Winter.... I'm more interested as to when Mr. Lehto plans to appeal this evil decision!

Jesus, I'm no lawyer but this seems SO BAD. SO BAD!
Did I read that right??
Someone could win an election, and then the House or the Senate --according to this type of ruling-- could simply declare that the loser is the winner??
Jesus freaking God.

Bilbray and Busby are comin up on Hardball. I think Busby should bring up this swearing-in-before-certification nonsense. I doubt she will.

aaand... nope.

Lehto is "colorful" isn't he. He's doing the heavy lifting for all of us in San Diego and the appeal. What a truthful interview. You don't get many of those (I'm refraining from lawyer jokes).

Thanks Paul for the very intelligent and hard work and thanks Brad and BradBlog crew for making this story happen.

The legitimacy of the election process is the one, last, most important thing that holds us together. Stripping our society of that belief in fundamental honesty and inclusiveness is a dangerous ploy.

We've had enough! This must be carried forward. The Speaker of the House DOES NOT have authority over local elections. The courts should not insult Madison and Jefferson by linking them to tyranical behavioir, a big no no where I come from and anywhere.

First rate Raw Story...

Paul is a great lawyer, a true progressive, and a good friend to the Election Rights movement.

That said, I disagree with him (again and again and again) about whether or not the candidates themselves have an obligation to challenge their defeat if there has been foul play or election misconduct. He feels the "price the candidate will be forced to pay" is too high. I think that when a citizen takes on the role of "candidate" that they take upon themselves the responsibility for seeing the process through, EVEN IF THE MEDIA ATTEMPTS TO VILIFY THEM!

The media right now is an arm of the Rethuglican Government, so to alter our behavior because of what the media MIGHT do is to say that the Rethuglican Government can dictate who can challenge an election. Given that the results generally favor the Republcian-controlled government, that's not a very sound position.

Kerry understood this when he chose to advertise to progressives and liberals the idea that he would be proactive in making sure that Democracy was carried out in 2004. Kerry simply failed to follow-through (flip-flopped?) on his promise and sold out election reform activists in the process by his quick concession and failure to support and bring publicity to the (Blackwell-foiled) recount efforts in Ohio. Personally, I think he squandered an opportunity, because now, when he tries to speak out as a member of the "loyal opposition" I just think to myself (or shout out lout) "shut the fuck up you scumbag --- you sold us out" rather than "Wow, it's so good to hear Kerry speaking up against the status quo." At this point, I would rather vote for a Cheney/Rumsfeld (or Rove/Pearle or Norquist/Moon or Limbaugh/Colter or well, you get the picture) ticket in 2008 than support a ticket that had Kerry on it.

In 2000 Gore chose NOT to challenge the SCOTUS decision because he feared for the stability of the entire Democratic system if the House went against SCOTUS and refused to accept the Florida electors. In retrospect, that might have been a bad decision, but at the time, it seemed a "reasonable" one. Our republic had survived a POTUS who thought trees caused pollution and relish was a vegetable; a criminal POTUS, and a POTUS who could hardly walk and chew gum, so who would have thought a drunk, ex-coke-snorting, AWOL-draft-dodging, failed businessman could have caused so much trouble. And, we assumed (quite accurately) that in 4 years we would vote him out.

NOW that we know what we are up against (to put it bluntly, a criminal cabal that will stop at nothing to hold power), candidates who purport to be Democrats must fight to the bitter end, and perhaps even a bit further (that is, perhaps, into the streets).

We are on the brink. Some of these decisions start to look like the "enabling laws" that allowed the NAZIS and Hitler to take complete power in the late 1930's. We are literally inches from the edge of a slippery slope precipice from which we will not easily climb back. At the bottom is a VERY VERY DARK valley of evil, and I can feel our footing giving way with every little (and big) crime that this Republican administration, this Republican House, this Republican Senate, and these Republican courts get away with.

We must take a stand. If not now, WHEN? If not here, WHERE?

I just read the linked article by Miriam Raftery and was very surprised to find that I have posted the only comment at Raw Story to that piece. I think that Paul projects a bit of a pessimistic outlook about having the money to proceed with an appeal- not that he shouldn't be pessismistic if people are not willing to pony up and pay to fight for our democracy on this critical issue. Still, I think Paul needs to project a little more optimism and hopefullness about this appeal going forward and to encourage contributions to the sites the article links to Velvet Revolution and No Sleepovers dot org, with the addendum that these funds will be used to fight for election integrity whether or not this appeal goes forward. While I suspect that, like myself, most others are more willing to contribute to an effort when they have a specific idea of what their contributions are going to be dedicated to, this is such an important issue that people need to be willing to contribute if there is ANY chance that it will help this effort go forward.

I will state now that I am personally going to contribute again, regardless of the equivocation I posed in my comment at Raw Story, because this is too important of an issue to not go forward with it.

Okay, so I didn't put the web addresses in the required link format (because that didn't work) but it shows up as a link anyway! What can I say.

{Ed Note: Steve, click link button; paste url into the box that appears; click that box done; type the link text; click the /link button: link accomplished. OR just paste the url into the comment box, BUT put it on its own line to make it easier for others to click, AND to prevent the thread from going phlooey in certain cases. --99}

Will the action be appealed? Yes. It will be filed within a week, possibly as soon as Friday.

Charlie L: You disagree with me on candidates contesting, but I'm trying to strike a balance and make a less-understood point about the pressures candidates are under. That does not necessarily mean they shouldn't do the right thing, at all. So, we may agree more than you think. In the specific case of Busby, for reasons of the practicalities of time, there's no way to reverse the result before the Nov election makes the short term moot. If in fact candidates followed a strategy that you might approve of which is "ALWAYS CONTEST" then the other side (in a short term election followed by a full term election such as in Busby's case) might invite or even bait an election contest that would just tie down resources that could result only in pyrrhic victory. However, due to the incredible jurisdictional claims of the defendants, this case now has been transformed to something much broader than it was originally.

Paul, clearly you (and Brad as well) have had some access to Francine Busby and I have not. That said, here's what I think went wrong.

It was my feeling that immediately after the special election, Ms. Busby (or any authorized representative or spokesperson) was visibly absent from any and all discussions about the errors and problems with that election.

I believe that she was following the same kind of "insider" advice that you allude to, and "saving her powder" for November.

Meanwhile, velvetrevolution and other organizations seemed to understand that THIS SUMMER and the movement to COUNT THE ACTUAL VOTE in the CA-50 was an important sub-movement in our fight for fair elections.

We will never know if the CA-50 and the "sleepovers" could have been a tipping point in our battle. You appeared (at least to my sight) about a month after this fight for honesty in the CA-50 began. Don't you think things MIGHT have been different had you been there the day after the election?

Busby didn't necessarily have to perform all the LEGAL challenges --- she could have just been out there publicly calling into question the validity of an election where insecure machines were taken home.

If she had said: "What kind of a Democracy is this?" or "Is this what our young men and women are dying for in Iraq?" or "Is this what my opponent wants to see?" or "Can't we do a bit better than a banana republic here in the USA?" or "I'm not saying I won, just that we really ought to find out who DID." Or "This Elections Supervisor is being very unfair and acted illegally. That just isn't RIGHT or AMERICAN!" or "I'm very surprised that the Republican-controlled congress would choose to swear in my opponent when all the votes haven't even been counted." or Etc. Etc. Etc.

Rather than "The candidate is on vacation and looking forward to a strong fight in November."

Speaking in public would have kept her in the public mind and given her a voice as part of the PRO-DEMOCRACY constituency. She could have spun each and every statement questioning the validity of the special election as being about THE FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY AND AGAINST THE TERRORISTS if she wanted to --- I wouldn't have cared. I just wanted to HEAR FROM HER.

Hell, even if she thought she shouldn't speak in public, she could have come and posted here (as you have) and let us know that she KNEW about this issue and its importance.

There are times when I am not sure how strong our movement for electoral reform and honest democracy really is, and I don't think it can withstand this kind of "abuse" many more times. The Rethuglicans want progressives and liberals to just "give up" on Democracy and voting --- that's their final trump card. They have said as much --- "We can only win by supressing the vote." Ms. Busby's actions did nothing to fight that inclination at a time when small, simple actions (and words) could have done so much.

Charlie L
Portland, OR
CLL2001@gmail.com

Charlie L: You mentioned one month, I came into the picture closer to two months after the election(end of July).

Regarding Busby, I was on the Peter B Collins show with her a few days back. I've also talked to her in person when we both spoke at the same event. I've been around politicians, she's the most real one I've ever met, and she listened. There's the past, and today things are what they are, improved. We need to encourage what we like and criticize what we don't like, but the timing should be like that of a coach of an athlete, who may criticize, perhaps condemn or cajole for bad performance, but when the performance finally improves I think only praise is in order, otherwise the wrong signals are given. It can even be devastating to an "underperformer" who is nevertheless trying to come back with an improved but mid-range performance and still be criticized....

If you like what a person or candidate is doing, support it near the time it occurs. Think of Pavlov's dog if you want, reinforce the behavior. I'm personally feeling much more optimistic brighteyed and bushy tailed now that Steve's made or making another contribution! Thanks Steve!

As a lawyer you can't cold-call the entire country for business. So, I couldn't get involved down here until I got called. I'm not saying anybody thinks I should have, but if someone were to start ragging on me on this board because IN THE PAST I didn't answer the call, when I'm busting one now, that would be an interesting way to teach me never to get involved with election activists again.

Despite regret and disappointment sometimes, eventually everyone pretty much is going to join us at this democracy ball we're trying to throw here. It's a matter of time, and we need/want it to happen much faster. If they get greeted at the door with a negative "reward" for their absence (even if it is AWOL) we're going to lose a bunch of people from the party.

Instead, I say we time our criticism and praise to be close to the events they cover, and the door is always open to the democracy ball for anyone who believes in democracy, all are welcome to come back and discover what it's all about.

I might add, and probably will post at Rawstory, that one of the comments I may or may not have said but it doesn't come off as "me" and that was to the effect that there is "nothing anyone can do." If I said that it was some kind of slipup, clearly this lawsuit and other things are things we can do. Talking up democracy and Zogby 92% so people know there's a lot of support for this is another thing to do.

Yesterday morning on cspan (Wash. Journ.) they were asking what people wanted congress to do. I called in and expressed my concern with the electronic voting machines, and the fact that congress was using the premature swearing in of bilbray to change the jurisdiction of our election here in San Diego. Everyone else needs to be calling in programs like this, and writing to newspapers, as well as representatives. Let's make sure they *can't* ignore us.

What I said:
Host: "San Diego, independent, Good Morning"
Me: "Hi, uh, San Diego, yes..."
Host: "Go ahead..."
Me: "I'm a member of the 50th congressional district in San Diego. We recently had the Bilbray/Busby race and many people have been concerned about the electronic voting machines used in it and it seems they have been pulling every stunt possible to keep the ballots from being counted properly; or at all by hand, even. And, uhm, they rushed to swear in Bilbray before it was certified and now they are trying to use that as a reason to change the jurisdiction from the San Diego court system, to actually be under the jurisdiction of congress itself. And that kind of upsets me because our elections and how they are done should be under our jurisdiction, not under congresses, and they kind of cheated by swearing him in early."
Host: "So you think there was fraud in the election?"
Me: "Well, I think that these machines are really, we really need to be concerned about them. We had paper ballots mostly in the last election that we can actually count now. They were scanned with optical scan machines that can be hacked like all the other ones. But, uh, next time in November we're going to have almost all touchscreens, and those can't be audited at all, basically. They're, they're completely insecure, and I'm very concerned. And now to see all these stunts pulled upsets me."

CALLING ALL LURKERS
------------------------------------

Now is the time to do your work before the November election. You may think you can't make a difference, but look at me, I got on CSPAN!! We need to get the word out, and let people know how concerned we are about these things, and how much other people should be, too.
if anyone cares, you can click on this link, click on 9-5-06 Wash. Journ. show, and go to 33:10

-- Chris Hooten

Great work, Chris Hooten!

The election issue is an add-in to almost every other issue. You can post on any political issue and add a comment to election protection, which is usually relevant.

FYI, everyone:

Chris Hooten pretty much rocks all the time, and is a paragon of lexicographical virtue, too.

Thanks 99!

Actually, I've linked before without trouble, doing exactly what you suggested. Unfortunately, this system can also get finicky and reject my links at times. I think the problem here was that it didn't like the fact that I was using a web address as my link text.

{Most welcome, Steve. --99}

Hey, and if the first choice Steve suggests of getting your self on the air doesn't work for you (maybe you're not a talker on the air) you can also alert others to an opportunity, and you can also alert me. That includes but is not limited to even asking shows if they will have me or any other democracy activist on the air. If you're really modest you can frame it as an inquiry into whether or not the folks you've heard about are going to be covered at any time... because you'd like to hear something about it.

Thanks everyone.
Good job, Lehto. Keep it up (havn't heard that before, huh?)

And 99, I am not a producer (of dictionaries,) i.e. lexicography, but merely a semi-literate consumer, i.e. a dictonologist.

OK, that's not really a word. Whats that word for nonsense words? Hmm. On the tip of my tongue...
And can you explain the word "outgribe" for me? And what does that have to do with green pigs? To the open thread.