Too F-ing little, too f-ing late from the same folks who slandered those of us who screamed "election fraud" in November & December 2004 and January 2005.

The Old Gray Lady is trying to preserve her place in history and her brand with progressives, but she's not much more than birdcage liner.

Charlie L
Portland, OR

yea!!!! and if we had counted all the hanging, danging chads in Florida. Oh wait a second, that was the other election.... sorry

HCOCDR, you're back!

I think the point is, there's ample proof that Ohio was a huge mess, run by Republicans, and the mess always favored Republicans. That, by the accounting of an honest person, stinks of "the fix is in"..

Not that I'd expect anyone supporting Shrubby would be "honest", not by a long shot.
Here's a question for ya, HCOCDR.. If what this guy says is true, and the Republicans are illegally running this town, how do you feel about that? What would you say if it was a Republican saying the Dems are illegally holding multiple offices and authorizing themselves to arrest people? (not that I expect an honest [or reasonable] answer)

HCOCDR foolishly said:

yea!!!! and if we had counted all the hanging, danging chads in Florida. Oh wait a second, that was the other election…. sorry

You're correct. When we did count all the hanging and "danging" chads in Florida, guess what was found? That Gore won by every imaginable standard [PDF] for counting those ballots when the entire state was counted (as Bush had wanted, but Gore wasn't allowed to request in his contest by state law).

The monarchofascists have gotten the idea that the people are sheep, meaning that they can go in and make all these "bungles", call it an election, and even the doubters will just mill around the herd, bleating. They seemed to have gauged the situation correctly. They're maybe a little upset about how aggressive the bleaters are about the voting machines, but are treating it the same way. "Aw, quit bleating, go back to chewing yer grass." This is not going to change until it stops getting them what they want.

Second try. (With disappearing commentary even before trying to post.)

How many of us does there need before we march on the White House? My God isn't it justified by anyone's standards at this point. If the same shit was going on in any other country, wouldn't we be thinking that they need to throw the bums out on their asses. Revolutions fucking happen, mate! The only con right now is the revolution ALREADY HAPPENED when the neocons stole the election in 2000!!!!

All media, independent or otherwise, need to be calling not for Impeachment - that is a broken method for a broken government - but for outright revolt. Under the constitution we have the right to take our government back from these treasonous individuals who have made war on the American people and the world:

Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution: Section. 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

15th Amendment, Section 1.
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude--

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--"

A long train of abuses and usurpations....

Do we or do we not have this? Now.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. CHECK

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. CHECK

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. CHECK

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. CHECK

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. CHECK

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. CHECK

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. CHECK

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: CHECK
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences CHECK
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. CHECK

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. CHECK

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. CHECK

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. CHECK

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. CHECK

Due to the differences of situation in contemporary times vs. colonial times, some of this is not directly transferrable, but with interpretative license, most of it definitely is.

How many years is it? Since the "liberal" NYTimes has reported this article? Ummmm.....2???? HEY!!! Thanks a lot!!! (I'm giving the NYTimes the "slow clap", seen in many teen movies).

Savanster: Exit Ricky...enter HCOCDR. Never posting on the same article. Did they ever meet each other? They better hope Bush doesn't pass the gay marriage amendment to the constitution!!! OUCH!!!!!!!!!

Brad:

You said:

“That Gore won by every imaginable standard [PDF] for counting those ballots when the entire state was counted (as Bush had wanted, but Gore wasn't allowed to request in his contest by state law).”

Now I’m truly confused!

I had remembered Al Gore asking for a statewide recount on television and that was verified by a blogger here (V. Kurt Bellman). Kurt said Al said that on television, but never FILED for a recount.

You’re saying here that Bush wanted a statewide recount.

If both candidates wanted it, why didn’t we have one?

Larry Bergan asked:

Now I’m truly confused!

I had remembered Al Gore asking for a statewide recount on television and that was verified by a blogger here (V. Kurt Bellman). Kurt said Al said that on television, but never FILED for a recount.

You’re saying here that Bush wanted a statewide recount.

If both candidates wanted it, why didn’t we have one?

By law, Gore was only allowed to ask for recounts in specific counties. Bush complained (opportunistically and disingenously) that Gore only wanted to recount counties where he thought he'd gain votes. The fall back position by the Bush/Cheney '00 campaign was to call for a full state recount from the Supreme Court (which they thought they'd do better with, apparently).

The irony is that had Gore gotten recounts of only the counties where he'd ask for one, the ballots would have given it to Bush.

Had the full state been recounted, as Bush suggested (and as was done in the study linked in the previous comment) Gore would have been the winner by all counting standards.

Thus, Gore won Florida by receiving more votes than Bush...by all counting standards.

Brad, there isn't any reason to believe that the Bush campaign wanted a statewide manual count. Larry Bergan's memory, posted above, is essentially correct. The events went something like this:

Gore campaign requested manual counting in a few important counties. Bush campaign claimed that this was unfair somehow, and sued, but did NOT request a statewide manual count. Gore went on television and said he had no objection to a statewide manual count: "Let's just agree to drop the lawsuits, and count the whole state." Bush just laughed, and didn't drop the lawsuits, and did NOT agree to a statewide manual count. FL Supreme Court ordered a statewide manual count. Bush campaign appealed to the US Supreme court, and argued that the ongoing statewide manual count was unconstitutional. You know the rest.

Bush campaign spokesmen often praised the legitimacy of a full statewide recount, but they were talking about the MACHINE recount which was automatic under state law and had already happened; they weren't talking about a MANUAL recount.

Thanks for the clarification guys. The maddening thing here is that 90% of the American people who never actually saw Gore on television asking for the statewide recount, because it was only shown once or twice and never again, believe that Gore never wanted a statewide, and was exclusively trying to preen what he could out of the counties he thought he knew were his.

We have all been exposed to these sins-of-omission and lying, but before I found Brad Blog, I was beginning to think I actually imagined Gore asking for the recount. Nobody I've asked around here saw it and thought I was crazy.

The media really should be ashamed.

FIX THE MACHINES Not The Elections

View bumper stickers on many of today's important issues.

'Almost' only counts in horse-shoes and hand grenades.
They 'almost' listen to every call with the NSA.
They 'almost' cage protestors at every rally.
They 'almost' banned the book "America Deceived" by E.A. Blayre III from Amazon.
They 'almost' stole 2 elections.
Maybe 'almost' counts more than horse-shoes and hand-grenades.
Last link (before they 'almost' ban it from Google Books):
http://www.iuniverse.com...?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

You are all a bunch fo whiners. Face it, your guy lost the election. Bush won both elections so you all get a life and get over it.

No Rove indictment ... I originally said Fitz had been compromised with an offer he could not refuse.

Then when Leopold came out with his truthout article and another reporter also said that Rove would be indicted ... I said I was glad to be wrong.

Now that it is so that I was correct, I shudder. They deliberately set Leopold up and he bit.

Take note MSM and the real press as well ... the republican dictatorship is moving into total control a little bit at a time.

The total contol of the press via targeted warfare is the new deal.

Is everyone in favor of the draft bill introduced on 6/6/06? I don't know why but Brad seems to be in favor of it. It is probably the large detail paid to CO status.

"almost certainly". Sounds like "maybe didn't".

I think Brad is off target about Bush thinking he had a better chance in a statewide Florida recount. The Bush position was almost certainly an effort to appear to take the high road, while knowing in advance their feeble effort for such a recount would surely fail. It almost certainly was never meant to succeed. The law many very well have been established for that very purpose. Just one of the many ordinary run of the mill spin jobs designed to make the criminals appear to be the victims that are regularly taught at The Fraud School Media Plant Jeff Gannon and Karl Rove Both Attended. The MSM falls every single one of these spin jobs hook, line and sinker.

This op/ed will be treated no better than the Rolling Stone article was by the MSM.
The MSM is about as trust worthy as a Tax Payer Funded Republican Propaganda Machine. This op/ed will be spun off as just another whining liberal.

I'm sure hcocdr will be pleased to hear that they are now doing something in Ohio that has not been tried much in recent years. They are now finally trying to Count the Votes Correctly in Ohio! The results sure should be a big surprise to hcocdr and the MSM. They had better get busy planning their next spin job.

Count the votes Herbert.
And get a life while you're at it.

You can read NYT columnists at www.edstrong.blog-city.com/

Jon #15

You are a republican dictatorship controlled individual in the 30% lunatic fringe that still approves bu$hit. The propaganda of that sick group of psychopaths only fools the fools.

Thanks for the link powkat. It sure is a well writted op/ed but the "liberal" MSM sure will not let that affect their spin.

Two facts with so much well known supporting documentation available that I won't even bother to quote it.

#1. Gore won Florida in 2000 but was cheated out of approximately 40,000 votes that were "spoiled" and voided by partisan election officials in Democratic precincts. Gore also won the national popular vote in 2000. Bush was "installed" as President by a partisan Supreme Court who did not adhere to the law (The U.S. Constitution nor the Florida Constitution and Statutes) and made a decision without regard for law or precedent (and refused to create precedent) and by a totally partisan 5-4 ruling stopped a recount that would have given Gore victory.

#2. Kerry should have won Ohio in 2004 except for the massive dis-enfranchisement of poor and black Democratic voters by a partisan Secretary of State who violated his oath of office and the Ohio Constitution and Statutes. Kerry also won New Mexico, where partisan election officials on Indian reservations stole over 10,000 votes from him.

I would suggest, Brad, that to improve our use of this website for sharing information and planning how to approach election count fraud, that anybody who does not agree with #1 and #2 above should be banned from commenting.

Just a thought.

Charlie L
Portland, OR

Planning might be electoral, civil, or militantly political. It might be open, hidden, or a combination. It might be centralized, celluraized, or a variety. It might be simultaneous or ongoing and non-contiguous. It might be pleasant or it might be ugly. It might be personal or it might be organized and structured.

As for free speech, go to freepers or Drudge or any other of ten thousand right-wing blogs and discussion boards to make your points to YOUR supporters.

This is BRAD's speech here and our right to comment should be at HIS discretion. If you read Article One, it is "The Government shall make no law abridging" not "BRAD shall make no rule abridging..." If we had "free speech" in the USA, I could go on CNN tonight and talk about election fraud, but I can't, because I don't "own" CNN or Fox or MSNBC or the NYT or WaPo or any of the corporate-owned and right-wing dominated mass media.

So, to all the Republicans and middle-of-the-roaders and anybody else who hasn't READ and UNDERSTOOD the books and long articles researched and written or assembled by Conyers, Fritikas, Palast, Freeman, Kennedy and others --- GO TO F&*%ing hell. You are part of the problem, so I doubt you will be part of the solution.

The truth is the truth and the time to argue about it is over.

It is now time to discuss exactly what level of rebellion we are going to apply to this threat to our Democratic Republic and the institution of elections that is at the heart of it.

Let's get to it, before it is too late.

What about that (*&^* R. B. Hayes stealing the election of 1876 from Tilden! Let's rehash that ancient history....or rather move on with life. The fact of the matter is BOTH parties in the US are corrupt & Both steal as many votes as they can...the real change we need is viable 3rd party out there not afraid to call'em like we see'em...where's Teddy & a Progressive Party when you need'em?

I generally find that people who have to tell other people their IQ (or even KNOW their IQ) aren't as smart as they think they are.

Maybe the IQ limit at BradBlog should be set at 184 --- what do you think Brad?

Charlie L
Portland, OR
(If I'm already lost, then at least I'm going to have fun finding out.)

Ohio: the assertions about Kerry's "almost certain" victory and the supposed inability of voters to cast ballots pales in comparison to the Washington State / King County / Seattle 2004 election.

Ballot cages and ballot boxes certified no less than three times to be empty continues to cough up new votes for Democratic candidates - especially for the Dmeocratic gubernatorial candidate tha had been constantly behind.

Refusal to verify voter registrations - in direct contradiction of state and county requirements.

Felon, deceased, and duplicate votes cast for Democratic candidates.

Hundreds of unverified absentee ballots were counted despite using state, county, and city municipal offices as residence addresses.

Disgraced King County elections manager Dean Logan was retained in his position by County Executive Ron Sims - despite the fact that Sims was up for reelection.

Sims also refused to institute the recommendations of an elections oversight panel and was even forced to compile the panel itself.

Any perceived slight in Ohio is just that - perceived. The fraud of the Washington State election, corruption of this state's Democratic oligarchy is clear and documented. The response of the "progressive" left: "OHIO!" Your hypocricy knows no bounds.

Seattle Patriot,
From a very liberal guy up in SnoCo, I am in agreement with you on this. I have no interest in being hypocritical about election issues - the election was fucked-ass up and that is the long and short of it. I am not a Democrat and Democrats should not win elections fraudulently any more than Republicans should. That being said, Ohio was still ripped off on a far larger scale than Washington. This is not a partisan issue, and Democrats should be called to task or their malfeasance also - at the very least there should be some serious investigation in to our gubernatorial election.

I'm not a Gregoire fan anyway. I was supporting Phil Talmadge, I think Gregoire is a paid-for politician as much as Dino Rossi (and you've got to admit that Rossi is crooked as the day is long - very charming a la Tom DeLay, but crooked nonetheless)

Brad,
The blog title says, "Kerry almost certainly won Ohio" but the NYT article you quoted says, "Kerry almost certainly would have won Ohio if ...".

Which is it? Won or would have won? Have it both ways, have it any way, which is certainly the liberal way.

Grumpy.

Mike J
Explain the difference between would have and did from a historical point of view. Don't both of them require getting the most votes or did that go out with electronic voting?

Brad and Larry Bergan:

Paul Begala wrote an enlightening article about Gore's televised suggestion of a statewide manual recount, and the Bush campaign's refusal. The original page seems to be gone from the Web, but someone posted it on Usenet so it's cached on Google:

From: cwhite1943@aol.computerize (ModerateDemocratMan2000)
Newsgroups: alt.politics
Date: 17 Nov 2000 02:39:00 GMT
Subject: :: Bush looked like he was making a hostage tape ::
Message-ID: <20001116213900.12540.00000138@ng-bg1.aol.com&gt;

I think you can watch the original footage here: http://archives.cnn.com/...ries/11/15/recount.wrap/ but I haven't tried it, because I'm on a computer that doesn't play video.

(By the way, Brad, comment #23 is spam. You might want to delete it.)

Brad and Larry Bergan:

Paul Begala wrote an enlightening article about Gore's televised suggestion of a statewide manual recount, and the Bush campaign's refusal. The original page seems to be gone from the Web, but someone posted it on Usenet so it's cached on Google:

From: cwhite1943@aol.computerize (ModerateDemocratMan2000)
Newsgroups: alt.politics
Date: 17 Nov 2000 02:39:00 GMT
Subject: :: Bush looked like he was making a hostage tape ::
Message-ID: <20001116213900.12540.00000138@ng-bg1.aol.com>

I think you can watch the original footage here: http://archives.cnn.com/...ries/11/15/recount.wrap/ but I haven't tried it, because I'm on a computer that doesn't play video.

(By the way, Brad, comment #23 is spam. You might want to delete it.)

Anonymous:

Well that article certainly hit the nail on the head. Thanks for clearing up something that's been bugging me for a long time. Isn't the internet great!

So if anybody tells me Al Gore only wanted to count the counties he thought he won again, I'm going to kill their dog!

The Bush team was operating under the premise that they won, and intended to BEND THE WORLD or BREAK it if necessary, with the full cooperation of the congress. That's what happened America. And it will NEVER be old news!
NEVER!!!

If my memory serves me in another case, I think they machine-recounted the state 3 times. Boy would I like to see what that proceedure looks like. We had punch cards here too, and I've never even seen a picture of the damned (secret software driven) things that count them, let alone had any knowlege of ANYONE watching it being done.

As far as I know, once those encrytpted ballots are packed up and sent to the central tabulator, that's the last anybody in the public sees them!

Are there any election judges reading this who can tell me what it looks like or how it works?

My first thought when sElection 2000 went down

So this is what a Dictatorship looks like

Thats when I woke up

Charlie L said:
[quote]This is BRAD's speech here and our right to comment should be at HIS discretion. If you read Article One, it is "The Government shall make no law abridging" not "BRAD shall make no rule abridging…" If we had "free speech" in the USA, I could go on CNN tonight and talk about election fraud, but I can't, because I don't "own" CNN or Fox or MSNBC or the NYT or WaPo or any of the corporate-owned and right-wing dominated mass media.

So, to all the Republicans and middle-of-the-roaders and anybody else who hasn't READ and UNDERSTOOD the books and long articles researched and written or assembled by Conyers, Fritikas, Palast, Freeman, Kennedy and others — GO TO F&*%ing hell. You are part of the problem, so I doubt you will be part of the solution.[/quote]

Right on Charlie!!

All you neo-cons with your blinders on can go F**K yourselves and spew your drivel to someone other uninformed a$$hole that wants hear it. Dems have had enough of your mouth. Go away.

Larry Bergan (#36):

The Internet won't be so great, if the corporations succeed in killing "network neutrality" which has been protecting Internet users from corporate censorship since the beginning.

I found a good brief explanation of the danger, in a newsgroup which normally covers spam prevention:

Verizon and AT&T/SBC want to change the rules of transit. They're using the free ride Vonage and Itunes are getting as an excuse to cut off independent media outlets. It's the biggest social engineering trojan since the Help America Vote Act eliminated recountable elections. It's more subtle than the Great Firewall but in the end the goals are the same, stifling dissent and controlling the minds of the unwashed masses. It's somewhere between _1984_ and _Tomorrow Never Dies_, but in real life.

The plan to replace the Internet, with some crappy censored thing that works more like the "mainstream" media, has already made it through the FCC and the House. Next step is the Senate, and then the President.

article:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester

update:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060515/chester

lots of links:
http://www.democraticmed...ssues/netneutrality.html

Warning: if you spend any time reading about network neutrality, you'll encounter TONS of astroturf. I've never seen anything like it. We've encountered people on Brad Blog who were paid to come here and post disinformation, but the enemies of network neutrality seem to have hired a whole ARMY of people to spend 40 hours per week doing nothing except posting disinformation on blogs!

PS. Brad, will the Preview button ever be brought back?

Three more good articles about network neutrality:

http://www.rawstory.com/...eling_Internet_0424.html
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042306G.shtml
http://www.tompaine.com/..._democratic_internet.php

Anonymous:

I know all about this. Our only hope of getting rid of Orrin Hatch is a democrat running here in Utah. I found out he supports this damn COPE act and wrote an open letter exposing his ignorance of it. He owns the internet provider I've been using for 10 years and thinks it will help him. I disagree that it will help anyone but the giant corporate telecommunications outfits and any congressperson who doesn't like to be bothered by his/her constituents.

No Republican or Democrat who knows anything about this, (and some 700,000 of them have voiced their opposition) support it, but the topic is being ignored or misinformation put out. This is THE free speech issue of the century.