Several notable items concerning the theoretically upcoming full recount in Ohio:

WELCOME BACK TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY!...You've been missed. Sort of. The Ohio Democratic party (if not the actual Democratic National Party) has joined the recount effort of the Greens and Libertarians in as much as they will be calling for volunteers, witnesses, funding etc. The extent to which they will actually be involved should become clearer as we get closer to the count. See their pathetically tepid or brilliantly under-the-radar Press Release today for more details of their return from the dead.

THE RECOUNT BEGINS...UM...SOON!... The heroes of the hour, the Green and Libertarian parties who asked for the recount in the first place, are now urging Ohio's much-beloved (insert irony here) Sec. of State J. Kenneth Blackwell to begin the recount sooner than the currently scheduled date of "after Dec. 3" or "after Dec. 7" depending on where you get your info. As discussed on these pages previously, the time currently allotted for a full hand recount of the 5.5 million ballots in Ohio (70% of them paper punch-card "dangling chad" type ballots) would not be enough to comfortably finish a recount fully and accurately, the Greens/Libs charge, before the final certified numbers must be sent to the Electoral College in D.C. on Dec. 13th.

In this previous piece, I reported on the latest New York Times article which essentially dismisses the very real concerns that millions of Americans have about our electoral system in the light of the 2004 Election results debacle. I suggested that readers managing-editor@nytimes.com; executive-editor@nytimes.com; national@nytimes.com; editorial@nytimes.com; oped@nytimes.com; public@nytimes.com; letters@nytimes.com; magazine@nytimes.com; QandA@nytimes.com; washington@nytimes.com; TheBradBlog@cville.com?Subject=Investigate and Report On Voter Irregularity, Mistabulation and Fraud NOW!">send email to The New York Times and let them know how you feel about their disgraceful performance in this regard. Keep those emails going!

It occurred to me that since The New York Times can't seem to find anything worth investigating and reporting on for the American people in regards to the way their votes were counted --- or not --- in the 2004 election, that perhaps I'd help them out with a cheat sheet to help them get started. Here's just a few of the many questions concerning this year's election (none of them "conspiracy theories", all of them confirmed by actual election officials and/or reported on by local news outlets --- not just "crazy leftist bloggers" --- in the affected areas) that the "newspaper of record" may wish to consider assigning reporters to investigate and report upon. NOW!:

I could go on, but that should be enough questions for the NY Times to continue to ignore for quite a while.

Please continue to managing-editor@nytimes.com; executive-editor@nytimes.com; national@nytimes.com; editorial@nytimes.com; oped@nytimes.com; public@nytimes.com; letters@nytimes.com; magazine@nytimes.com; QandA@nytimes.com; washington@nytimes.com; TheBradBlog@cville.com?Subject=Investigate and Report On Voter Irregularity, Mistabulation and Fraud NOW!">let them know how you feel about their reporting or lack thereof!

And send the link to this article to anybody and everybody you can!

As if to say "Fuck off, Americans! We're busy with more important things!", The New York Times is running a smarmy little piece in tomorrow's Week in Review under the headline: "Still Unhappy About the Election? Here's a Place You Can Vent."

It's a piece about some of the email that's been sent to the "National Association of State Election Directors" --- whoever the hell they are --- complaining about the way the election was run and the way votes were counted, mistabulated, or whatever.

The New York Times has been bravely leading the way in ignoring the story of America's failure to hold an honest, clean and transparent election. Even though they've had time to dismiss the whole affair as "the conspiracy theories of leftwing bloggers."

Their criticism and sniffing dismissal of those of us who give a damn about getting this story right and told to the American people accurately is ironic coming from the "newspaper of record" which spent a year helping us get into a war by becoming the unquestioning lapdog of the Bush Adminstration's rhetoric and inaccurate propaganda. They had to issue an apology for their crappy reporting. And they've got the gall to criticize "bloggers" for covering this story?!

Still Unhappy About the NYTimes Disgraceful Coverage of This Story? Here's a Place You Can Vent!

UPDATE: I've decided to help The NY Times do their job. Please see these 15 Unanswered Questions about the Election Results that they may wish to investigate. Apparently they need a cheat sheet to get started!

I came across this story a few days ago but failed to blog it in the crush of...something or another. Glad I was reminded of it again today.

The Columbus Free Press, (which, by the way, should be lauded for the superb job they have been doing covering the post-Election outrages in Ohio, unlike so many of their media brethren) documents the latest scandal to surface from Ohio's Election Night, this time in Columbus:

The formula used to determine where and how many machines will be placed is based on a maximum usage of 100 votes per machine so that the length of voting lines won't become a burden to voters.

If you're not outraged about that, whether on the Right or Left, then I hope you'll not do me the insult of calling yourself an American.

The system is broken. Period.

From today's Cleveland Plain Dealer:

SIDENOTE: Notice LoParo's statement that it was "Internet blogs" and "alternative press" that have brought "glitches" to light. While the word "glitches" may or may not be accurate, it's certainly notable that even the Republican Ohio Sec. of State's office is admitting that the blogs and alt. press have noticed, caught and reported errors while the Mainstream Media continues to nap.

Whether one believe these are "glitches" and/or whether there is enough of them found to change the national election seems to me to be beside the point. Such "glitches" have already reversed the results of several local races and initiatives across the country as is. And since they are all about counting our votes correctly in the world's most important democracy, one would think that these issues would be a top priority for the MSM.

In other words, we (bloggers, etc.) have been right and the MSM has been wrong in not reporting and investigating these stories. Even the Republican Secretary of State's office in Ohio has now officially admitted as much!

WAKE UP, CNN!!!

Love this story. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-"PA") as hypocritical as you likely already know him to be. But this time, it's only the U.S. Constitution that he seems to be violating, as opposed, for a change, to just common-decency and human-kind.

Or as John Aravosis of AMERICAblog (from whom I caught the link) put it --- "couldn't have happened to a nicer asshole".

This brouhaha should be of no major concern to Mr. Santorum, however. Since Republican legislators are now more than free to avoid violations of their once sacred "Rule of Law" by simply changing the rules of the law as any potentially-scandalous situation-of-the-moment may require.

Better dead than red.

It was the clever graphic at left that first caught my eye. But the article which accompanied it by Jason Bradfield, a once-conservative activist who came to his senses and is now working towards progressive pragmatism in D.C., explains what might have been going through a Bush voters head in 2004 --- from the perspective of someone who had voted for Bush in 2000.

He analyzes the way which progressives may be able to speak to the "hyper-individualistic 'me-first' worldview" of so many of those voters in the future.

It's a fairly heady but extremely articulate analysis as is Bradfield's own blog "Random Thoughts of an Ex-Conservative". Both are well worth the read.

I wish I could resize this one to fit here. But I can't. So please click here to check it out (one panel of which is at right, another down left, but there is more...)

And by the way, if you're of the mind that this should be a "time of healing" and "coming together", you are reading the wrong blog and/or listening to someone other than George W. Bush.

The fact that the divisiveness in this country is now on schedule to grow only fiercer and more counter-productive to the general welfare of our nation and our world is perhaps the only thing that the faux "President-Elect" and I would seem to agree on. The difference being that while he apparently takes pride and pleasure in that fact, it breaks my ever-lovin' heart.

But I just live in this country, so I play with the cards I am dealt.

The money quote from Mark Crispin Miller's piece from Tuesday...longer quote than usual...because it's well-deserved:

(Thanks tipster DuffyB for the link!)

Our friend Pam, at her simmering "House Blend" asks an astute question --- though one for which the answer is likely self-obvious to any Reality-Based Americans.

She wonders why it is that a Saudi Prince is protecting News Corp from a possible hostile take-over bid as reported in Wednesday's Financial Times:

Follow the money. Ignore the sloganeering. Fox News and News Corp "support America" in the same way that George W. Bush "supports the troops".

...But if you count on The News to get your news, you probably hadn't realized that 1,216 US troops have now died in Iraq. For some reason or another.

The rate in the 19 days so far this month of 5.21 U.S. servicemen and women killed each day is the highest since the first 12 days of the initial invasion when 7.67 were killed each day.

Have a nice evening --- especially you folks in the "Red States".

...Comes DUBYA: The Movie!

(via Krup's Just Sayin')

Speaking of Russ Baker (see the previous item), he's got an interesting story today in The Nation about Ralph Nader's recount in New Hampshire. Which began today, by the way.

Baker's piece explains the optical-scan concerns which drew Nader's attention and lead to the recount demand after they were noticed by citizen Ida Briggs, a software designer and statistical analyst in Michigan who --- unlike those covering Scott Peterson in the MSM --- decided to investigate the numbers in New Hampshire:

American citizen does it again. I look forward to what the hand recount may or may not show in the coming days. Though Baker also sagely notes:

(Gracias to amigo Fin for the link!)