In Ohio I think you may be right. I was thinking about Oregon when I wrote those posts and in Oregon Kerry won by a large amount of votes.
<blockquote>
Michael Badnarik / Richard V. Campagna.......7,256 - 40%
George W. Bush / Dick Cheney...............866,300 - 47.19%
David Cobb / Patricia La Marche............5,303 - 29%
John F. Kerry / John Edwards...............942,646 - 51.35%
Michael Anthony Peroutka / Chuck Baldwin...5,253 - 29%
Write-in Votes.............................8,938 - 49%
Total......................................1,835,696
</blockquote>
In Ohio straight ticket voting could (more than likely) have played a part in perpetuating a possible fraud in the outcome of the election and for Cobb to only get 24 votes (I assume you're talking about the whole state) seems to me to indicate something fishy is going on. I find it extremely difficult to believe only 24 people voted for the Green Party.
The "sovereign citizens" love to impersonate cops, judges, preachers, agents of federal agencies, and they are always trying to infiltrate county government, some non-profits and organizations like the American Legion or VFW. I was once a member of both the American Legion and VFW in Oregon and I actually saw them try to become elected officials of two posts here in Oregon.
On the home schooling, charter school issues, I believe the "sovereign citizens" are using ultra-conservative Republicans to further home schooling and charter schools. The "sovereign citizens" have pushed for home schooling for about thirty years. They hate public schools. The "sovereign citizens" believe, and they are correct, they can teach their kids to hate America more easily, brainwash their kids with bizarre Christian Identity beliefs more easily, and not have to mix with those pesky non-Aryan, non-master race folks if they can isolate their kids by home schooling. I'm not saying everybody who home schools is an anti-government looney, just a lot of them.
I have more on this at one of my posts.
http://sleazereport.com/wp/index.php?p=652It seems the ultra-conservative Republicans have actually adopted a couple of the ideas of the "sovereign citizens".
Charter schools are really just another attempt to isolate the kids of the "sovereign citizens", albeit a compromise mostly.
The second to last paragraph in the preceding post hits the nail on the head.
<blockquote>
I'm kind of ranting and raving here, since most of these thoughts are only half-baked at this point, but I'm hoping to get more input and ideas. It sure seems like these people (and by "these" I mean SC/CI, Constitution Party, Falwell, Buchanan, some Libertarians (not all of them are LaRouchies, I guess) are really quite effectively shaping and molding society from under the radar
</blockquote>
Orcinus (David Neiwert) is a writer in Seattle, WA who runs the blog Orcinus. He has spent years studying militias, sovereign citizens, and Christian Identity adherents in the Northwest.
He has written a four part series of posts exploring how the lunatic ideas of the "sovereign citizen" movement and the "Christian Identity" movement have seeped into the ultra-conservative movement and from there into the conservative movement. Here's the link.
http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2004_10_10_dneiwert_archive.html#109694976530359103Part one of Orcinus' series is called "Part 1: The Morphing of the Conservative Movement". The following are the first three paragraphs of his series.
<blockquote>
When trying to make sense of the seemingly inextricable political morass into which we've descended, one of the real keys to understanding our situation is realizing that conservatism and the "conservative movement" are in fact two entirely different things.
Conservatism, like liberalism, is not a dogmatic philosophy, but rather a style of thought, an approach to politics or life in general. It stresses the status quo and traditional values, and is typified by a resistance to change. Likewise, liberalism is not relegated to a discrete "movement" but rather describes a general politics that comprises many disparate concerns.
The "conservative movement," however, is a decidedly dogmatic political movement that demands obeisance to its main tenets (and exiles those who dissent) and a distinctly defined agenda. Movement followers proudly announce their membership. (In contrast, there is no "liberal movement" worth speaking of -- just a hodgepodge of loosely associated interests.) Importantly enough, their raison d'etre has transformed from the extenuation of their "conservative" impulses into the Machiavellian acquisition of power, usually through any means necessary.
</blockquote>
On my blog there is also reference to influential, somewhat secret, white supremacist groups called Citizens' Councils that later morphed into the Councils of Conservative Citizens.
http://sleazereport.com/wp/index.php?p=175The following is an excerpt from the post at the link above.
<blockquote>
'Uptown Klan,' remnant of racist history
By CAMERON McWHIRTER
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/09/04
INDIANOLA, Miss. — Fifty years ago today, 14 white men gathered in a modest home in this drowsy Mississippi Delta town to launch a grass-roots movement.
Led by a 32-year-old farmer named Robert "Tut" Patterson, the men organized the first Citizens' Council, a group dedicated to stopping public school integration following the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision.
Bill Johnson/Special
Arthur Marble is the first elected black mayor of Indianola, Miss. The Delta town was the birthplace 50 years ago of the Citizens' Council movement, dedicated to stopping public school integration.
A cartoon taken from a November 1955 issue of the official newspaper of the Citizens' Councils of America depicts the projected effects of the Brown v. Board of Education decision for public school integration and the role of the NAACP.
Modern-day offshoot takes up case for whites
As the Citizens' Council movement petered out, a handful of members met in Atlanta in 1985 to form a new organization to defend whites against what they saw as encroachment by minorities and immigrants.
The new group, the Council of Conservative Citizens, drew most of its membership from the rolls of the dying Citizens' Councils.
"
outlived its usefulness," said Gordon Baum, an attorney and former autoworker who heads the new group. "It was apparent to some of us that it was going to sleep."
Today the CCC, based in St. Louis, claims about 15,000 members, though actual membership cannot be independently confirmed.
The CCC has had links with several high-profile Southern politicians, including Louisiana white supremacist David Duke. The council made headlines in the late 1990s when Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and then Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) were criticized for attending CCC meetings.
Lott initially denied any knowledge of the group until he was confronted by a Washington Post reporter with a copy of the group's newsletter. According to the newsletter, Lott told group members in 1992 that they "stand for the right principles and the right philosophy." When pressed, Lott renounced the group.
Barr said he attended just one meeting in South Carolina but had no idea what the group advocated. Barr later condemned the group and its beliefs.
The CCC argues that whites have been disenfranchised by the federal government. The group publishes literature attacking gays and its official Web site posts stories about violent crime committed by blacks against whites. Other editorials bemoan the collapse of the apartheid regime in South Africa, Jewish lobbyists in Washington and President Bush's proposal to loosen immigration policy.
</blockquote>
I notice <blockquote>s don't seem to work, however, I think I'll keep the blockquotes in anyway.
__UPDATE__
The following from Steve Gilliard's News Blog illustrates a couple of points I was trying to make in my preceding paragraphs. The link is
http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2004/11/bill-of-what-wingnuts-to-challenge.html
<blockquote>
Courts first to go in right-wing revolution
By George McEvoy
Palm Beach Post Columnist
Saturday, November 27, 2004
Every time the so-called Christian Right has tried to turn this country into a theocracy, those pesky federal courts have stymied things.
So now — according to the liberal Americans United for Separation of Church and State — the right-wingers have come up with a new scheme. All they plan to do is to strip the federal judges of their right to hear cases involving the separation of church and state.
Reportedly, such leaders as the Rev. Jerry Falwell and Republican Rep. John Hostettler of Indiana, flush with what they see as a successful right-wing revolution, believe they can make the federal courts virtually powerless.
Rep. Hostettler, addressing a special legislative briefing of the Christian Coalition last month in Washington, reportedly talked at length about a bill he plans to introduce. It would deny federal courts the right to hear cases challenging the Defense of Marriage Act, which bans same-sex marriage.
"Congress controls the federal judiciary," Rep. Hostettler was quoted as saying. "If Congress wants to, it can refer all cases to the state courts. Congress can say the federal courts have limited power to enforce their decision."
Apparently, the Hoosier congressman has not heard of the balance of power among the three arms of our government. He was quoted as telling the Christian Coalition members:
"When the courts make unconstitutional decisions, we should not enforce them. Federal courts have no army or navy... The court can opine, decide, talk about, sing, whatever it wants to do. We're not saying they can't do that. At the end of the day, we're saying the court can't enforce its opinions."
Another congressman, Alabama Republican Robert Aderholdt, was quoted as advocating court stripping as a means to protect state-sponsored Ten Commandment displays, such as the one erected by former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore.
And then there was Sheila Cole, executive director of the Republican Study Committee, a group of ultra-conservative House members. She said federal judges who refuse to listen to Congress might well be impeached.
Others in attendance at the session called for more direct action to render the federal courts powerless. During a question-and-answer period, a member reportedly said that in such cases as the Ten Commandments display, people should form a human barrier, if neccessary, to prevent removal.
</blockquote>
Steve Gilliard then goes on to write about the above news article.
<blockquote>
When I say this isn't a fascist dictatorship, I mean that. But when you have Congressmen who no longer believe in the rule of law, you're taking a step on that road.
Democracy HAS to be defended. There are ALWAYS threats to our freedom, always have been. Some by the misguided, some by the rational and well-meaning.
Rep. Hostettler has not heard of the following: Marbury vs. Madison
</blockquote>
He's right. Having Congressmen who have become, essentially, idiot tools of those ultra-conservatives who want to do away with the constitution and turn this country into some sort of extremist theocracy indicate that many of the lunatic ideas of the "sovereign citizens" have made their way into many areas of the "conservative movement".
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(829 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
