Frist!!
Thanks, Thanks, Thanks Brad

The black and white photo above is a link to this article ... which I urge you to read if you haven't done so already ...

Thanks again, Brad. Good work!

I hate repug scum. You know looking at the black and white picture is really tempting me to find a way to Atlanta this weekend.

READ THIS NOW!!!! ENJOY!!!!!

Vanity Fair allegations that Denny Hastert took Turkish bribe money.

Charlie

The Speaker of the House taking bribes. This is just great. Gotta love the repug culture of corruption. Way to go Denny!!

Valley girl,

I had an idea of creating a huge petition site and getting Hackett into fighting mode because this election was likely gamed.

We can't just stand here with the evidence starting to look pretty bad, he is going to deploy to Iraq.

I don't want him to go to Iraq after how hard he has fought, especially when we need those like him HERE fighting **NOW**

The republicans of Ohio has had enough of stolen votes in Ohio!!!!! I can sense it totally, and he needs to be taking up the fight for his chair! No more!

I reccomend we all get to him before they deploy back to Iraq, and investigate the vote. Kerry rolled over and fled- **But this man said that he does not intend to!**

If he knows that regardless they overturn the result or not, that this is investigated and the illegal fraud or obstruction is sifted through that america will know the truth.....He must do it.

This has to happen NOW!!!! How do we get an organized call for them to investigate? I bet he won, but they will not willingly overturn the results. They are very very corrupt, thanks to Paula Hicks Hudson.

Doug E.

I know, NB
Keep the the faith. How trite is that?

The ACVR stuff and Paul Hackett's "loss" in the last 24 hours have left me feeling like I've been hit by a car.

Has anyone heard whether ANYONE is looking into possible fraud in Ohio? I've e-mailed a couple of Ohio papers requesting an investigation (for all the good that will do.)

And Rahm Emmanuel and the dccc e-mail me asking for money and saying how great it is that hackett ALMOSt won. What a crock of shit. Talk about abused codependent dipshits! "Thank you, sir, may I have another???" The neo-cons are laughing at us.

I feel like I scream into an open void sometimes, and its just like that scream **IM NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!!!!!!!!** gets deeper and deeper.

The election was stolen. We all feel it and I can sense it. I knew it the minute the results became too close for comfort again...when they said "its going to be close..."

Red flag for the theft. Immediate and deliberate theft, and I can't shake it off. I'm concerned though that the leaders do not wish anyone to challenge results.....And are aiding the fascists in the White House. I feel as though we will have to force Hackett or someone else to pay attention and lead the fight.

The fact is, I thought he would either lose by a bunch or win. I was prepared to simply enjoy the results of either, and understand the implications.

But when I saw that instead he got super close to winning, and was winning......I got that stomach twisted in knots feeling again. **THE FIX WAS IN**

AND I HATE THAT FEELING!!!!! Don't all of you hate that damn feeling!?!?!? AND I KNEW THE VOTE COUNT WOULD NOT BE FAIR, BECAUSE HACKETT WON!!! DAMN IT!!!

THEY are sick, phony, disgusting bastards. THEY definitely did this theft just to rub it in our faces, can't you sense it.....and they claim that the voters won't do anything.

Email for DD director, maybe someone can get on hand witness reports:
chris@mydd.com
jerome@mydd.com

Doug E.

Hi, Doug E. - I exactly feel your frustration. I often think that sometimes, even though we can see the train heading down the tracks towards disaster, we can yell and scream "get off the tracks, watch out, get off the tracks", people just won't listen and get hit by the train. They then sob and cry, and scream out that it isn't fair, and that they are now suffering...but they just won't listen in the first place, and they bring it on themselves...we can only do what we can...we can't fix everything before bad things happen...for everthing, there is a season...the season of change is moving very slowly in the U.S. I guess I believe there is a grand plan, and we each separately and individually are to learn by our own mistakes, or not.

Hey everybody! Me too. I feel like I just got hit by a car (like Jim Cirile.) I've got that sickening feeling, but I knew I couldn't trust any election. Not as long as the GOP-ers own the voting machines and the central tabulators.

Brad, thanks for this great article. You really pointed out how Yellow the Elephants are. They're too disgusting for words --- dishonest, disingenuous and loathsome. (And they seem a little r-a-c-i-s-t to me.)

Hey Unbeliever --- come on down to Atlanta for the march! Look at the list of who'll be there:

Pro-Democracy March & Rally

Speakers and Performers
Check back often for updates!

Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Sr.
Congressman John Lewis
Ambassador Andrew Young
Dr. Joseph E. Lowery
Stevie Wonder
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi
Willie Nelson
Mayor Shirley Franklin
Bruce Gordon President, NAACP
John Sweeney President, AFL-CIO
Harry Belafonte
Gerald W. McEntee President, AFCSME
Tom Joyner
AME Bishop Vashti McKenzie
Congressman John Conyers
Mayor Antonio Villagarosa
Andy Stern President, SEIU
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Roberta Flack
Anne Marie Tallman President, MALDEF
Senator Richard Durbin
Barbara Arnwine Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
John Legend Recording Artist
Congressman Charles Rangel
John Wilhelm UniteHere
Cousin Jeff Johnson
Congresswoman Corine Brown
Judge Greg Mathis
Sandra Maria Esteves
Dr. Bobby Jones Gospel Artist
Charles Steele President, SCLC
Juan Adrade
Rev. James T. Meeks Rainbow/PUSH Coalition
Corey Harris Recording Artist
Joe Hansen International President, UFCW
Amir Sulaiman
The Carpenter Ants Recording Artists
Coach Ken Carter
Bruce Gordon President, NAACP
Stan Watson Chair, Georgia Legislative Black Caucus
Red Storm
Rev. Jasper Williams
Darius Brooks Gospel Artist
Rev. Jerry Black
Kim Gandy, President, NOW
Nova 4 Jehovah Gospel Hip-Hop Artist
Phyllis Wheatley
Rev. Major Jemison
Leslie Cagan United for Peace and Justice
Little Zion Recording Artist
Porsche Foxx
Christian Outler
Liza Lakes

~~BUT WHERE'S CYNTHIA MCKINNEY????~~

I agree we need Cynthia Mckinney, she is a laser on cleaning up elections in Georgia. Diebold is already getting roughed up thanks to her and the fearless activists.

http://www.countthevotes.org

By the way, did anyone see this??

http://www.recountflorid...2005/ClermontResults.xls

Schmidt
60.69%

Hackett
39.31%

Difference: 408 votes

Why in the world would Schmidt have over 60% of the votes from early voting, if she got 1158 ballots the same time Hackett got 750?

A difference of barely 400 votes? How did she get over 60% and why did it suddenly go down?

Further the worst part of the snapshots....

At 9:3/50 PM

She had over 7800 votes.

In less than 15 minutes, a whopping 10,000 votes was added to her total, while by comparison, around 5500 was added to Hackett.

Could there be over 2300 missing miscounted votes?!

Since this was an all republican district, almost no one was watching for the tricks!!!!

Doug E.

Hey guys, without Republicans, the 1964 Civil Rights Act would have never been passed.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act almost died as democrats filibustered the Act for 74 days.

The Senate invoked cloture (ending the democrat filibuster) with the vote of 82% of Republicans and 66% of Democrats; and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ultimately passed the Senate when 82% of the Republicans (and only 31% of the Democrats) voted for passage, and passed the House with 80% Republicans (and only 58% of Democrats) voting for passage.

A Republican president also freed the slaves. Went to war over it. He was known to the South as the "most hated president ever."

Paul you make me sick. Your corrupt leaders have almost ensured that the new voting rights act NEVER gets renewed.

Don't talk to me about what republicans do! The republican leadership is completely corrupt and off the deepend. Even the rank and file republicans are sick of em.

By the way I know hundreds of real republicans. They think they're fucking insane, go figure that out. I hold nothing against them for the party being hijacked.

Doug E.

Paul, you are so right. It's not Dem vs Pub.

But I also hope this election in Ohio is investigated.

Nice photo contrast, Brad.

Hi, Kira - I don't like saying this...but...I have a sick feeling...the FEMA exercise for this weekend "south of DC"...August 6...do you think it will happen in Atlanta???? I'm sorry, but the evil bastards are evil!!! Please answer...

Those black and white photos speak for themselves! Selma, 1965. Police sicking the German Shepherds on the black people!
Now the election hanky-panky in Florida and Ohio!
May God help us!!! May God help us!!!

Doug-

Nice point. Good question. Is it possible that there are just 2300 to many votes? Thats votes were added to her column during a computer "glitch" and wouldn't an audit of the number of signatures vs ballots cast make a difference.

In regards to the provisional ballots. I don't remember reading anything about whether they were counted or not. But lets not forget the lesson of the 04 Election, and thats that if the winner wins by a larger margin than there are provisional ballots, than there is no need to count the provisional ballots.

So if you add votes to the total....or have a dramatic 10000 vote increase in less than 15 minutes, you've had more than enough time to estimate the number of provisional ballots that have been cast, then you can make the opponet conceed before the provisional votes are counted by making sure that you add enough votes to the total so it would seem implausible to contest, game over, move on, the fix is in.

Anyone think an audit of the records vs total would be allowed by Blackwell? Care to ask?

Any bets that the number of provisional ballots cast is somewhere not to shy her margin of victory?

Goodnight

Charlie New Orleans

Peggy --- yes --- I'm sweating bullets. I've thought about it and decided that I'll go ahead and march. My grandmother marched as a suffragette in 1913 in DC, so I feel obligated to march at this rally as much to honor her as to offer my presence to this important cause.

It is so disgusting!!!!!!!!!!

There was a magical **23 precincts** involved, those are the ones with the most fraud!!

By the way I found this evidence:

**The greatest website you have ever seen explaining it!!**

http://www.answers.com/t...troversy-voting-machines

This evidence will make even all republican and democrat doubters, understand the time is now. CHALLENGE THE SYSTEM!!!! And fight until it is COMPLETELY reformed!

Do you want Thomas Noe counting your votes? How about Jeffrey Dean? **Then Challenge the damn system, RESTORE DEMOCRACY!!!**

Doug E.

Paul - What's your point? That the elections weren't stolen yesterday and in 2004 because Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves? That a partisan diversionary coverup report wasn't issued because there was a Southern Democrat contingent in Congress for many years that predictably and consistently opposed civil rights legislation and there were good Republicans in favor of civil rights?

There are many things Republicans can be proud of in their history - abolitionism (although there were free soil Democrats also), Lincoln, advocacy of small business and community. There were also things not to be proud of - blatant corruption after the Civil War, Teapot Dome and the complex of corruption surrounding it (originating in Ohio, by the way), for example.

Same with Democrats, of course - good, bad, and the ugly. They are people with interests and occasional statemanship not members of biological species called "Republican" and "Democrat". (Excuse me if this was your point. Didn't sound like it to me.)

What is disturbing is an apparent inability to change from wide focus to a detailed view - a close look at what is happening right now and a huge blind spot in not seeing the obvious sense and necessity of knowing the votes are being counted. It would seem to an American (not as a "Republican" or a "Democrat") it would be non-negotiable.

BlackBoxVoting.org has announced that it looks like charges against Jim March will be dropped.

It's a little strange BBV is so quiet about the Ohio 8/2 s*Election. I would have thought they'd all be crunching the numbers over there, but there's hardly a word.

DOUG, sweetheart, have you tried the help for making links? (CLICK HERE for help adding links in comments and much more) --- look just above the comment box and click on the CLICK HERE --- it's so much nicer for readers to be able to click on an active link AND it doesn't stretch the page width. Please try it

**REMEMBER THAT THEME WHEN YOU FEEL LIKE THE BUBBLE IS ABOUT TO BURST?**

I think it just happened......

"Edmonds reportedly added that the recordings contained repeated references to Hastert’s flip-flop in the fall of 200," Rose pens, "over an issue which remains of intense concern to the Turkish government—the continuing campaign to have Congress designate the killings of Armenians between 1915 and 1923 a genocide. For many years, attempts had been made to get the House to pass a genocide resolution, but they never got anywhere until August 2000, when Hastert, as Speaker, announced that he would give it his backing and see that it received a full House vote…Thanks to Hastert, the resolution, vehemently opposed by the Turks, passed… Then on October 19, minutes before the full House vote, Hastert withdrew it. He attributed it to a letter from President Clinton."
LINK

Sibel Edmonds whistle-blows on the 9/11 coverup artists.....Plus...

**US Attorney's office comments on Indictments!!!**

Citizen Spook has interviewed a representative of Randy Sanborn's office at the Dirksen Federal Courthouse in Chicago where the Fitzgerald investigation is headquartered. Randy Sanborn is the official spokesperson for the US Attorney's Office in the Northern District of Illinois. Sanborn is also the official spokesperson for Patrick Fitzgerald.

It's crucial to ask the right questions, and the right questions need the right words. The political and legal environment we find ourselves in at this strange moment in American history is centered upon the manipulation of citizen perception. We have been asked to endure a President who can say with a straight face, "That depends on what the meaning of is, is." And the current right wing lunatic harbingers of Treason are flogging a defense in the Valerie Plame affair based upon the ridiculous assertion that there's a difference between outing "Valerie Plame" and outing "Joe Wilson's wife".

Because of this environment, it's imperative that those of us in the Blogosphere stay focused for pinpoint accuracy with the questions that we ask, the words we use, and our analysis of the answers we receive.

Yesterday, **Tom Flocco** published the following headline bombshell, "Bush and Cheney Indicted":

"U.S. federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's Chicago grand jury has issued perjury and obstruction of justice indictments to the following members of the Bush Administration: President George W. Bush, Vice-President Richard Cheney, Bush Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Cheney Chief of Staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, former Attorney General John Ashcroft, imprisoned New York Times reporter Judith Miller and former Senior Cheney advisor Mary Matalin."

link

The story spread like wildfire through internet forums. As of last night, I couldn't find an official, "on the record", reply to the story from the US Attorney's Office in the main stream media or anywhere in the Blogosphere.

That made sense, because Grand Jury proceedings are Secret, and without a Judicial Order releasing Grand Jury results, the US Attorney's Office would not be allowed to comment on what the Grand Jury has done.

The Federal ules of Civil Procedure:

"Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provide that the prosecutor, grand jurors, and the grand jury stenographer are prohibited from disclosing what happened before the grand jury, unless ordered to do so in a judicial proceeding. Secrecy was originally designed to protect the grand jurors from improper pressures. The modern justifications are to prevent the escape of people whose indictment may be contemplated, to ensure that the grand jury is free to deliberate without outside pressure, to prevent subornation of perjury or witness tampering prior to a subsequent trial, to encourage people with information about a crime to speak freely, and to protect the innocent accused from disclosure of the fact that he or she was under investigation." http://www.law.ku.edu/research/frcriIII.htm

The prosecutor is barred from "disclosing what happened before the grand jury, unless ordered to do so in a judicial proceeding." The law does not allow Fitzgerald to comment regardless of whether Indictments have been "returned" or not.

Furthermore, according to the Federal Handbook for Grand Jurors, keeping the proceedings and findings of the Grand Jury secret, "[p]revents the disclosure of investigations that result in no action by the grand jury. http://www.moed.uscourts...ndbookForGrandJurors.pdf

The US Attorney's office is not allowed to comment about proceedings regardless of outcome.

So I was surprised this morning, when I came across a post at http://www.flybynews.com which contains a statement, alleged to be from the US Attorney's office. Please note that I am not vouching for the credibility of the flybynews.com comment. I have conducted my own interview with the US Attorney's office and will discuss it below, but it was this flybynews.com comment which percolated my curiosity and led me to dig a bit deeper. The flybynews commentary: __________________________________________________________________
Updated 03 August 2005 - ---------- This following received via email ----------- From: "People's Attorney / Volks-Anwalt Wolfram Grätz" Leuren Moret wrote:

I called the US Attorney's office this morning and they had "no comment" but when I asked them when they would announce this to the public they said " **we have** not issued **these** indictments". They had a lot of phone calls.

http://www.flybynews.com...i?newsid1123024424,95688,
__________________________________________________________________

Assuming for the moment, that the quote is accurate, the words must be examined carefully in the context of grand jury linguistics and rules of procedure because they tell us that the US Attorney does not "issue" indictments. So when Randy Sanborn's office issued official statement to me this morning, "on the record", which said, "This office has not issued any indictments," the US Attorney was telling the truth, and was no in violation of the Federal secrecy law. As you will see, the statement in no way denies Tom Flocco's report that the "grand jury" has issued indictments.

LEGAL LINGUISTICS

The grand jury and the US Attorney are two separate entities with the respect indictments in that the prosecutor, according to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, presents "information" or an "indictment" to the grand jury, and the word "indictment"is used as a noun, and it's used to describe the allegation against the defendant . And if the grand jury finds sufficient evidence that a crime has been commited, the grand jury votes to "indict", indict now being a verb, and if the the grand jury indicts, it then "returns an "indictment" or a "true bill". But the indictment returned by the jury is a "finding" whereas the "indictment" (aka "information") presented to the grand jury is an allegation."

"If the grand jury finds that there is sufficient evidence of probable cause, the grand jury "returns" an "indictment" which is also known as a "true bill", or in the alternative, if there is not sufficient evidence of the crime, the grand jury will return "a not true bill" aka "bill of ignoramus".

It's not legally possible for the US Attorney's Office to "issue" "indictments" when referring to charges that a grand jury has voted to "return" "indictments" on. Those "indictments" are "returned" by the grand jury, not the US Attorney.

And just so we're clear, neither the US Attorney or the grand jury, according to the letter of the law, is empowered to "issue" indictments. Rule 9 empowers "the court" to "issue" a "warrant" or "summons"."
http://www.citizenspook.blogspot.com/

I think I just heard the bubble pop.

Doug E.

This link didn't work for ya' Doug #23 (above as 0803.html">LINK)
Vanity Fair floats allegations GOP chief Hastert took Turkish bribes

Good try, though! It'll come with practice.

These are your other links:

TomFlocco.com

Law.ku.edu/Research

Fed Handbook for GrandJurors.pdf

FlyByNews

Citizen Spook Blogspot

('whew')

And we'll see --- I'll be ecstatic if this is true, let's hope it is.

Adding to Arry's #21, to Paul:

Whoever wins the war writes the history.

People of this country have been subjected to brainwashing by propaganda since the beginning. I hate to say it, but most of what we learned in school was propaganda.

To really know the truth about who did what, you have to study what was written in other countries about our history, as well as study as many different sources of American History as you can. After you do that, you'll find that it's a very different story. And even then, it may be hard to know the exact truth.

I'm very sorry, but that's the truth.

Kira: **This** has gotten very interesting, because before the Prosecutions office would not comment....

Now she goes out on a limb, and specifically mentions in the question "we have not issued these indictments from our office"

The way she phrases it saying, " **we** have not issued **these** indictments"

Tells you that the prosecution is not issuing the indictments himself.....And that it appears the Grand Jury is issuing or has issued the indictments.

Indicted? There's also the prospect of the Grand Jury going far past Fitzgerald's evidence and running away....If its a runaway Grand Jury, the biggest cleanout we have ever seen in Washington D.C. could be afoot.

This has gotten real fascinating...Plus another Grand Jury has been established as well. I have a strong feeling indictments have come.

Doug E.

That's really interesting, Doug. I'm saving my energy, though. I guess I've gotten kind of jaded over the months of thinking "this one's going to do it" and then it just fizzles out. I'm still crossing my fingers on this one! Thanks for all your research.

I meant: "he soft-shoed through his campaign, almost as if he was letting duhbya look better" ON PURPOSE!!

Its so sad but true...

Feels like your best friend stabs you in the back regarding John Kerry.....What happened to him, why can't he take up the senate committee to investigate the DSM?

I found this horrible piece of evidence on the DLC...

http://rightweb.irc-onli...nd/marshall/marshall.php

Their leaders are PNAC board members.

Doug E.

re #32: That's exactly right, Doug. It is indeed SO SAD ... but has it not been obvious for a long time?

In my opinion the neocon democrats are perhaps even more dangerous than the neocon republicans, because of the added layer of deception. We know enough not to trust neocon republicans, but we continue to be fooled by neocon democrats.

Speaking of which, let's take a good look at Paul Hackett, who was presented as an anti-war candidate. Consider a few of his comments about the war in Iraq:

The White House has been painting a rosy picture and people aren’t buying it anymore. We all know the outcome is uncertain and there is no exit date. But even now, too many conservatives just want to applaud whatever the administration does. And too many liberals who opposed the war want to see the president’s Iraq policy fail.

Considering that the president's Iraq policy is a BIG FAT LIE, that it involves mass murder and the wanton destruction of an unarmed country on FALSE PRETENSES, it's incredible to me that anyone with an ounce of humanity in his bones could hope for such a policy to SUCCEED. And that's without even considering depleted uranium.

If I say we should pack up our radioactive ammunition and go home, it's not because I want to see Bush's policy fail. It's because I don't want to see any more people killed, on either side. And it's because I don't want to see any more radioactive waste scattered over the earth.

Apparently Paul Hackett is too steeped in blood and propaganda to recognize that in Iraq, we're the invaders, we're the occupiers, we're the bad guys.

He also says:

No matter what your position on the war, if we pull out now the entire region will spiral into chaos and present our nation and military with a far more difficult challenge than we currently face.

I disagree entirely.

First of all, he has no business prefacing a very debatable pro-war opinion with the phrase "No matter what your position on the war". That's a cheap trick --- a tactic whose only purpose is to shut out contrary viewpoints, and to stifle debate. I'm not having any of it, and I hope you aren't either.

Secondly, and more important: In my opinion, if we stay, the entire region will continue its spiral into chaos. But if we pull out now, we'll remove most of the targets, as well as most of the shooters. And as an added bonus, horrific events such as those described here and here and here would finally stop.

Clearly Paul Hackett and I disagree on some serious issues. I respect his right to his opinions, even though I disagree with him. But I wish to point out the source of our disagreement. It's really very simple. His position on Iraq is pro-war. And mine is anti-war.

In the long view, this whole discussion [what we should do about Iraq] is hypothetical and meaningless. "Should" doesn't enter into it. We're staying, no matter what the secretary of "defense" might say. There is no way we're going to build all those bases and then turn them over to foreigners.

How then can we get out of Iraq? I think we have to start by realizing that the democrats couldn't manage to nominate an anti-war candidate for president last fall and they couldn't manage to nominate an anti-war candidate for congress this summer either. This despite the fact that the majority of Americans believe we should get out of Iraq. So ... What does that tell you?

To me it means that both the democrats and the republicans are aligned against the majority of American voters. Yes, there are some Good Democrats, but unfortunately they do not control their party. Who does control their party? The DLC neocons, as pointed out by Doug in his comment above.

So ... what next? Here's something that has seemed obvious to me for a long time, although it still appears to lack popular support: In my opinion, true electoral reform must deal with primaries as well as general elections --- and not just vote-counting in the primary elections, but the entire nomination process. What difference does it make if the general election is rigged, when the "contest" is between two candidates who both support the same crooked enterprise?

If the majority of democrats oppose the war, then why should their party be "led" by pro-war right-wingers who call themselves "centrists"? Is it because the primaries are as "fixed" as the general elections? I don't know; I'm just asking.

Does anyone else know? Does anyone else even think about things like this? And if so, what do you think??

I have precious few answers to go with my big stack of questions. But I do know this much: It's not easy being green.

Winter Patriot:

Well, I have to say Hackett is very anti-war now. He was just appealing to the conservative voters and others in Ohio. That's what he had begged to do.

But he did not agree with why we are over there. I do have to agree with the fact, deserting Iraq without putting any structure in place is a mistake. The whole region is screwed up, we can't make it worse and force the Middle East to hate us more.

What I wish Hackett would have said, is that Iraqis need to take over their own freedom and all our soldiers who are **controlling their oil, their resources, and energy** need to get the hell home. They need to get out of Iraq period, and we need to stand down and let the Iraqis build their government!

If he had said that, despite the fraud we would have taken the whole district. I know this, but still the fraud is a horrible thing.

Doug E.

I'm sorry, Doug, but I'm hung up on the contradictions.

If he's anti-war NOW but his website STILL looks pro-war then what sort of message is that supposed to send?

It says to me that the fraud goes a lot deeper than we ever thought.

Winter: You can never discount anything. I just want to believe Hackett didn't lie about who he is and what he stands for.

You know, have at least some faith that someone out there, besides the brave Conyers or Waters, is standing up for progressives. That's all. Hackett has all those qualities. Even though he knows the Iraq war must be finished, but we should not be engaging in nation building anymore.

Doug E.

Hi, Winter - I agree 100% with every word you wrote in #33.

The problem is the so-called leaders have a problem with HONESTY and TRUTH. Saying what you think others want to hear, when you don't believe it, and actually believe it's wrong and damaging (like in dying) to others, just to get elected, is pathetic.

It's not leadership. It's weak and dishonest. Like John McCain, like John Kerry, like most of them. Very UNLIKE JOHN CONYERS. The situation will NOT get better until you replace dishonest leadership with HONEST LEADERSHIP.

Dishonesty and trickery has been the standard for gaining and keeping political office in America. If honesty and fairness became THE STANDARD for leadership, the first of those to run for office on this new standard may well lose. But society will be introduced to a new concept (sad to say) and over time WILL LEARN that this is the way that will yield the best outcome for everyone. The question is how bad will the situation become before people want to try a NEW STANDARD: HONESTY AND FAIRNESS IN GOVERNMENT.

BTW - The Iraqis are not stupid, helpless people. If America pulls out NOW, the Iraqis can call upon the U.N. and the rest of the world, for that matter for help. Also, America can send different forms of assistance, as in medicines, doctors, food, if asked. And, in fact, America can send troops IN THE FUTURE, IF ASKED. So, this propoganda that America "has to stay now " is rubbish. Bushco want to stay - FOREVER - TO CONTROL THE RICHEST OIL FIELDS IN THE WORLD. And Bushco would be pleased if every living Iraqi dropped dead this very moment...and the rest of the world would shut up and submit to their authority (bombs). So, it is imperative that America gets out of Iraq - NOW!

Hi all! Just got a message from little puny JFK - my response:
Grow a pair of balls, Johnny, and I'll start giving money to the Dems again. Skull and Bones, Hey? How about stolen elections in Ohio?

Robert E. L. Strider III
----- Original Message -----
From: John Kerry
To: aragorn@login.cz
Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 6:23 PM
Subject: The Fight Starts Now

What kind of dweeb wears a suit and tie to a Marshal Tucker concert?

Peggy - the neoCons have already established military bases for permanent occupation. This will enable a closer jumping off point for further Imperialistic Global-Takeover moves.

It's sickening, but the truth is, there is no (and never has been) intent of ever leaving the Middle East. I know you've studied up on PNAC, but for those who aren't quite sure what it all means check out this site:

PNAC discussed & digested into small chunks and excellent links provided here:

Stop The Lie .com

Has anybody researched which Democrats are linked to the PNAC-ers? You know the Shadow Gov't has to be made up of both.

TIA!
Kira

Kira: I'm afraid to dig really deep into that, because I know almost all of the DLC leaders are PNAC.

And I don't want to find out Kerry is PNAC.....I don't think he is, but I felt so deceived by Kerry and I really thought he was a true guy of integrity....I just wish he would break the from the DLC and prove his worth. I wish he could come out and say what he really wants to say, it must be so hard for him. Actually it must be really tough knowing the kind of corruption he knows about.

Doug E.

Gahhh - I feel the same way, Doug. I really, really believed in Kerry. But ... he soft-shoed through his campaign, almost as if he was letting duhbya look better. He missed hundreds of opportunities to show his strengths compared to d's weaknesses. He chuckled through all of them.

I waited for all these months after the s*Election for him to do something, but NOTHING!!! I think I'm through believing. Hate it, but ... unless he's being threatened ... I think he's part of the plan.

PROVE ME WRONG, JOHN KERRY!!! Here's your chance!

Paul- The issue isn't with losing.

The issue is that once paper ballots are restored, anyone who loses can't complain anymore and that means any republicans or democrats that lose a race lose it at their discretion.

Until that time however, **some Democrat or Republican** could just as easily login to the computer, select an entire county of registered voters, and hit the "delete" key by accident. There goes all those voters, and all their voices! They could even switch the memory card around and watch all the votes get destroyed by a malicious program.

The partisans could then come back and claim it was an "error", and will never happen again...Uh oh, then one week later **it happens again**

The solution? ** VERIFIED PAPER BALLOTS: VERSUS STOLEN ELECTIONS!!! **

http://www.countthevote.org

Doug E.

Who in government can we trust? Is anyone other than Howard Dean outside the template of PNAC?

I don't know and I'm even a little suspicious of Dean --- wahhh!

Top photo, the b/w one... ummm, yeah, it's the cops cracking skulls that were enforcing policies put in place by racist Jim Crow Democrats :laugh:... Democrats; racists then, racists now :laugh:

I agree on one angle, the Democrats back then were racist. They were all DLC type rich, southern conservative lunatics.

Today we still have alot of DLC democrats but now they are way outside of the mainstream. Now progressives must win the war!!!

Hackett and company were the first stage, showing how true populist democrats-that is the people, win elections. But now in order for that to happen the voting system must be fixed period.

Paper Ballots, correct the stolen elections. Even recount and audit Ohio 02.

Doug

Doug --- the Republicans back then were also racist.

The civil rights split in the Democratic Party of those years was a fact of life, but the Voting Rights Act was initiated and written by a Democratic president and attorney general following widespread citizen action led primarily by Martin Luther King, Jr. President Johnson negotiated in his usual successful style with Republicans (they got some key appointments and so on) and got the bill passed - although public sympathy and pressure was probably what really made passage possible. (In the House, there was a Republican effort to water down the bill that was defeated.)

Since then, the Republicans have been "Southern Strategy", Willie Horton, and disenfranchisement. (Well, far earlier than that, actually - see the election of 1876.) There is a reason Strom Thurmond switched to the Republican Party and that black citizens vote overwhemingly Democratic.

But it wasn't Johnson or Humphrey or any other Democratic politician who was responsible for the passage of the Voting Rights Act. That honor goes to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and the many people who were willing to put their lives on the line to insist that the Constitution means what it says and that America lives up to its promise and ideals.

Are we up to carrying on the great tradition?

Gee - I'm looking at my comment #47 & realizing I really meant to say that "some Republicans" back then were racist, just as "some Democrats" were racist. It's never a case of ALL.

Please remember that the history we studied in school was full of propaganda and bias.

The truth of the matter is that there are people on both sides of the aisle who are selfish and bigoted and power-hungry. There are people on both sides of the aisle who are seriously trying to make choices that help humanity - who strive to make this country great, strong and worthy of admiration.

Unfortunately, the ones who hold the power today are not the latter.

Kira - When I posted #48 I hadn't seen your other interesting links and comments on another thread regarding this issue. Thanks for them.

here, that is - at #9.

You're welcome, Arry and thank you for your ever insightful and well-tempered comments!

Cheers! Off I go to the Voting Rights March! I know y'all will be there in spirit.

The black and white photo is a picture of heroes oppressed by the majority in power to preserve power and to suppress the black vote.
To use it in the way you have is a problem.
Do not ever forget that the "bad guys" in that photo were ordered to do what they did by Democrats intent on keeping blacks from voting. Alabama Governor Wallace and Selma Mayor Smitherman were both Democrats. In fact, by the time of the Selma march, the Governor's mansion had been occupied by a Democrat for 90 years. What were the republicans doing during that time, not enough. But, the United States Congress passed the KKK act (used to prosecute conspirators who would interfere with a citizens right to vote) expressly as a way of protecting Republicans from the north who were murdered or attacked as they traveled south to stand up for the disenfranchised.
The juxtaposition of these photographs gives a false impression that republicans and not democrats have a record of working toward disenfranchisement.
That said, thank you for posting the b/w photo as a way to remember the struggle for voting rights.