accomplishing the second and third tasks (making the case for action and challenging rationalizations) does not rely on citing statistics and instances of fraud either. If you are in a situation that lends itself to a genuine dialog, the case you need to be making is quite different.

As I point out in this Dec 15th post:

When our case for action is centered in detailing the evidence for specific instances of fraud, we unnecessarily open ourselves up to this kind of denial{described in the post I’m responding to}. And permitting the denial allows people to rationalize inaction. We need to make a case that allows "no escape" -- a case grounded in simple truths and moral principles.

I describe the approach -- one that cuts through the rationalizations and muddled thinking that block action -- in this Dec 14th post.

. . .They may be true, but the actions to set the record straight never materialized, whether by obstruction or spin. . .

It is never too late. For one thing, we can move to Impeach the Felonious Five on the Supreme Court for their criminal Bush v. Gore edict -- yes, even posthumously. There are many ways to come to terms with the horrors of the past eight years and "set the record straight". The first step is to face the truth as a nation. I'll be fighting to bring that about for as long as it takes.

. . .I do believe that it is important to convince more people that the elections were fraudulent, but it will take time, and that has always been the case. . .

No one can predict how long it will take. Change rarely happens linearly. Critical mass builds behind the scenes, and then things turn on a dime. We could have reached critical mass yesterday for all we know. The battle may be short. It may be long. We need to challenge grim predictions of a long battle. Such predictions are not logical and discourage people unnecessarily.

People who know the truth just need to jump into the fray. Every action, small or large, has ripple effects we never see.

. . .I am glad there are those patient enough to pursue and spread the truth. Something good will come of that, at the very least these efforts will elevate it in the mainstream from a conspiracy theory to something that really happened. Things are changing, we'll see. . .

My whole point is that it doesn't require "patient" or special people to spread the truth. Anyone who knows the truth can just open their mouths and voice their knowledge. They don't need to be articulate. They don't need a lot of talking points. They just need to notice opportunities to speak, and speak.

. . .Screaming it was never an option, IMO, because doing so may have resulted in making more people aware more quickly, but the next step would have been what I outlined in the previous post: going to court without definitive evidence...and so on.

I'm not big on screaming (although I undoubtedly come on too strong at times).

As you may have gathered if you read the post I cited above, I challenge your emphasis on the need to prove the truth in court. As I point out in that post:

Our right to have confidence that we are being afforded free and fair elections for our government officials is a right that no other consideration can supersede. A free and fair election is one in which all citizens have been afforded equal access and opportunity to cast their vote and have that vote accurately counted.

We are the sovereigns here. We the People, through our representatives, have defined election laws to ensure elections that are free and fair and reflect our will. Any rationalization that justifies violation of this right must be challenged. The law is intended to serve our will, not thwart it. When elections are conducted in a manner that undermines confidence, and application of the law fails us, We the People must demand a political remedy; one that trumps all legalisms and cynical misuse of our courts.

In other words, We the People need to Just Say NO to Untrustworthy Elections. If our election officials fail us and the courts fail to right the wrong, there are other ways to hold them accountable and demand a new, trustworthy, election.

Fascists will always find ways to manipulate our institutions. The only way to fight them is to reject the fascist view that the law can trump reality or our collective will. If we do not put that bit of propaganda out of our minds, we can kiss our constitutional democracy goodbye.

[ProSense]

200. You have just laid out one of the longest and most drawn out

arguments that did nothing to refute the following points:

It will take time

More evidence than is out there to convince people

And evidence that will stand up in court and validate the fact that the election was stolen doesn't exist.


Impeach the Supreme Court? Really?

We the people? See the above points.

[pat_k]

204. ????

It will take time

How do you know things are not on the verge of a massive shift?

More evidence than is out there to convince people

This does not make sense. Perhaps a typo?

And evidence that will stand up in court and validate the fact that the election was stolen doesn't exist.

We know Gore won Florida. The will of the people was clear. It wasn’t even close.

The truth is that while the {s}election of 2000 was not a landslide, the notion that it was close is only supported by circular reasoning. It is based entirely on the notion that the bush kids “won” the election in Florida. The truth is that Gore won the election, as opposed to the vote count, in Florida.

And Florida wasn’t really all that "close" either. Long before Frank Luntz’s focus groups demonstrated that only by defiling the high court, and thereby American justice itself, would they be able to get their theft past American public opinion, extrapolation of the mysteriously uncounted ballots conclusively demonstrated that Florida elected Gore by tens of thousands of voters (if not counted votes).

For anyone with any amount of morality or decency, that should have been the end of it. As an election is not a sporting event or contest of any kind. It is a survey of the will of the electorate. And the result of that survey had been demonstrated to a level of certitude that would be acceptable in any legimate court case.

When these true facts are taken into account, Gore beat the bush kid by 46 electoral votes (292-246). Which is equal to roughly a dozen so-called “red states.” How close does that sound?

The fascists were well aware that a majority of the voters in Florida went to the polls intending to vote for Gore. They don’t even argue otherwise. Rather, they looked to partisan judges to stonewall and reverse the will of the people on "techncial" grounds that in fact violated the intent of the law. And even then, they were unable to stop the counting of votes. To do that, they had to call on partisan members of the Supreme Court to violate their oath to uphold our Constitution.

If you believe such cynical misuse of the courts can trump reality, then you and I have a very different view of what this nation is about.

We also know that more people went to the polls intending to vote for Kerry in Ohio and Florida. We know that vote counts in nearly every state were corrupted in Bush’s favor. Cynical misuse of the courts to stonewall and disregard these facts violate the sole moral principle on which this nation was founded -- the consent of the governed. The people are sovereign here. We have created institutes through which to express our will, but we do not cede our ultimate authority to the institutions we have created.

The reality is known. The courts may or may not catch up. Charges of wrongdoing are being litigated in nearly every state. But, whatever the outcome of those cases, if partisan judges disregard reality in violation of the intent of the law, their judgment holds no authority over the sovereign will of the people. We can Just Say No to Untrustworthy elections.

Impeach the Supreme Court? Really?

Certainly. Why not? The five who made up the majority violated their oath to uphold our Constitution. They overstepped their Constitutional authority and rendered election in Florida incomplete under Florida law. The usurped the role of Congress, and they did it knowingly. Their crime can't be erased with the passage of time.

We the people? See the above points.

If this is a point, you have not made it clear.

[ProSense]

205. Do you understand your point (in your own words)?

"No one can predict how long it will take. Change rarely happens linearly."

Reread your post.


And when the hearings begin to impeach the Supreme Court, I'll stand and cheer. Please keep me posted.

[pat_k]

206. Look at history. Things often turn on a dime... [edited]

... change rarely progresses linearly.

Or, metaphorically, we can't predict when one more straw will break the camel's back.

In the social and political realm, the accumulation of "straws" is largely invisible. When the last one hits, masses of people can come to a common conclusion, much to the surprise of all prognosticators. A "last straw" revelation could come tomorrow. It could take years. There is no way to know, so there is no reason to discourage people with grim assessments of "a long hard slog ahead." You are more likely to immobilize with such predictions than to prompt action.

[ProSense]

207. This is proof that things only appear to change on a dime.

Sudden change only happens as a result of smoking gun evidence, being caught in the act, or as you say that one straw that broke the camel's back, which means that the weight has been building up for a period of time.

[pat_k]

208. What evidence do you have the we are not on the verge

... and will reach it tomorrow?

As I said, no single person can be aware to all the accumulating straws. No one has any idea how close or far we are, so any prediction it will take a long time has no basis.

Signing off.

[ProSense]

209. On the verge? Don't know, but it's more than a year (or five) later. n/t

[pat_k]

211. That's opinion. Unless you're omniscient, it is impossible to know. n/t

[ProSense]

213. Not a prediction: 2004 election was a year ago; 2000, five years ago. n/t

[pat_k]

214. And the relevance of this is??

The "last straw" revelation could come tomorrow. It could come next month. It could come in five years. That Kerry Won the 2004 Election could become an "everybody knows" item so fast your head would spin.

Every person who knows the truth simply needs to do what they can to add "straws" -- large ones, small ones. When victory comes, whether that is sooner or later, they can be proud of their role in making it happen.

[ProSense]

215. Time. It takes time, and again you make point that it does. n/t

[pat_k]

217. How much longer is unknown. Could turn on a dime next month.

... or next year. The point is that we don't know how long.

People are so knee jerk with "It will be a long hard slog" or similar grim assessments. My point is that there is no logical basis for such assessments. Change can come very fast.

[McCamy Taylor]

107. The fraud isnt a one man job either. Lots of players involved. Bob Ney

for example. The more rocks you turn over, the more nasty bugs you find.

I try to do my part at my websit Grand Theft Election Ohio but it is hard to keep up. If anyone has a hair raising story send me a link. An illustrated version is easier for people to remember.

http://www.grandtheftelectionohio.com/index.htm

[robbedvoter]

112. True, but that one man still copped out for personal convenience

I agree with everything you write about the entire party needing to be behind this - not just Conyers and barbara Boxer. All true and sensible statements.
But their faults do not excuse Kerry's concession, neither his timely visit to Iraaq when the Senate was voting to confirm the electoral votes. best you can say is:

"Kerry was not the only one who ditched us"

Which is not much, considering that at that moment all our efforts , hopes and votes were pinned on him.
It was his moment in history. He failed to act.

[Vektor]

118. Saying he "failed to act" is not really accurate...

Most of the general public likely has no idea in what capacity he has acted or is still acting.

Some of us, maybe do. (???)

Either way, the media is hardly going to cover his efforts, and that's the only way that most Americans know what capacity he is acting in. By what the news tells them. Which is never really correct or complete information.

But still, my post was not to "excuse" anyone, but point out that there are very good reasons why Kerry had no choice but to concede. You can't "act" when you haven't a grain of evidence to act on. Any prosecuting attorney knows that. (And how could he, Nov. 3rd? They STILL haven't solved the mystery of what really went on, where, and how.)

There was no "self convenience" involved. There was only reality. That reality being there is no way anybody could have proved by Nov. 3rd that the Repukes stole it, and how.

If Kerry acted "out of self convenience" then the entire Democratic party did too. I didn't hear a SINGLE DEM cry fraud the day after the election.

If Kerry enjoyed acting out of self-convenience, he'd have thrown a fit the next day with no evidence whatsoever. That would have been self-convenience. Kerry acts out of SELFLESSNESS every day when he speaks out for other Dems who have taken a hit, including Gore, right after he was robbed. Kerry defended him on Larry King Live. I'm still waiting to see another Democrat go on a major network talk show or news show and say that the election was flat out stolen from Kerry, and that he indeed won.

Someone needs to step forward and defend Kerry, now. If he were the one to do it, he'd be nailed to the cross.

Worse, nobody would believe him. He needs the party's backing.

[robbedvoter]

120. He had the bullhorn and put it down (Nov 5, 2004)

That was his moment - he missed it. And now, dems - instead of putting all their efforts in correcting elections are blabbling about "reinventing ourselves" and "What went wrong"

[Vektor]

123. I'm not saying that...

I don't think we need to reinvent ourselves at all, and I know what went wrong.

Republican dirty tricks went wrong.

And yes, he had the bullhorn, but what would he have yelled? That's my concern. We all knew in our hearts the Repukes were up to no good, but could we prove it? Beyond a shadow of a doubt? Unfortunately, we can't now, and we certainly couldn't the day after the election. Anything Kerry said would have been met with disdain. Election theft is a big accusation. What did he have to back it up?

The main thing is this has to be PROVED. We have to have either written confessions from the guilty parties, or video of someone hacking the tabulators...I mean, all the statistics we talk about, the exit polls, the impossible margins of error, the disenfranchisement...they certainly deserve scrutiny, but they would not count as irrefutable proof in the courts. Which is what we need, and that will take a long time.

Even that, all those facts, figures, and statistics, those took a while to compile too. Kerry certainly did not have all that together on Nov. 3rd. So again, he could have shouted into the bullhorn, but what would he have said?

Nothing anyone would have taken seriously. There is still a large segment of the DEMOCRATIC population that doesn't believe there was fraud. One man alone would never be able to convince them. Especially not the guy who "lost."

The whole party needs to pick up the bullhorn, or no one will hear a peep.

Kerry probably knew that better than anyone. Imagine if this happened to you? How would you feel if your whole entire party remained quiet?

[robbedvoter]

128. Republican dirty tricks went just fine - in part because of Kerry

They perfected Florida, botched Ohio and a few others - they got THEIR job done. Kerry let US down.

[blm]

136. The DNC and left media failed when pitted against the RW machine.

Bush didn't have to do SHIT.

Kerry bested Bush in every matchup between the two of them. It was the RW machine that did all the daily heavy lifting for Bush.

[robbedvoter]

144. No doubt about that.

[Vektor]

148. I'm don't understand how you can say that.

Who's "US?"

Maybe you feel he let YOU down, but I don't feel he has let me down one iota. I also can't help but wonder if your feelings of dissatisfaction stem less from something Kerry failed to do, and more from your own expectations that may have been unrealistic.

As it has been said countless times, Kerry did all he could humanly (realistically) do and continues to do so. Most times, when people find themselves so bitterly, relentlessly disappointed in someone else whom they say has "let them down," it is because they expected the impossible.

One cannot thrown stones at Kerry for not "doing enough" without throwing stones at the entire party. We're supposed to be in this together.

The party let Kerry down.

[ProSense]

125. On Nov. 3 ...

there was an army of people calling for the machines to be secured, including members of Kerry's campaign. They prepared lawsuits and went about gathering evidence. The entire army of election fraud advocates, including just about every liberal blog out there, were out in full effect. They even got some brief MSM coverage on Countdown and a little coverage on C-SPAN. They raised a stink and made it all the way to the courts with a lot of preliminary evidence and got slapped down, partly because of Republican obstruction, partly because the media ignored it and partly because they didn't have that one piece of evidence that they could use to expose the fraud. So the bullhorn symbolism pales in comparison to what actually happened and still nothing came of those efforts. And a lot of those people who launched the original charge are still at work trying to expose the fraud.

[robbedvoter]

129. Lawyers bound to Ohio were called from the tarmac because party bosses

decided that they'll look like cry babies if they go with this. So, they chose to me men and piss it all away - hafter having bragged about lawyers, money and will to fight.
This info came out on Air America withing a week - Mike Papantonio on Ring of Fire reluctantly admitted it.
Tha making of that decision is the crap in which we wallow now. Ignorance, powerlessness and oportunism.
It was one last chance for democracy - and they let it go just so as not to look bad....

[TayTay]

142. It was not the last chance for democracy

There are no last chances for democracy. There is the will to fight going forward and the decision to keep working the problem. If we had that last chance defeatist argument in our past we wouldn't have female suffrage, the advancements of the civil rights movement and so forth.

The only way this dies is if people let it die.

[LittleClarkie]

162. Noooo! It's too laaaate! Doooomed I tell you. Doooomed!

(runs around thread screaming) Iiieeeeee!

How does Kerry end up being more to blame than Bush, is what I'd like to know. Somehow Bush gets a pass in all of this, and the weight of the world rests on Kerry instead.

[diamondsndust]

124. Very well stated...

"Someone needs to step forward and defend Kerry, now. If he were the one to do it, he'd be nailed to the cross.

Worse, nobody would believe him. He needs the party's backing."

This is what I was talking about last night. There is a division within our Party that needs to be healed quickly. Sure, everyone who runs WANTS to be President, but in the end, the one who gets the nomination NEEDS to be backed and supported by the rest of the ones who ran, as well as by the WHOLE Party itself. The people spoke, chose their candidate, and the Party needs to back him (or her) 100 percent or they are helping the other side. I cannot stress it enough... we need to stick together... stick together... stick together... there IS power in numbers!

At first, I was disappointed by Kerry conceding but as time went by I also realized that it was his only option, and he did so with the same grace and eloquence as always. The man is of unquestionable character, as should be evident by all the assaults on his character by the repukes, which he stood tall and proud above all of them, and didn't have to stoop to their level. His record of military and government service to our great nation speaks for him. Hey John, run again in '08! We have your back! I want to see Kerry/Edwards2: The Showdown! Maybe a new party is in order?? The TRUE Democratic Party??

http://www.offrampbums.com/bushbum.html

[LittleClarkie]

160. You can say accurately that he failed to act in the way you thought he

should.

But you can only speculate on why. Personal convenience is one possibility, but one I reject. For lack of a smoking gun would seem a more likely possibility.

[robbedvoter]

145. But claiming it was - and it was Kerry's. He blew it!

[Vektor]

156. And, so then did the party that didn't stand up for him.

If Kerry failed, they all did.

But *I* don't believe in blaming the victim.

[robbedvoter]

173. Victim of the theft, accomplice in the deceit. No blame for the theft

for Kerry. Just for the cover up. And the failure of the rest of the party doesn't excuse kerry anymore than the criminal actions of all republicans make W any less guilty for his own.

[Vektor]

181. That is so ridiculous that it is laughable.

Kerry, an ACCOMPLICE IN THE DECEIT? WOW. That is rich.

Your blinding hatred for the man has clouded your judgment. I can't even believe you would say something so off the wall. You really do just want an excuse to hurl insults, don't you?

Kerry needs no "excuse". He did nothing wrong.

[robbedvoter]

182. He can do no wrong by you. As for the rest of his voters, the country

the world - history will sort it out, you are too emotional to be able too.

[Vektor]

186. Nice, false, assumption.

He can do no wrong by me? You know that since we have talked about every aspect of his career and I said that? We are talking about one subject. In this case, I think he did OK. Since you and I have never discussed other issues about him, you have no basis on which to comment about anything else.

Emotional, you say? Hardly. You clearly know nothing about me. I have weathered baseless attacks, one after another on this subject, and where my attackers are losing their cool, and resorting to nasty personal digs, (to the point of getting their posts deleted) I am completely rational.

I hate to break this to you, and subsequently burst your little bubble of delusion, but you don't know me. Don't go making assumptions about me based on the fact that you seem to hate the guy I voted for. In my line of work, you CANNOT be emotional. I dare you to spend one day doing what I do for a living, and not come away a basket case.

You really have no idea what you are talking about. You have just reached the point where you know nobody is listening to your insults toward Kerry any more, so you are turning on me instead, because you disagree with my thread and my viewpoint.

Why DO you appear on every thread about Kerry, no matter how innocuous, to spread hate? No constructive discourse, just nasty barbs. Do you see me appearing on your threads about other candidates that you like, doing that?

No, and you never will. That would be absolutely classless.

[robbedvoter]

193. Hate, love fon't enter into my posting. My handle says it all.

I am angry as hell about it - and whether you see me worthy of your tea party or not, I won't stop talking about it and being angry. The election was stolen - not "fraud" - not some votes - the outcome was twarted and that voided my vote. And Kerry should have fought for it. When it mattered.

[Vektor]

197. You are free to talk about it if you wish...

even here. It is when you start using insults that turns people off. Nobody wants to exclude you from the conversation, but personal attacks are just not necessary. You can be angry without being mean.

[politicasista]

146. Kicked and nominated!

Thanks Vektor!:kick:

[Vektor]

157. Thanks Sista!

(Dig the hater here...)

Mrow, hiss! :rofl:

[BigYawn]

147. it will take ONLY ONE MAN or WOMAN to prove election fraud beyond

any reasonable doubt. And that one person has to be a
computer programmer or a technician who actually did
the dirty work, to come forward.

That's all we need, just one such person.

No amount of discrepancies between polls and actual votes
can be made to stand up in court.

[pat_k]

154. Nope. We know Kerry Won. The evidence takes us WAY OVER the reasonable. .

...doubt line.

If you harbor any reasonable doubts, reading the following book will put them to rest.


Fooled Again
How the Right Stole the 2004 Election
& Why They'll Steal the Next One Too
UNLESS WE STOP THEM!

By Mark Crispin Miller

[BigYawn]

196. Okay, then why has not Kerry gone to courts with the evidence Mark Miller

has documented in his book? I don't see any hope of
reversing the 2004 election reults without proving
it in court. If Mark Crispin Millers book has the goodies
Kerry needs, he should go ahead and file a suit ASAP.

[pat_k]

199. I challenge the fascist view that the law can trump reality or the collect

... collective will of the people.

As I point out in a post from Dec 12:

Our right to have confidence that we are being afforded free and fair elections for our government officials is a right that no other consideration can supersede. A free and fair election is one in which all citizens have been afforded equal access and opportunity to cast their vote and have that vote accurately counted.

We are the sovereigns here. We the People, through our representatives, have defined election laws to ensure elections that are free and fair and reflect our will. Any rationalization that justifies violation of this right must be challenged. The law is intended to serve our will, not thwart it. When elections are conducted in a manner that undermines confidence, and application of the law fails us, We the People must demand a political remedy; one that trumps all legalisms and cynical misuse of our courts.

In other words, We the People need to Just Say NO to Untrustworthy Elections. If our election officials fail us and the courts fail to right the wrong, there are other ways to hold them accountable and demand a new, trustworthy, election.

Fascists will always find ways to manipulate our institutions. The only way to fight them is to reject the fascist view that the law can trump reality or our collective will. If we do not put that bit of propaganda out of our minds, we can kiss our constitutional democracy goodbye.

Facing the truth as a nation -- that Bush lost the last two elections -- is just the first step. What to do about it comes next. There are many options, starting with Impeaching the Felonious Five on the Supreme Court for their criminal Bush v. Gore edict -- yes, even posthumously. We can call on Members of Congress to pass legislation declaring all actions taken during the Bush administration null and void. When this nations faces that truth, and the people remember that they are the soveriegns here, the possibilities are endless.

[BigYawn]

210. You are right about all that, my only point is

that the quickest way to overturn the election(s) is to prove
fraud in courts. By the time we get the congress elected to
serve people's interest could take several years, by then shrub
would have already served out his 2 terms.

And in My Honest Opinion the only sure way to succeed in courts is
to gey one of the technicians/programmers to come forward and admit
his/her role and present the fraudulent code to the courts. I am sure
there were several people involved in the fraud, and if there is a way
for ONE of them to regret the crime, Kerry could still find justice.

[pat_k]

212. I'm all for litigation, but the ultimate court is the court of public

...opinion.

We just need to take care that we do not fall into the trap "Can't do anything until it is proven in court." There are many, many ways the people can "Just Say NO to Untrustworthy Elections."

[BigYawn]

216. Amen to "just say no" but we gotta realize we are dealing with sheeple

who do not spend time observing political details.
My wife (sigh) amongst them.

[TayTay]

167. That is not true!

One man or woman is an aberration and can be dismissed. The Republicans are quite good at discounting single occurrences. What we need is a few people to come forward because that can be proof of a conspiracy. That would much better.

There will be no single savior of democracy. Democratic institutions are saved by groups of people, that is the nature of democracy.

[ray of light]

175. You're right.

[BigYawn]

195. Not really! The actual crooked programmer will be able to produce

concrete evidence such as code used in voting machines,
which is likely to stand up far better in high courts.

[WildEyedLiberal]

164. You're 100% correct - the party FAILED Kerry

Of course, there are those with shady agendas who would like to place all the blame squarely at Kerry's feet. These people will not listen or respond to proven facts, which leads me to conclude that they have an agenda other than the truth. These people are destructive fifth column elements and must be excised like the malignant tumor they are.

[Vektor]

165. So which method you you prefer?

Cauterization, or standing sending a helicopter into their "flight path?"

:evilgrin:

[diamondsndust]

170. give them an unarmored HumVee...

an M-16 and NO body armor, then send them to the hottest zones in Iraq and Afghanistan to fight their illegal war for oil on their own.

[Vektor]

188. Excellent idea.

...Or maybe give them 24 hours to prove the stolen election with no help.

Then attack them viciously if they can't do it.

[zann725]

176. I think we ALL should keep screaming "EF." But Noe and Abramoff

connection could be the smoking guns we need. Noe at least, and his money laundering IN Ohio on a BIG scale, not only to effect Repug campaigns (including Judicial), and National Repug campaigns NOT only "swung" the election, but also the balance of Congress, etc. AND if Abramoff squeals, Noe may too. If Noe does, Blackwell does too. I think this is very emininent and close, the exposing of REAL "smoking guns" in Ohio....that Kerry won't have to say the EF word himself. Others will for him. That, and ShrubCo's plummeting programs and economy.

[StoryTeller]

178. Excellent post, Vektor!

John Kerry won me over with his integrity and his dignity. I know there are people who would have preferred to see him pitch a fit about the election, but I think he chose to behave in a much more presidential manner. I wish he had received more support, but I respect how he conducted himself given the situation he faced. He is a very classy, intelligent, honorable person. I'm proud of him--wish he was my senator. :)

[Vektor]

187. Thank you!

Your voice of reason is music to my ears!

[ret5hd]

218. .

[marions ghost]

219. I believe that

the politicians (R & D) all know the election was stolen.
(Stolen in many ways, as u say OP)

It's the voters that are in the dark and in denial. The Dems have been unwilling to risk opening this huge can of worms. If Kerry is willing to do anything about the election problems at any time, it is commendable. We need all the support we can get.

good post Vektor