How to Keep Democrats From Blowing the November Election

Posted in General, TAKE ACTION! on May 9th, 2006
Posted by CrisisPapers in Editorials & Other Articles
Tue May 09th 2006, 05:09 AM
| Bernard Weiner |

I know it doesn’t make much sense, given how the Republicans seem to be imploding every day in new scandals and corruptions and reckless policies — and with the Administration’s approval numbers about to head into the 20s — but I can’t shake the fear that somehow Bush&Co. will keep both houses of Congress in the November election.

This anxiety was heightened the other day when, in a local supermarket, I ran into Stephen Rosenfeld, one of the key electoral-integrity activists in this country.

Since he had been examining electoral chicanery in the 2004 balloting for more than a year-and-a-half, I asked Rosenfeld if he was close to finishing up his research.

My simple question released a torrent of information from him about how the Republicans were able to steal the election in Ohio, and thus the Electoral College vote that elongated the HardRight’s hold on power, with Bush as their front man.

Customers who were reaching around us to get to the bread and cookies were party to the rush of facts about how and why pundits are not now analyzing the presidency of John Kerry — but I don’t want to diminish Rosenfeld’s thunder by listing the details here, since he (with co-author Bob Fitrakis) has a book on the subject coming out in the Fall.

Suffice it to say that the information he laid on me, along with what has been picked up from other electoral-fraud experts — Mark Crispin Miller, Ernest Partridge, Steven Freeman, Bob Fitrakis, Harvey Wasserman, Brad Friedman, Alastair Thompson, Bev Harris, John Conyers, et al. — makes it clear that Kerry was robbed. In some states, it’s likely that the Republican vote-counting corporations massaged the numbers to create a Bush "victory." But it’s equally clear that, in key locales around the country, the GOP might not have needed to fiddle with the computer software since enough votes were stolen from the Democrats by other slimy methods.


As many have noted, the Bush campaign was aided enormously in this thievery because their campaign co-chairs in key states were also the Secretaries of State — that is, the officials in charge of conducting elections and certifying the vote results: Katherine Harris in Florida in 2000 (with brother Gov. Jeb Bush overseeing her work), and, in 2004, Kenneth Blackwell in Ohio, Terry Lind in Michigan, Matt Blunt in Missouri, Glenda Hood in Florida, et al.

It has been widely documented that nefarious techniques were employed in key states to aid Bush’s "victory," such as: removing hundreds of thousands of likely Democratic voters from the voting rolls; rejiggering the precincts so that when those voters went to their usual polling place, they were told they had to go vote elsewhere and when they got to the new place, they had to vote by Provisional Ballots (in Ohio, thousands of those ballots apparently are still uncounted!); making sure the voting machines in heavily Democratic wards were out of commission or malfunctioning or too few in number for the crowds who wanted to vote, thus forcing working-class citizens to stand in line for many hours, with the result that many gave up and went back to their jobs; thousands of unstamped ballots that were moved around to various precincts; locked warehouses in which various electoral irregularities were carried out; dirty tricks to keep likely Democratic voters from showing up (supplying them with the wrong voting date, telling them that anybody with unpaid parking tickets would be arrested at the polls, that sort of thing); not always catching that e-votes for Kerry automatically, either deliberately or because of technical malfunctions, were being switched into the Bush column, etc. etc.

With several hundred thousand voters kept from casting their ballots in Ohio, for example, the ultimate conclusion is that Kerry would have won that key state, and other close states, had the election been conducted honestly, absent the dirty tricks and fraud. But, of course, before any serious recounting could take place, Kerry, despite his promise to fight, quickly threw in the towel, as had Al Gore four years earlier, which haste and timidity permitted Bush&Co. to continue on their corrupt, incompetent, deadly ways.

These were shameful, cowardly Dem retreats by the candidates in the face of fire. Only now are Gore and Kerry starting to behave and speak out the way they should have during their campaigns, at least about the environment and civil liberties and the war in Iraq, leading one to believe that those two are readying themselves for another go in 2008.


And where were the rest of the Democrats during all this electoral thievery? Lost and asleep at the wheel, as usual.

One can’t escape the conclusion that even five years out, the Democrats in general just don’t know how to respond to cutthroat aggressiveness and criminality on the part of the Republicans. They never knew what hit them in Florida in 2000, in Ohio in 2004 and don’t really have their oppositional act together now in 2006, with the midterm election just six months away.

On occasion the Dems display a bit more starch in their spines, but in general liberals remain locked in a more naive frame of mind, from an earlier era, when elections, no matter what their deficiencies, were more or less on the up-and-up and fair-mindedness was the operational mode for politicians: Elections were held and the declared winners got to rule, but they governed by taking into account the legitimacy of the opposition minority. Those days are long gone, thanks to Rove’s bullyboy tactics.

The Democrats just don’t want to deal with, or don’t know how to deal with, the reality that in the Bush/Cheney/Rove era the Republican leadership has a singular goal in mind — to win, by whatever means necessary — and that it has a meticulously worked-out system for victory that violates every rule and tradition set up in years’ past. The lasting legacy of Karl Rove.

And yet the Dems are planning their first weeks in office post-November, as if all they need to do is to watch the GOP sink further in the polls and then waltz into control of the House and/or Senate.


Why am I so snarky here about the Dems? Because there is a too-long history of Democrats tending to gear up once every two and four years for an election campaign, refusing to face the fact that the Republicans are in campaign mode every minute of every day, with the goal of decimating and destroying their political opposition. It’s the permanent campaign which, not coincidentally, ties in to their permanent war ("the war on terrorism," a war against a tactic) that serves as the underpinning for their domestic and foreign agenda.

The end result has been an increasing slide into a homegrown kind of American fascism: a desire by the HardRightists for one-party rule; Bush’s fondness for dictatorial governance; his 750 "signing statements," where he asserts that he can override laws passed by Congress whenever he so chooses (see Charlie Savage’s mostly-ignored Boston Globe story, "Bush Challenges Hundreds of Laws: President Cites Powers of His Office"; and Bob Egelko’s "How Bush Redefines the Intent of the Law"); his conviction that he has a blank-check to initiate wars of choice; his authorization of torture; his ordering the NSA to spy on millions of American citizens; his attempts at neutering the Legislative and Judicial branches of government, etc. etc.

And permitting all this to pass beneath the public radar is a cowed, cooperative mass-media, whose reporters serve mostly as stenographers rather than as true journalists holding government officials’ feet to the fire. Clearly, if a Democratic President had behaved himself as Bush and Cheney have done — lying in order to foment a war, breaking the law on innumerable occasions, leaking classified information for political reasons, authorizing torture, etc. etc. — he would have been impeached and removed from office with extreme haste before he could do any more damage to the Republic.


So, if all this is true, with Karl Rove (assuming he’s not indicted shortly for perjury and obstruction of justice in the Plamegate case) unleashing his campaign and foreign-policy "surprises" during the next six months, what do we ordinary citizens do about the situation? Specifically, what can we do about the reality of a corrupted election system?

Thankfully, many citizens and public-interest groups have become involved in the electoral-integrity issue, both on the national level and in various key states, challenging the reliability and transparency of e-voting machines and vote-tallying procedures, suing voting officials in civil courts when honest elections and verified means for re-checking the votes are not satisfactory, etc.

But angry citizens are ignoring another powerful avenue to counteract election fraud, and the increasing chances for more such illegality: They should demand that their state attorneys general and local district attorneys bring criminal charges in their jurisdictions against the GOP, Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia, et al. Were this to happen, the "discovery" process might well yield an abundance of incriminating documents that would have an enormous impact on national politics. Example: the phone-bank sabotage case in New Hampshire, where GOP officials with ties to the White House were convicted of interfering with the Democrats’ phone system in that state just prior to the 2004 election.

But whether all these good-government moves will be enough to guarantee honest elections in November is up in the air, especially with many Bush-appointed judges on the federal appeals courts. The point is that by and large these legal moves are being initiated by citizens and organized groups, not by the Democratic Party.

(I have been following the suggestion of Ernest Partridge and others: I return solicitation letters to Democratic Party headquarters with a strong note saying I will send no money until the Democrats decide to fight like an opposition party should for honest, transparent, verifiable elections. No action, no donation. Similarly, many progressives are telling much the same thing: stop being so timid; electoral integrity and confronting electoral fraud needs to be front and center for progressives. We can have all the good candidates and popular policies in the world, but if the opposition is running the vote-counting mechanism, goodbye honest elections and the chance to defeat the GOP and begin to restore America’s traditional values to our political system.)


New revelations about electoral integrity and fraud, both good and bad, keep breaking all the time. As I write this, more states have become aware of built-in problems with computer-voting systems and are being forced, at least temporarily, to consider more secure methods for voting and ballot-tabulation. Brad Friedman reports:

"We’ve now been able to gather a great deal of additional information concerning details about the story we first posted yesterday on the official Pennsylvania state warning issued about the new ‘security vulnerability’ discovered in all Diebold touch-screen electronic voting machines.

"That warning, which has now brought a lock-down on all Diebold systems in PA, where early voting is about to begin prior to their upcoming May 16th primary election, was reported by the Morning Call yesterday. The warning says the serious security vulnerability could allow ‘unauthorized software to be loaded on to the system’."


Many liberal pundits and thinkers are out there, many based on the internet, with solid ideas and suggestions for how the Dems might position themselves for victory in November and in 2008; for just one, see the new book "Crashing the Gate: Netroots, Grassroots, and the Rise of People-Powered Politics," by Markos Moulitsas Zuniga ("Kos") and Jerome Armstrong. But it’s not clear if the party establishment is open to what its base is telling them. If such blindness and deafness continues, this ignorance and timidity will guarantee a continuing series of losses at the polls, despite recent public-opinion surveys indicating how poorly the Republicans are viewed in the country, including, most importantly, by those calling themselves conservatives.

Perhaps the worst crime of the Democrats these days is their failure to recognize that ordinary citizens, including many of those moderate Republicans and independents, are way ahead of them in wanting a quick exit from Iraq and in approving impeachment hearings. That Dem timidity does not give evidence of a robust opposition party, willing to fight for what is best for the country; many moderate Republicans and independents may choose to vote for the devil they know than one about which they’re uncertain and apprehensive.

So what can you and I do to alter this picture of Democratic lassitude and possible defeat in November?

As with’s handy list, "What You Can Do," the first and most important task is for all of us to educate ourselves on what’s going on, and then spread the word, light fires of activism in our friends and neighbors, organize ourselves politically (whether running yourself or becoming active in the campaigns of Dem or third-party candidates), relentlessly demand that our elected representatives stand up for the Constitution and not roll over when the Administration continues its illegal rampaging at home and abroad, constantly call the mass media on their biases and deficiencies of investigatory coverage of the Bush Administration, and support the nation’s largest and most effective alternative press: the progressive websites and bloggers on the internet.


Finally, realize the import of a good share of the conservative Republican movement abandoning the extremism of the Bush Administration. All those conservative generals and Bill Buckley are just the tips of the iceberg of resentment and appalled anger at what Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rove are doing to the once-respected Republican Party and to this country in terms of our stalled economy, the humongous deficits being racked up, the unending wars of choice our young troops are dying in (with Iran fast coming up as the next reckless-insanity theater of war), the ever-expanding levels of corruption in the Republican Party, the outsourcing and privatization of so much of traditional, established government functions — outsourcing even to potential enemies abroad!

These moderate and conservative Republicans are ripe for making alliances with progressives, populists and libertarians in opposing the dangerous, reckless policies of the Bush Administration. Smart Democratic policy would devise ways to lure those folks into the impeachment camp.

But, if the kinds of changes discussed above are not made, and the Dems lose both houses of Congress in November and still no radical changes are made in how to approach the 2008 presidential election, it may well be time for serious consideration of a third-party alliance. In short, 2006 may be the Dems’ last reasonable shot and they’d better not blow it. Let’s put our activism into hyperdrive in the next six months and make sure they don’t.

— BW

Discuss (10 comments)

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

An Appearance of Guilt

Posted in General on March 8th, 2006

March 7, 2005

By Ernest Partridge, The Crisis Papers

The accumulated weight of evidence of election fraud – statistical, circumstantial, and anecdotal – has failed to move the mainstream media to report or investigate this evidence, or the Democratic party to acknowledge and protest the apparent Republican control of our elections.

This essay is not yet another account of that evidence, which I have spelled out extensively and which I firmly believe to be compelling.

Instead, I wish to deal with another indicator that our national elections no longer represent the will of the voters, but rather are manipulated to produce the outcome desired by the "winning" candidates and party. This indicator is the behavior of those who manufacture, program, and operate the paperless, unauditable machines (direct recording electronic: "DRE"), and those who benefit from this technology.

Perhaps this new electronic voting technology is as honest and reliable as the private election industry and the winning candidates tell us it is. However, they simply do not behave as if this were the case.

My contention might be illustrated by this parable:

Suppose that a drug-sniffing dog at an airport identifies a suspicious piece of luggage. The customs officer then locates the individual whose name is on the tag, and orders him to open it. Now suppose further that this person then proceeds to do one or more of the following:

a) He denies that the luggage is his.

b) He calls his lawyer who presents an injunction against further inspection of the luggage.

c) He claims that he is a diplomat, and thus not subject to luggage inspection.

d) He offers a bribe to the inspector if he will "forget the whole thing."

Might one not suspect that the traveler was trying to hide something?

The dog then gets back to work, and soon identifies another bag, and the owner of this parcel is identified and ordered to open the luggage for inspection. He does so willingly and without qualm, having packed the bag himself and thus knowing that there is no contraband therein. He is also aware that the dog has a record of 30% false positives.

Which of these two responses more closely resembles the behavior of the DRE manufacturers (Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia), of the Republican Congress, and of the Republican National Committee? Are the DRE manufacturers and the Republicans acting in a manner consistent with their claims that "e-voting" is both honest and accurate? Or are they behaving as if they have something to hide?

Here are a few indicators. Because there are so many, I will be brief. For details and documentation, follow the links:

  • First and foremost: DRE machines use secret software and produce no separate record of the voting to allow auditing and validation of the votes. Thus, by design, it is impossible either to prove or disprove directly the accuracy of the vote totals of a DRE machine or the neutrality of the software. (However, there is abundant indirect evidence of e-voting fraud: statistical, anecdotal and circumstantial evidence. But that’s another topic).
  • The manufacturers and programmers of DREs (all of whom have close ties with the Republican Party) insist that their software ("source codes") must be kept secret – for no apparent and defensible reason. (They claim to be concerned about copyright infringement. But music, essays, fiction, drama, etc., all are public by nature, and yet all are protected by copyright).
  • The e-voting manufacturers also make ATM machines and automated gas pumps, both of which produce paper receipts. Yet they steadfastly resist demands that their "touch screen" voting machines produce printouts, which might then serve to validate the accuracy of the votes.
  • DRE manufacturers will not allow "test hacks" of randomly selected machines. (Unauthorized hacks have proven DREs to be extremely vulnerable to fraudulent manipulation. So too a recent report by the non-partisan Government Accountability Office: a report that has been virtually ignored by the mainstream press).
  • A bill by Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) that would require validated printed paper receipts of the votes and random inspection of the DRE machines has been locked up in committee by the Congressional Republicans. A discharge petition, which would allow a vote on the bill, is unavailing, due to insufficient support by the Republicans.
  • In 2000, computer programmer Clinton Curtis was asked by a GOP congressional candidate, Tom Feeney, to create a software program that would alter vote counts in favor of the Republicans. Curtis testified to this under oath, signed an affidavit, and took a polygraph test. Of course, Feeney, now a congressman, denies Curtis’ allegations, but unlike Curtis, Feeney refuses to state his denial under oath or to submit to a polygraph.
  • In California, Stephen Heller, a temporary employee of Diebold Election Systems, obtained copies of memos indicating that Diebold may have used uncertified voting systems in the 2004 primary and suggesting that thousands of voters might be disenfranchised in subsequent elections. Heller’s "reward" for blowing this whistle? He was charged with three felony counts and, if convicted, could serve more than three years in state prison.
  • In 2004, California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley decertified Diebold DRE machines. In a special recall election, Republican Arnold Schwarznegger replaced Democrat Gray Davis. Kevin Shelley was then harassed and forced out of office and replaced by Republican Bruce McPherson, who "conditionally" recertified the Diebold machines. (These are two types of machines: Optical scan with paper ballots, and "TSX" with touch-screens and no paper record. It is the paperless TSX machines that are especially vulnerable to undetectable manipulation and fraud." There is a heated debate within the election reform community as to whether Optical Scanning is an acceptable improvement over DREs, or whether, on the other hand, only hand counted paper ballots will do. But that’s a topic for another essay).
  • The Alaska "flip-flop." The Republican state government of Alaska refused to release to the Alaska Democrats the Diebold database files from the 2004 election on the grounds that it was "a company secret." (These were records of a public election, mind you). After persistent requests, the state relented albeit under very restrictive conditions. But then, just two weeks ago, the state again denied the request, claiming that it was a "security risk" to the state of Alaska.
  • December 20, 2005: Rather than obey a North Carolina law requiring that source codes be made public, Diebold withdrew its machines from the state elections.

There is much more, which you might find here and here. But this much suffices to make my point.

What we find, then, is an industry and a political party which, on the one hand, insists that the totals from electronic voting machines are entirely accurate and honest, though these same machines are so designed that they preclude any independent evidence to support these claims. On the other hand, this same industry and party steadfastly resist any and all attempts to introduce reliable methods of validation, much less the most reliable system of all: hand counted paper ballots.

Persistent suspicion and charges of fraud are damaging to the industry and the GOP. If they are as innocent as they claim to be, why don’t they just eliminate these damaging suspicions by offering proof, and then allowing, and even encouraging, paper records, independent audits, and exit polls?

Despite a near-total embargo by the mainstream media of news, analysis, investigation and commentary on ballot security and allegations of fraud, combined with an astonishing indifference to the issue on the part of the Democrats and their allies, public doubts about the security and accuracy of elections and hence of the legitimacy of the Republican control of the White House and the Congress, simply will not go away. In fact, these concerns appear to be increasing and will likely continue to increase, as the credibility and public approval of the Bush regime continues to drop.

Here’s a thought experiment for those who insist, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the past three elections were above reproach and doubt. Put this confidence aside for a moment and just imagine, hypothetically, that the elections of 2000, 2002, and 2004 were all fixed, and that the coming election of 2006 will be fixed. Then ask yourself: if this were so, how would the behavior of the industry and the GOP be in any way different from what it is now?

Then ask, if the elections are honest and accurate, why don’t the industry and the Republicans act like it? In short, if they are innocent, why do they willingly persist in appearing guilty?

These questions must be asked by the Democrats, loudly and persistently, for as Karl Rove and the GOP propaganda machine knows so well, repetition is the key to successful persuasion of the public. Satire and ridicule are also very much in order. We must "pile it on" until continuing silence by the GOP and by the compliant mainstream media becomes unendurable.

And if the e-voting establishment – party and industry – are ever forced, however reluctantly, to enact reforms consistent with their protestations of innocence, what might they do?

Here is a list of proposals that any honest voting machine industry and political party should be willing to endorse:

a) Publish the source codes. (The copyrights can be fully protected.)

b) Include printers with all machines. Stipulate by law that in case of recounts, the paper receipts are to be the official ballots of record.

c) Require independent audits – of local balloting, and of regional compiling of election returns.

d) Allow examination and "test hacks" of machines, selected randomly.

e) Outlaw all data inputs (by direct line, wireless, or UV) to voting machines and compilers with the exception, of course, of the "inputs" by the voters.

f) Rigorously enforce and prosecute election fraud laws.

If the industry and the Republicans won’t agree to these assurances, then they must present a plausible explanation as to why they decline to do so. Absent that explanation, we citizens of this alleged democracy under an alleged rule of law must demand that every vote be counted and verified, and we must be supplied with proof that this has been accomplished. Furthermore, every individual who has engaged in election fraud must be tracked down and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. We are entitled to no less than this.

Dr. Ernest Partridge is a consultant, writer and lecturer in the field of Environmental Ethics and Public Policy. He publishes the website, The Online Gadfly and co-edits the progressive website, The Crisis Papers. He is at work on a book, Conscience of a Progressive, which can be seen in-progress here. Send comments to:

Crisis Papers Archive

Re-posted from Democratic Underground

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

G.W. Bush Conspired with Others to Steal the 2000 and 2004 Elections.

Posted in General on February 13th, 2006

by columnist Maureen Farrell
Extracted from Top 10 ‘Conspiracy Theories’ about George W. Bush, Part 2.
See also… Top 10 ‘Conspiracy Theories’ about George W. Bush, Part 1

"There was one exact moment, in fact, when I knew for sure that Al Gore would Never be President of the United States, no matter what the experts were saying — and that was when the whole Bush family suddenly appeared on TV and openly scoffed at the idea of Gore winning Florida. It was Nonsense, said the Candidate, Utter nonsense. . .Anybody who believed Bush had lost Florida was a Fool. The Media, all of them, were Liars & Dunces or treacherous whores trying to sabotage his victory . . Here was the whole bloody Family laughing & hooting & sneering at the dumbness of the whole world on National TV. The old man was the real tip-off. The leer on his face was almost frightening. It was like looking into the eyes of a tall hyena with a living sheep in its mouth. The sheep’s fate was sealed, and so was Al Gore’s."
Hunter S. Thompson, ESPN, Nov. 27, 2000

"[The Bush Family’s] sense of how to win elections comes out of a CIA manual, not out of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution."
Former GOP strategist Kevin Phillips, BuzzFlash, Jan. 7. 2004

While some believe a coup began on Sept. 11, others will tell you it began with the 2000 election. Even though George Bush’s first cousin declared him the winner and his brother Jeb assured him he’d won Florida, many Americans remained unconvinced.

First there was the surreal sight of the Bush family on national TV, as staged and phony as Susan Smith’s tearful plea to return her "kidnapped" children. Then came the well-groomed thugs, sent on Enron and Halliburton planes to stop the Florida recount. But it wasn’t just James Baker’s ploys or the Supreme Court’s ruling that signaled something was amiss — it was the attitude of ordinary citizens who were more concerned about their "team" winning than about democracy itself.

Unless you rely solely on FOX news (the modern equivalent to "living under a rock"), the shenanigans that occurred in pre-election Florida are now old news, and have been dissected at length in documentaries, magazines and to some degree, in the mainstream press. A St . Petersburg Times op-ed later deemed the election "stolen," the Associated Press reported that Florida had "quietly" admitted "election fraud," and Vanity Fair devoted a sizable portion of its Oct. 2004 issue to exactly how Team Bush pulled it off. By the time CNN sued the state of Florida for its ineligible voters list in 2004, the underbelly of the beast was plainly visible.

But in Nov. 2001, when Greg Palast uncovered then Secretary of State Katherine Harris’ role in the shameful voter roll purge in Florida, the news was explosive. The New York Times — the paper that would later print front page disinformation to sell the war in Iraq — took a pass, however, until three years later, when it was too late to do anything about it.

At first, election irregularities were featured as anomalies, like when the Washington Post covered computer glitches that literally subtracted thousands of votes from Al Gore and gave them to a Socialist candidate. By the time similar problems were reported during the 2002 midterm and 2004 primary elections, people were understandably skittish, with e-voting failures having "shaken confidence in the technology installed at thousands of precincts" — with as many as 20 states introducing legislation calling for paper receipts on voting machines.

In early 2004, Mother Jones predicted that "Ohio could become as decisive this year as Florida was four years ago" and sure enough, Americans awoke the day after the election without a decisive winner. And though John Kerry later conceded, questions have since been raised by computer programmers, mathematicians, journalists and others. "Was the election of 2004 stolen?" columnist Robert Koehler asked, before addressing the many "numbers-savvy scientists are saying that the numbers don’t make sense."

There were warnings before the election, of course, with red flags being raised by researchers at prestigious Stanford and John Hopkins Universities. But despite Diebold’s CEO’s promise to deliver Ohio’s electoral votes to George W. Bush, Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell’s prominent role in the Bush/Cheney campaign, and the suspicious election night lock-down in Warren County, Ohio, many still believed election angst could be attributed to a super-sized case of "sour grapes."

When Christopher Hitchens, who is admittedly not a Kerry fan, also weighed in, however, that excuse flew out the window. "Whichever way you shake it, or hold it to the light, there is something about the Ohio election that refuses to add up. . . ," he wrote.

Rep. John Conyers and the Government Accountability Office also found widespread irregularities, and when statisticians picked apart the election results, Bush was not the legitimate winner. Pollster John Zogby compared the 2004 election to 1960’s suspicious contest, and University of Pennsylvania professor Steven F. Freeman put the odds that exit polls were that wrong, in that many states, at 250 million to one.

The evidence was so compelling, in fact, that NYU professor Mark Crispin Miller took it upon himself to tackle the proverbial suggestion "somebody should write a book." His extensively-researched yet largely ignored Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They’ll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them) shines a crucial light on the "stealthy combination of computerized vote theft, bureaucratic monkey business, systematic shortages of viable equipment and old-fashioned dirty tricks. . . " that led to democracy’s last debacle, and will most likely lead to the next.

Ohio’s 2005 election also failed the smell test, and by late Jan. 2006, the Washington Post looked into allegations of election tampering — without the dismissive, lazy reporting usually afforded the subject. Describing tests conducted by Florida’s Leon County supervisor of elections Ion Sancho, using "relatively unsophisticated hacking techniques," the paper quickly uncovered how easy it is to steal an election. "Can the votes of this Diebold system be hacked using the memory card?" election officials asked test participants, and though two marked their ballots "yes" and six said "no," by the time they went through Diebold’s optical scan machine, the results read seven "yes" votes and one "no."

"More troubling than the test itself was the manner in which Diebold simply failed to respond to my concerns or the concerns of citizens who believe in American elections," Sancho said. "I really think they’re not engaged in this discussion of how to make elections safer."

Hmmm. You don’t say.

There is a reason, you see, that "None Dare Call It Stolen," and that reasons extends beyond the preponderance of evidence. "If electronic voting machines programmed by private Republican firms remain in our future, dissent will become pointless unless it boils over into revolution," former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Paul Craig Roberts wrote. "Power-mad Republicans need to consider the result when democracy loses its legitimacy and only the rich have anything to lose."

James Madison predicted a similar scenario. "The day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility," he reportedly told the New York Post. "It will be an impossibility because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of a few."

Those would be the "one percenters." And chances are, you aren’t one of them.


© Copyright 2004, Maureen Farrell

Maureen Farrell is a writer and media consultant who specializes in helping other writers get television and radio exposure.

Extracted from Top 10 ‘Conspiracy Theories’ about George W. Bush, Part 2. See also… Top 10 ‘Conspiracy Theories’ about George W. Bush, Part 1

From Scoop Independent News

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

Democratic Underground BOOKMARKS

Posted in Democratic Underground, General on January 28th, 2006
A Full Recount Would Show that López Obrador Won Mexico’s Presidency by Mo Laotra Sun Jul-09-06 10:27 AM
BRAD BLOG: 2 New Suits Against Diebold & Friends, New Busby/Bilbray Stuff! BradBlog Thu Jul-13-06 02:41 PM
Mexico: Rightist “winner’s” Brother-in-law Wrote VOTE COUNT Software – WOW autorank Wed Jul-12-06 04:33 PM
LA Times asks the $50,000 Question, Bush: War Criminal? Vyan Sun Jul-02-06 10:17 AM
Bradblog: New lawsuit seeks immediate decertification of Diebold!! Stevepol Thu Jul-13-06 07:47 AM
“The Stolen Election of 2004” by Michael Parenti mod mom Fri Jul-14-06 07:28 AM
Greene Co OH ’04 Recount Irregularities Detailed Under Oath mod mom Sat Jul-08-06 03:38 AM
Salon: Mexico 2006: Florida all over again? kpete Fri Jul-07-06 10:41 PM
LIVE NOW: DU’s TruthIsAll on the Mike Malloy Show (+ post) kster Sat Jul-08-06 05:27 AM
Citizen Clinton Speaks Out: Former President Raises Cain – Almost althecat Thu Jul-06-06 01:12 PM
KY: Grand Jury Refers Election Probe to Special Panel Wilms

Sun Jul-02-06 09:27 AM



Rolling Stone: Kennedy: company insiders are prepared to testify (2006) ProSense Sat Jul-01-06 12:48 PM
Washington Post, “A single person could swing an election.” Botany Thu Jun-29-06 01:35 PM
A call to investigate the 2004 election ProSense Wed Jun-28-06 10:53 AM
Long Version of Clinton’s REMARKS (thanks to MCM for finding!) mod mom Sat Jul-01-06 03:04 AM
Here we go again. Grand jury probes election inconsistencies in KY. Stevepol Sat Jul-01-06 06:57 AM
CA: Tally is Rising in Registration Fraud Wilms Wed Jun-28-06 08:20 AM
over 1000 metric tons of the deadly U238-isotope serryjw Fri Jun-23-06 06:11 PM
New Report Shows 17 States at High Risk For Compromised Election Results sfexpat2000 Sat Jun-24-06 05:56 AM
Hey, everybody! Las Vegas is going BANKRUPT!!! IdaBriggs Sun Jun-18-06 12:18 PM
“Emergency Townhall Meetings” CA-50 Here we go! kansasblue Fri Jun-23-06 05:05 PM
Scoop: Bush Election Theft Saga Heats Up In Ohio Wilms Tue Jun-20-06 07:15 PM
Best sites & resources for election fraud NEWBIES ? IndyOp Sat Jun-17-06 10:22 PM
NYT Bob Herbert: Kerry ‘almost certainly’ won Ohio in 2004 drm604 Wed Jun-14-06 07:48 AM
1/2 of Bush victory margin in New Mexico in 2004 ghost votes MissWaverly Fri Jun-16-06 01:39 PM
CA-50 2nd Edition, I look at the April 11th Special Primary FogerRox Mon Jun-12-06 10:12 AM
Most charges dropped in phone jamming RW election fraud unpossibles Fri Jun-16-06 07:45 AM
Greg Palast: African-American Voters Scrubbed by Secret GOP Hit List kpete Fri Jun-16-06 10:30 AM
Courageous Schakowsky (D-IL): WAS 2004 ELECTION STOLEN? “ONLY ANSWER YES” IndyOp Fri Jun-16-06 12:19 PM
It Only Takes One Man To Steal an Election (And It’s Not Who You Think) McCamy Taylor Thu Jun-15-06 08:58 AM
Yurica Report in support of RFK article: A Vast Political Misfortune Ojai Person Wed Jun-14-06 07:20 PM
AUTORANK Kennedy’s Challenge – Salon, Mother Jones & the Tortured Dialogue althecat Thu Jun-15-06 09:36 AM
Massive voter suppression in South Carolina election today? IndyOp Wed Jun-14-06 02:29 PM
DNC contacts Brad–they’re looking into Busby/Bilbray race in CA emlev Wed Jun-14-06 08:55 PM
NYT Bob Herbert (via RawStory): Kerry ‘almost certainly’ won Ohio in 2004 eomer Mon Jun-12-06 06:43 PM
Illegitimate election-Key RFK Source-Responds to Criticism of 04 Election kpete Thu Jun-15-06 06:29 PM
NO, THIS IS **IT** FOLKS!: Bill Bored Sun Jun-11-06 10:14 AM
From the ERD: RECORDS FOR 150,000 COLO. VOTERS MISSING rumpel Sun Jun-11-06 11:26 PM
Dr. Ron Baiman: Something Smells Fishy in San Diego – cross post from GDP bleever Sun Jun-11-06 05:09 AM
bradblog: BUSBY/BILBRAY ELECTION IN DOUBT Wilms Sat Jun-10-06 09:47 AM

Debunking the Debunker CrisisPapers Wed Jun-07-06 08:47 AM
Howard Dean on Diebold: “These machines are a problem” kpete Sun Apr-23-06 02:55 PM
Cramdown, Stripdown, Lockdown Democracy In The USA – By DU’s Own Autorank althecat Sat Apr-22-06 02:52 PM
Phone records… people in election phone jamming called White House! AGENDA21 Tue Apr-11-06 11:03 AM
28,000 votes stolen from Kerry in Lucas County (Toledo); Noe @ Work Botany Sat Jun-10-06 03:26 AM
WHAT in the Heck does this RFK, Jr. guy WANT anyway?? Man-o-man!!! Land Shark Wed Jun-07-06 05:50 PM
Debate over Rolling Stone Article ignores what’s Important to USA Land Shark Tue Jun-06-06 05:23 PM
Rolling Stone Editorial: A Call for Investigation (Election 2004) ProSense Sat Jun-10-06 08:55 PM
Ken Blackwell must be stopped BobcatJH Wed May-10-06 09:43 PM
6th Circuit opinion (4-21-06) Holds Op-SCan & P-cards Unconstitutional!!! Land Shark Tue Apr-25-06 06:13 PM
Scoop, NZ: The Theft Of The 2004 Presidential Election seafan Fri Jun-09-06 12:45 AM
THIS IS **IT** FOLKS. garybeck Sun Jun-11-06 08:33 PM
Dr Ron Baiman: “CLEARLY A CRIME WAS COMMITTED IN OHIO” mod mom Mon Jun-12-06 06:55 AM
Candidate Clint Curtis Praises RFK Jr – Calls For Fed Investigation kpete Sun Jun-11-06 07:51 AM
Machines change votes in Iowa BeFree Fri Jun-09-06 09:10 PM
Results of Close Busby/Bilbray U.S. House Special Election in Doubt feelthebreeze Thu Jun-08-06 09:54 PM
So Dark the Con of Ken:Blackwell Sins In ’04 Coming Back To Haunt Him Algorem Wed Jun-14-06 05:25 AM
Brand new e-voting machines fail in early voting hours in Kern Co., CA. Cleita Thu Jun-08-06 12:14 AM
Fitrakis responds to Tokaji’s analysis of RFK Jr: mod mom Mon Jun-12-06 08:58 PM
Cliff Arnebeck’s response to Farhad Manjoo article: mod mom Thu Jun-08-06 11:14 AM
Fitrakis responds to Manjoo’s Salon article: mod mom Thu Jun-08-06 09:21 AM
USA TODAY: Spate of Lawsuits Target e-Voting Wilms Mon Jun-05-06 06:42 AM
RFK, Jr & Salon’s Manjoo & DU Election Reformers Agree On: IndyOp Mon Jun-05-06 11:08 PM
Bush – Most Hated President Ever Stole Both Elections WillYourVoteBCounted Mon Jun-05-06 02:56 PM
Diebold video, 46 seconds, at “Current TV” website. Eric J in MN Wed Jun-07-06 09:48 PM
Bobby Kennedy JR. on ’04 election theft in feature Rolling Stone article Amaryllis Thu Jun-01-06 06:41 AM
Convicted Phone Jammer now teaching @ GOP Campaign School mod mom Wed May-31-06 11:27 AM
Preemptive election theft: Is Turdblossom working the CA-45th? kpete Mon May-29-06 10:25 PM
Paper Ballots, Hand Counted, are the “Gold Standard” Around the World Wilms Mon May-29-06 10:17 PM
NM: Court Says That State Should Have Allowed (2004) Recount Wilms Mon May-29-06 08:43 PM
4 STEPS TO HOW THE GOP STOLE THE ’04 ELECTION (and will repeat again) mod mom Sun May-28-06 05:51 PM
Gore: No Intermediate Step Between SCOTUS Decision and Violent Revolution Wilms Thu May-25-06 05:53 AM
“2004 Presidential Election – Compendium of Attempts to Dismiss Vote Fraud papau Wed May-24-06 04:27 AM
Exit Poll Margin of Error in North Carolina 2004 BeFree Tue May-23-06 04:11 PM
Will MSNBC put this ON TV ? kster Tue May-23-06 03:35 PM
ANOTHER 100+ Machines Fail in Allegheny County (Pittsburgh)! Amaryllis Wed May-17-06 01:51 PM
Paul Weyrich GOP strategy: Our election wins increase as # voters decrease IndyOp Tue May-16-06 08:28 PM
Its the Voting Stupid ! Blogged by John Conyers,Jr. Twist_U_Up Tue May-16-06 01:04 AM
Update on David G. Mills’ Tennessee Lawsuit on the Unconstitionality of Pa Febble Mon May-15-06 09:32 PM
New York Times — Black Box Voting study “biggest ever” patriothackd Sat May-20-06 05:12 AM
BradBlog/John Gideon: Diebold’s Deliberate Security Vulnerability Wilms Fri May-12-06 05:26 AM
Poll: 2004 Election Was Stolen; according to viewers of all news except Kip Humphrey Thu May-11-06 08:17 PM
Harri Hursti Report II – Diebold touch-screens Steve A Play Sun May-14-06 09:24 AM
May 10 – 4 Arizona Voters Sue Secretary of State WillYourVoteBCounted Thu May-11-06 04:30 AM
Local Boards of Elections Blocking Thousands of New Yorkers from Voting eomer Wed May-10-06 03:06 PM
AMERICAN BLACKOUT-a must see film: from FL to GA to Franklin Co OH mod mom Tue May-09-06 05:01 AM
$13 Million No-Bid Sweetheart Deal with Diebold Draws Fire from activists Amaryllis Wed May-10-06 07:57 AM
(Ohio) Vote counting goes on up north MelissaB Sun May-07-06 06:27 PM
BBV: more dirt on Diebold, possible lawsuits, heroic officials lauded Stevepol Tue May-09-06 02:22 AM
WANTED: This person voted over 6,000 times on 11/2/04 garybeck Wed May-03-06 06:36 PM
Brad: National media finally covers 2006 electoral meltdown Amaryllis Fri May-05-06 05:39 AM
Brad: Indiana and West Va file legal actions against ES&S Amaryllis Sat Apr-29-06 01:26 PM
Help with Ohio Parallel Election (contact info) mod mom Thu Apr-27-06 12:54 PM
Blackwell Distributes Voter Lists with SS Numbers mod mom Tue Apr-25-06 10:16 AM
(Bradblog) Friedman briefs Feingold on election fraud ! kansasblue Mon Apr-24-06 08:10 AM
Clear paper ballot counter, transporter and storage box kster Mon Jun-05-06 09:12 PM
Cramdown, Stripdown, Lockdown Democracy In The USA Wilms Mon Apr-24-06 06:18 AM
Free Press uncovers evidence of ballot tampering in Warren County, Ohio Wilms Sun Apr-23-06 04:51 PM
Wed Dec-31-69 04:00 PM
HOPE? Slew of lawsuits hit the voting machine companies garybeck Fri Apr-28-06 10:34 AM
FreePress: Evidence of Ballot Tampering in Warren Co Ohio in ’04 mod mom Wed Apr-26-06 07:16 PM
Brad: OR SOS Bradbury sues ES&S; says “we will not be coerced” Amaryllis Fri Apr-21-06 02:09 AM
Asked @125 judges if confident every vote counted…no hands went up Wilms Wed Apr-19-06 05:53 AM
PA Lawsuit: John Gideon and Joe Hall Illuminate Wilms Mon Apr-17-06 06:55 PM
Update from Alaska… Blue_In_AK Thu Apr-13-06 06:22 PM
MUST READ! – E-VOTING 2006: The Approaching Train Wreck (+) kster Tue Apr-11-06 02:52 PM
HOLT’S RESPONSE!: MARK IT UP! Bill Bored Thu Apr-13-06 09:07 PM
Motion Filed Before Judge Carr Seeking Reconsideration in Recount Case eomer Sun Apr-09-06 09:38 AM
Election Day troubles could be part of ‘international conspiracy’ kpete Sun Apr-09-06 09:58 AM
With voting machine company now bankrupt, CEO speaks out: kster Sat Apr-08-06 11:58 AM
Recount FIXED in Ohio for 04 Presidential Contest me b zola Thu Apr-06-06 04:43 PM
Shocking Diebold Conflict of Interest kpete Fri Apr-07-06 04:05 PM
No Voting Machines for Leon County: You Won’t Believe Why kster Tue Apr-04-06 07:35 AM
Susan Sarandon calls for outside monitoring of US elections due to fraud Amaryllis Tue Apr-04-06 06:14 PM

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

2004 Election Take Action!

Posted in, General, TAKE ACTION! on January 28th, 2006

Please help these organizations and recount efforts:

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

2004 Election State by State

Posted in, General on January 28th, 2006
















New Hampshire:

New Jersey:

New Mexico:

North Carolina:










1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

2004 Election Main Stream Media

Posted in, General, Main Stream Media on January 28th, 2006

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

2004 Election Electronic Voting & Tabulating

Posted in, Black Box (Electronic) Voting, General on January 28th, 2006

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

2004 Election General

Posted in, General on January 28th, 2006

Corporate America controls the media and we get manufactured news.

Corporate America now controls the voting machines and we get manufactured elections.

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. ”

– Margaret Mead – US anthropologist & popularizer of anthropology (1901 – 1978)



1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page

Evidence? We Don’t Want Your Stinkin’ Evidence!

Posted in General, Main Stream Media, TAKE ACTION! on January 24th, 2006

January 24, 2005
By Ernest Partridge, The Crisis Papers

Like biologists with evolution and atmospheric scientists with global climate change, those who warn us that our elections have been stolen and will be stolen again must now be wondering, "just how much evidence must it take to make our case and to convince enough of the public to force reform and secure our ballots?"

The answer, apparently, is no amount – no amount, that is, until more minds are opened. And that is more than a question of evidence, it is a question of collective sanity.

In his new book Fooled Again, Mark Crispin Miller not only presents abundant evidence that the 2004 election was stolen, but in addition he examines the political, social, and media environment which made this theft possible.

When I first read the book immediately after its publication, I confess that I was a bit disappointed. What I had hoped to find was a compendium of evidence, from front to back. To be sure, Miller gives us plenty of evidence, meticulously documented. But evidence tells us that the election was stolen. Miller goes beyond that to explain how and why it was stolen, and how the culprits have managed, so far, to get away with it.

So on second reading, I find that it was my expectation and not Miller’s book that was flawed. We have evidence aplenty, to be found in John Conyers’ report, and the new book by Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman, in addition to the Black Box Voting website among numerous others. Soon to be added is Prof. Steven Freeman’s book on the statistical evidence of election fraud. What we don’t gain from these sources is an understanding and appreciation of the context in which this crime was committed. This we learn from reading Miller’s book.

If, in fact, the last two presidential elections have been stolen, and if in addition there is a preponderance of evidence to support this claim, then this is the most significant political news in the 230 year history of our republic.

So what is the response of the allegedly "opposing" party to the issue of election fraud? Virtual silence. And of the news media? More silence. Case in point: the media response to Mark Crispin Miller’s Fooled Again. As he reports: "There have been no national reviews of Fooled Again. No network or cable TV show would have the author on to talk about the book. NPR has refused to have him on… Only one daily newspaper – the Florida Sun-Sentinel – has published a review."

Force the question of election fraud and demand an answer, and the most likely response will be a string of ad hominem insults – "sore losers," "paranoid," "conspiracy theorists" – attacks on the messenger and a dismissal of the message. We’ve heard them, many times over.

Persist, and you might get as a reply, not evidence that the elections were honest and valid (there is very little of that), but rather some rhetorical questions as to the attitudes and motives of the alleged perpetrators and to the practical difficulties of their successfully accomplishing a stolen national election. Questions such as these:

  • How could the GOP campaign managers believe that they could get away with a stolen election?
  • Why would they dare risk failure, and the subsequent criminal indictments and dissolution of their party?
  • What could possibly motivate them to subvert the foundations of our democracy?

The answer to the first two questions is essentially the same: they believed and they dared because they controlled the media and thus the message. Miller’s sub-text throughout his book is that the great electoral hijack has been accomplished with the cooperation, one might even say the connivance, of the mainstream media, without which the crime could never have succeeded.

Immediately following the election, the critics were shouted down with such headlines as these: "Election paranoia surfaces; Conspiracy theorists call results rigged" (Baltimore Sun), "Internet Buzz on Vote Fraud is dismissed" (Boston Globe), "Latest Conspiracy Theory – Kerry Won – Hits the Ether" (Washington Post), and in the "flagship" newspaper, the New York Times: "Vote Fraud Theories, Spread by Blogs, Are Quickly Buried." (Miller, 38.)

Even more damaging than the slanted "reports" in the media, was the silence. The Conyers investigations? Ignored. The scholarly statistical analyses of exit poll discrepancies? Ignored. Evidence that Bush cheated in the debates with a listening device? Dismissed. The recent GAO report on e-voting vulnerabilities, and the Florida demonstration hacking of computer vote compilation? Ignored. And most appalling of all: the media blackout last week of Al Gore’s eloquent speech, warning of the threat to our Constitution and our liberties posed by the Bush regime.

And all this merely scratches the surface of media malpractice. For more, read the book.

The motivation to steal the election, says Miller, combined religious (or quasi-religious) dogma and self-righteousness and a perception of the opposing Democratic party, not as the loyal opposition, but as the enemy – deserving not defeat, but annihilation. ("You are either with us or against us," says Bush). Together, this adds up to what Miller calls "The Requisite Fanaticism." He writes:

It is not "conservatism" that impelled the theft of the election, nor was it merely greed or the desire for power per se… The movement now in power is not entirely explicable in such familiar terms… The project here is ultimately pathological and essentially anti-political, albeit Machiavellian on a scale, and to a degree, that would have staggered Machiavelli. The aim is not to master politics, but to annihilate it. Bush, Rove, DeLay, Ralph Reed, et al. believe in "politics" in the same way that they and their corporate beneficiaries believe in "competition." In both cases, the intention is not to play the game but to end it – because the game requires some tolerance of the Other, and tolerance is precisely what these bitter-enders most despise… (Miller 81-2.)

Reiterating a theme that is prominent in his writing, Miller points out that the psychological pathology most conspicuously at work in the right’s demolition of politics is projection: the attribution in "the enemy" of one’s own moral depravity:

The Bushevik, so full of hate, hates politics, and would get rid of it; and yet he is himself expert at dirty politics: an expertise that he regards as purely imitative and defensive. Because his enemies, he thinks, are all "political" – dishonest, ruthless, cynical, unprincipled – he is thereby "forced" to be "political" as well, in order to "fight fire with fire." As we have seen, this paranoid conviction of the Other’s perfidy suffuses and impels the propaganda campaigns of the right, and it was especially important in Bush/Cheney’s drive to steal the last election. Indeed it was their firm conviction that they had to steal the race, in order to frustrate the Democrats’ attempt to do it first. (Miller, 82.)

This is just a brief sampling of Miller’s astute political and psychological analysis of the "why" and the "how" of the stolen elections of 2000, 2002 and 2004. That analysis, which takes up about a third of the book (Chapters 3 and 4), adds an invaluable dimension to our understanding of the political disaster that has befallen our Republic, and that analysis suggests guidelines in the struggle to avoid the theft of the upcoming elections of 2006 and 2008.

I have written at length about what might be done if we are to restore the ballot box to the voters. These crucial steps come immediately to mind, as I read Miller’s Fooled Again.

Briefly, we need a media, we need an opposition party, we need an aroused public, and we need a miracle. But take heart: history tells us that political crises have a way of producing miracles.

The mainstream media (MSM) must be discredited and an alternative media established in its place. The internet offers a voice to an opposition that is excluded from the mainstream, and a few independent publications and broadcasts remain, however feeble in comparison to the MSM. If a sizeable portion of the public deserts the mainstream, and directly informs the publishers and broadcasters why they are doing so, the media, and particularly their sponsors and advertisers, will take notice. Recently, some of the media have become more critical of the Bush regime and the GOP Congress, but it is, by and large, too little and too late.

So either the commercial media must resume the role of watchdog of government power, as intended by Jefferson and Madison, or it must be made irrelevant. The Russian dissidents late in the Soviet era have given us an example: if you have no media, create one, even if it is suppressed by the government. It was called "Samizdat" – a painstaking process of typing several carbon copies of forbidden manuscripts on condition that the recipients would do likewise. Similarly, the Iranian dissidents during the reign of the Shah copied and distributed audio tapes of revolutionary speeches. In the computer age, there are huge advantages: Internet publication and, f the Internet is taken from us, CDs and minidiscs. For now, the Internet is our Samizdat.

The Democratic party is the only potentially effective opposition party in sight. But at the moment, it is a toothless tiger. We must tell that party that it must either lead the struggle to restore electoral integrity or step aside. When the Clintons, Cantwells, Liebermans and Feinsteins run for re-election, they must be opposed in the primaries by authentic progressives. Even if those progressives lose, but with a creditable showing, the "establishment" Democrats will nonetheless get the message. Next time you get a solicitation notice from the DNC or the Senate or Congressional Campaign Committees, tell them "no dice" unless they deal with the election fraud issue. Then tell them that instead of a contribution, you are purchasing Miller’s book and donating it to the local library.

As for the public, remember that more than half the public is awake, aware, and opposed to the Bush regime. Of these, a small but significant minority is convinced that election fraud is a serious problem. But that dissenting public lacks a voice, cohesion and leadership. This is a recipe for potentially sudden change: like fuel and oxygen, lacking the third necessity – heat of ignition. A message, from a Tom Paine or a Jefferson, or leadership from a Washington, a Gandhi, a Mandela or a Sakharov, can ignite the fire that will consume this evil regime. Or not. That depends on whether concerned citizens sit by and wait for others to act, or instead take some initiative and join the struggle – writing to Congress, talking to any and all associates that will listen and perhaps a few that won’t, contributing to alternative media, copying and distributing dissenting essays, and generally raising hell.

And finally, miracles: they are, by nature, unpredictable. Some possibilities: A few corporate and financial elites will finally come to realize that where Bush is leading, they don’t want to follow, and they will join the opposition. (There are a few intimations of this already). Similarly, perhaps a few journalists, and even some Republicans, will finally if belatedly decide that they would prefer not to live in a dictatorship. Bushenomics is bound to lead to an economic collapse that is certain to wake up the public. And even now, some state Attorney General or some District Attorney may be preparing an indictment for election fraud against an e-vote company executive that could break this conspiracy wide open.

But don’t wait for miracles to happen – make them happen.

If we are to take back our country, we must first take back our vote. Mark Crispin Miller’s book will tell you what has happened, how and why it has happened, and what must be done about it.

Will we, the people, take up the challenge? On that question rests the fate of our republic, of our liberties, and of "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."

Dr. Ernest Partridge is a consultant, writer and lecturer in the field of Environmental Ethics and Public Policy. He publishes the website, The Online Gadfly and co-edits the progressive website, The Crisis Papers. He is at work on a book, Conscience of a Progressive, which can be seen in-progress here. Send comments to:

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

top of page