|
for that reason (that, and his promise to go after the war profiteering corporate news monopolies), more than likely with the collusion of Traitor Democrats like Terry McAuliffe and Christopher Dodd (who, more than anyone, was responsible for destroying the transparency of U.S. vote counting--a chief architect of the "Help America Vote For Bush Act," Oct. 02, simultaneous with the IWR and closely related).
So the good Doctor turned his hand and mind to strengthening the power of the party grass roots--and the majority of Americans*--who shared his view of the Iraq War. A wise and astute thing to do. If our democracy is going to be saved by anyone, it is going to be--and really must be--by US, the people. The McAuliffes of the world are never going to do it.
Which brings me to my next point: Who can we trust?
If you look at the U.S. "military-industrial complex" and the historical continuum of unnecessary, unjust illegal wars that it has created since the conclusion of WW II (or maybe since Korea, an arguable case--possibly a true UN peacekeeping mission), there is simply no difference--NONE!--between our two political parties. In fact, the term "the War Party"--which is comprised of virtually all of the top Democrats and Republicans--is pretty accurate, on war issues. It is no different today, except that--given that the Vietnam War is still in living memory, and thus the people of this country, burnt once--seeringly--would not likely want to be burned again*--the Democrats had to be a little more circumspect in their support. In a despicably cowardly act, many top Democrats voted for giving GEORGE BUSH the power to start the Iraq War, so they could later give themselves deniability. (The charge of "flip-flopper" against Kerry was hauntingly true--although it flew like an ugly ghoulish bat out of Karl Rove's mouth.) They could have stopped the war by one simple means: delaying giving Bush that power a couple of months, and requiring him to return to Congress AFTER the UN weapons inspectors had completed their work. But they didn't.
Remarkably, though, 156 Congress members and Senators voted AGAINST it--as compared to ONLY TWO in Congress who voted against the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in 1964.
This latter stat--the GROWTH of the anti-unjust war movement among Democratic office holders, over thirty years time--and its reflection of the sentiments of the great majority of Americans* (not adequate representation, but better than 1964)--explains what happened next: the passage of the "Help America Vote For Bush's War Act" of 2002, which fast-tracked highly expensive, highly insecure, and extremely insider hackable electronic voting machines, run on "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations, all over the country--and the mind-boggling silence of the Democratic Party about this outrage, to this day.
Howard Dean has said a few extremely quiet, barely audible things about the SECRET programming in these nefarious election theft machines. I gather that SOMEBODY has the entire upper echelon of the Democratic Party by the balls (or tits, as the case may be), and has dug their talons deep into their flesh. I do sympathize with people in that tortured condition. It can't be easy--and could well be lethal--trying to buck a fascist coup consisting of the most ruthless killers, thieves and liars who have ever gained power here. But still, what are they doing about these election theft machines NOW?
The litmus test for me, as to how to judge these leaders, who may be under great stress, is: Given the gift of a majority in Congress--from the grass roots and Howard Dean--how quickly would they restore transparent vote counting?
And the answer is: Not quickly. And--amazingly--not at all.
The main Democratic Congressional proposal about rightwing Bushite SECRET corporate vote counting is to KEEP IT SECRET--to retain the "TRADE SECRET" code in all voting machines and central tabulators, and tack on a "paper trail" and a measly stinking 2% audit, with billions more taxpayer dollars stuffed into Diebold/ES&S pockets for this purpose. (In Venezuela, they not only have an OPEN SOURCE code system--anyone may review the code by which votes are counted-- they ALSO audit these machines with a 55% (!) ballot recount.) 2% is ridiculous, given the widespread suspicions about these machines, and the overwhelming evidence of their unreliability, let alone their complete mon-transparency.
Further, they are in no hurry to enact even these bandaid measures, so that we have at least the most minimal of accountability in the 2008 primaries and general election.
Yeah, maybe they have to "support our troops," some of them. Maybe their money sources would dry up if they didn't lard the war profiteers with billions and billions of additional "emergency" funding, or maybe the war profiteering corporate news monopolies would blackball them, or "swiftboat" them. I can sort of understand getting trapped into war. I cannot understand getting trapped into "TRADE SECRET" vote counting by rightwing Bushite corporations, once you have the power to undo it.
Unless you are in on it.
As we know now, we are dealing with more than two stolen elections--2000 and 2004. We are dealing with the awful consequence of "TRADE SECRET" vote counting--that ALL our elections are suspect, even when Democrats win. We now have a situation with over 70% of the American people opposed to this war and wanting it ended, yet the Congress they elected** (or thought they elected) to end the war just ESCALATED the war!
Something's wrong with this picture. And it's not just the War Party syndrome. It's the WAY that the War Party is THWARTING the will of the American people THIS TIME--with NON-TRANSPARENT vote counting, in almost every state, SECRETLY CODED by rightwing Bushite corporations, with not a peep of objection from the Democratic Party. Well, a few peeps from Dean. That's it.
This is such a fundamental assault on our democracy, that it brings the basic loyalty of every office holder TO our democracy into grave question. We basically now have a Stalinist voting system. And when you ADD all the corruption and all the Rove "caging lists" and so on, we have a fascist state, in which democracy CANNOT work. The people, when riled up, can occasionally outvote the machines, but we cannot achieve peace, or any serious reform, even with a 70% majority in the country!
Who can we trust? NOBODY who isn't screaming and yelling, and chaining themselves to their desks, and floating daily banners above the Capitol dome, about "TRADE SECRET" vote counting!
I can't tell you how appalling it is to realize what is really going on. It sickens me. But truth and reality also have a way of cleansing the system, clearing the mind and focusing the energies on essentials.
Transparent vote counting. The basis of all democracy.
Dr. Dean says that a Democratic president will end the war. History, recent and past, does not support that assertion. And it seems very unlikely to me that "the War Party" will ever give up their new foothold in the Middle East. But most of all, this assertion doesn't pass the litmus test. How are we to elect anybody who would truly end the war, and institute other much needed serious reforms, when we no longer have public control of how our votes are counted?
Grass roots activists can only win so many elections, just to see them stolen away by corporatists and warmongers, before that great democratic force--the grass roots--becomes utterly demoralized. Outvoting the machines--and all the money and corruption--can only get us so far. It clearly could not get us a Congress to end the war**. How can we do that bigger thing--elect a President who will bring peace and reform?
-------------------------------
*56% of the American people opposed the Iraq War from the beginning, Feb. '03 (NYT and all other polls), even before all of Colin Powell's pack of lies to the UN were exposed. 56%! That would be a landslide in a presidential election. (And, believe me, it was.) Now it's over 70%. This war was/is so unjust, so illegal, and so heinous, that the war profiteers and THEIR Anthrax Congress KNEW, back in Oct. '02, that they could not permit an honest vote on it, in 2004. They knew that that 56% would only get grow bigger. They knew that their 24/7 war propaganda wasn't working, and could not work, on this "Vietnam in living memory" population. That is WHY they fast-tracked the hackable electronic voting systems all over the country--to defeat that antiwar majority. Although Kerry was wish-washy on the war, many people were voting more to oust Bush than to elect Kerry. And Kerry is at least an intelligent guy, with a good political history, and would not likely have instigated the war himself. He was an okay alternative--and might have made a great president. The tragic thing is that it appears that the Democratic Party leadership threw that election. They never wanted to win. Their support of non-transparent electronic voting, fast-tracked under the radar of the American people, tells us that. Why didn't they want the votes to be counted in the open?
**In '06, all of the House was up for reelection, but only 1/3 of the Senate. This is part of why the war has not been stopped--the Senate is still full of dinosaurs and Bush "pod people." But the House Democratic victory is saddled with 40 or so "Blue Dog" Democrats (Traitor Democrats) who want to cut everything in the budget except war spending. And that is where I would suspect Diebold/ES&S chicanery--the stealth warmongers who have a "D" after their names. TIA (at TIA.net) estimates that we should have won 50 seats, not 30, and many more antiwar seats. Rahm Emmanuel had something to do with this, but, with 70+% of Americans opposing the war, he had an uphill battle to keep antiwar candidates and real reformers off the ballot. More than likely, he had assistance from the wingers at Diebold/ES&S.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
