NYT Weighs In - Take a Deep Breath, Nothing Unexpected Here...

[IndyOp]

Crappy journalism:

1) One quote from Kerry's generic response letter to people who asked him to contest, saying that he won't.

2) One statement from the 'wise' reporter indicating how unfortunate it will be to abandon ordinarily polite ritual.

3) One quote from an idiot/Republican calling us 'loony'. (Remember Gandhi's progression: First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win...).

Really, if the worst they can do is to say we are being impolite and call us "loony" -- I say, what the heck -- BRING 'EM ON -- let's defend Democracy!

Election Results to Be Certified, With Little Fuss From Kerry
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/06/politics/06elect.html?oref=login>

:kick:

[Helga Scow Stern]

1. I was just about to fax Hastert again in response to his spokesman

making such an idiotic statement. Any ideas?

On edit:
Good assessment of the article, BTW.

Here is the obnoxious Hastert spokesman quote:

"They are really just trying to stir up their loony left," John Feehery, a spokesman for Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, said of the Democrats.

[IndyOp]

9. Most useful line "Republicans are eager for debate"

Isn't it fantastic? "Republicans are eager for debate" -- so Republicans should stand up and contest, right? The elections were free and fair and they have reams of data and 1,000's of witnesses to prove it. So let's debate!

:kick:

[liberalMabhool]

2. Damn!

[Helga Scow Stern]

3. That's what I meant by my post earlier that I don't even feel like asking

the MSM to cover anything anymore.

They'll just have to catch on some day.

People are learning, with or without them. We will just have to keep creating our own media.

[fearnobush]

4. Ohh, it's the "mea Culpa" NYT's. Here's what they sent me.

Dear Mr. fearnobush,

In the first few weeks after the election several readers wrote us about this issue. Mr. Okrent responded to these concerns on his web journal. I include the entry below (see post #35).

<http://forums.nytimes.com/top/opinion/readersopinions/forums/thepubliceditor/danielokrent/index.html?offset=36&fid=.f555e99/36>

dokrent - 5:40 PM ET November 21, 2004 (#35 of 40)

The Times and Covering Allegations of Election Fraud

Sorry to have been neglecting this spot for so long; I could give you a list of excuses, but none of them
is especially good.

Now, though, my mailbox has begun to overflow with criticisms of The Times for not looking more deeply
into allegations of large-scale vote fraud in Ohio and Florida, a story (if true) that no one can ignore. In some
of these messages, writers say that "now that the theft of the election has been proven ...," The Times must
reveal this to the wider world.

Were the assertion even nearly so, I would do more than recommend that The Times reveal it ­ I’d be
demanding it publicly, loudly and frequently. But the evidence I have seen to date proves nothing, other than
that there was a certain amount of error in certain counties, and an aggressive effort by some partisans in
some areas to challenge some likely Democratic voters. To my knowledge, no one in the Kerry campaign’s
vast on-the-ground operation, or in its armies of well-situated lawyers, has made the argument that what
happened in Ohio (or Florida) could have changed the result of the election. Similar views were explained
in "Vote Fraud Theories, Spread By Blogs, Are Quickly Buried," by Tom Zeller (Nov. 12).

And more, I expect, will be explored and explained in future articles if meaningful allegations can indeed
be established as facts. Both Matthew Purdy, the head of The Times’s investigative unit, and Rick Berke, the
paper’s Washington editor, assure me that reporters will continue to look into the issue. I’m confident that if
they find something, they’ll publish it. A good investigative reporter (much less a whole staff of them) turning
away from a story like this one ­ if true ­ would be like a flower turning away from the sun. Careers are made
by stories that detail massive election fraud.

But: the operative words here are if true. Wishing doesn’t make it so. Although it would probably pain him to
have someone from The Times touting his work, David Corn of The Nation, in a recent column, offers plenty
of reason to examine the allegations before I, or anyone else, should leap to give them credence. You can
find Corn’s column here.

Since then, over seven hundred other readers have raised similar concerns requesting more coverage on this issue. You may be interested in the following articles:

<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/22/politics/22poll.html>

<http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/15/politics/15ohio.html>

I raised reader concerns with Mr. Okrent and a few days ago he asked me to let you know that he does not believe The Times's coverage of the voting in Ohio is over.

[Helga Scow Stern]

5. Others got that letter too. I was just thinking about it tonight,

remembering that last line....

[DearAbby]

6. The road is not going to be easy...Hard work reaps rewards

Have to shine the light, to see where the roaches scatter. The light has been switched on. Everyone knew the Spin machine would be kicked on "high". Buckle your seat belts kiddies...You wanna take a ride?

:hippie:

Edit newbie blunder on the smiley

[senseandsensibility]

8. Welcome to DU

DearAbby!!:toast: Good post!!

[benevolent dictator]

7. I got a call from D.C.

they said that Kerry had asked that the vote not be challenged, and that the right way to go about it was to push for election reform. This came from... Dr. Lora Chamberlain. (Dr. Lora Chamberlain [e-mail] http://www.illinoisprogressives.org ) She said it at the pre-rally. She did not hear the announcement herself, but this is what she heard. Another at the rally thinks she said something it being report on CNN? but didn't actually hear the announcement herself.

None the less, it's important to keep the pressure on them. If they certify it, nothing happens, if they don't, things might change. Most of the Senators seemed very reluctant to challenge the vote, keep pressure on them, we only need one to break.

The said to pass this message on:

Prior to this announcement, they had as many as 8 senators (including Reid, Clinton, Schumer, and Byrd) were seriously considering challenging the vote, let's make sure they do!

Call the congressional operator: 1-800-839-5276 between 8 AM and noon on January 6th. The vote is at one.

You can ask for any of the 44 Democratic senators. Ask to speak to their aid who deals with election fraud issues, and if the aid is not in, ask to leave a message and request it be delievered within the hour.

Tell them: This is not about Kerry anymore, this is about investigating and verifying the vote before it's ratified. Please stand up and challenge the vote, even though Kerry is not going to.

What could it hurt to lobby our Senators one last time?