Mark Crispin Miller talks about our theocracy

[dragonlady]

Last night we went to hear Mark Crispin Miller speak about his new book, Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them). Although he covered the election fraud that we're all familiar with here (touch screen machines, long lines, etc.), the main thrust of his message as far as I'm concerned was something else.

He spoke about the mentality behind this "crusade" that was unprecedented in scale and technical sophistication. This was driven by the right wing's "fierce theocratic hatred of American democracy" by a group that is opposed to the Enlightenment and a fact-based society. They see the Democrats as evil and demonic, and consider it a religious necessity to defeat us. The opinion of the voters is irrelevant. That explains the second part of the book's subtitle.

He also said he is having trouble getting his book publicized in the major media (can't get reviewed by the New York Times, can't get on the Daily Show) and has gotten trashed by Salon and Mother Jones. Nobody, including most Democrats (Al Franken, Michael Moore, Kos) wants to believe that elections can be stolen. They are in denial--it is just too disorienting to accept that our democracy can be subverted in this way.

The media should operate as a check on this abuse by reporting the facts, but they are a monopoly and will not. Someone asked how to ensure that the 2006 and 2008 elections will not be stolen. He said, read the book! And get involved.

[bloom]

Democracy Now covered it. Yea for them!

I don't know what's up with all of the other so-called liberal leaning media outlets.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. Thanks for the recommendation. I'll register for it at the library!

[The Doctor.]

2. He can't even get on The Daily Show?

This is outrageous.

Americans just want to be in their comfy little fantasy world and are willing to ignore anything that might jeopardize that.

This country is in for a very rude awakening.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. That is scary if TDS turned him down. :^(

[The Doctor.]

13. Hmm... perhaps we should have a little letter-writing campaign?

Seriously, having MCM on as a guest is not the same as running an election fraud story.
I'd probably make a jab like, "Gee, you guys used to present real news under the guise of comedy." -or something.

[GreenPartyVoter]

18. Honestly, if they can let O'Really on there....

[occuserpens]

3. Miller does not get it

rigged elections != stolen elections

If the owner agrees with the "transfer" of the property, one can talk about "machinations", but not about "theft".

[Snotcicles]

4. Only if the owner agrees in advance. n/t Edit

I think not all parties agreed.

[acmejack]

6. Care to expand?

I admit I am not too smart, but I'm a bit confused by your post.

[occuserpens]

12. Suppose somebody drives away your car at night.

In the morning you are perplexed that you can't find it. But when cops come, you say that everything is fine.

Why should cops care?

Same with Kerry. He says he has no problems with elections-2004. So, all we can say is that they were rigged. But not stolen!

[Mist]

16. It seems to me it's not just what Kerry thinks or "accepts"

Anyone whose vote was switched had their vote stolen. Anyone who couldn't vote after standing in line for hours had their opportunity to vote stolen.

[occuserpens]

17. This is vote-rigging

[nashville_brook]

20. is there an *experiential* diff btwn a rigged election and a stolen one?

or is there an epistemological diff?

hmmm...

i don't know, but my gut feeling after all the kerry-miller-dlc thing went down is that kerry must have benefitted from some rigging/stealing/etc during the primaries. they act as if there's refuge in denying election fraud. there was a big "shhh" after the election that even Edwards was surprised by. they just act as if there's "something that shouldn't be talked about with election fraud" like how families don't talk about alcoholism (which i'm writing an article about). it's top of mind and looking at it thru the lens of Strategic Myth -- you have to wonder what the bigdogdems have to lose in fighting for our votes not being stolen.

when i go into the voting booth i must know that there is someone there to count it. it's a basic schoolyard emotion. please let this be a clean game. at the point of casting a vote you are completely at the mercy of "good will" at every fucking turn. jesus christ -- most of my neighborhood votes in the sCARY baptist church (the people who bugged us every nite when we moved in, until i had to tell them we were jewish and we'd never attend church with them...that they were fine people, don't mind to chat, but gotta a religion, thanks.) -- i vote in the methodist church which makes me feel better for some stupid reason. maybe because it's on the top of the hill. why the FUCK do i have to vote in a church? why are THEY trusted and not teachers, or librarians? or even people at the YMCA. i'd rather vote at the freaking Y than a church. and who are all the old people with the books. and the grim-faced watchers. and there's always a big black box with a lock on it, looking like a set piece from Sweeney Todd and you go into the machine with the brown curtains that have never been washed, and you what? press a button so a light lites up. wheee. then what? is that what the black box is for? why can't i just put my vote in the box my own damn self. who moves the votes? when you think about it, voting is way messed up. buying a lottery ticket seems more secure.

but i digress :)

[occuserpens]

24. rigged vs stolen

<is there an *experiential* diff btwn a rigged election and a stolen one? or is there an epistemological diff?>

IMO, the difference is huge: the stolen car makes a criminal case. The rigged car is just an odd story and a matter of general concern.

(That's ontology rather than epistemoliogy ;- )

[nashville_brook]

33. but to the people who's vote was "rigged" -- it was stolen -- ie, they

didn't get to have it. stolen. stolen vote made possible by a rigged machine.

not a crime there?

[nashville_brook]

34. and so my response is that it is epistemological -- not ontological. it's

in how you have constructed you reality. not the way it really is (outside of the cave or whatever).

epistemic.

[nashville_brook]

35. self-delete

dang cranky browser...

[occuserpens]

40. let us make it formal

It is reasonable to define both rigged2004(X) and stolen2004(X) for X - results of 2004 elections in the whole. This makes everything clear :-)

[OldLeftieLawyer]

36. That is some amazing silliness

I hope you're kidding.

[tblue37]

43. American democracy does not belong to John Kerry--

It belongs to US. The election was OUR election for OUR president. He just happened to be the current Democratic candidate for the job. And as one of the joint owners of the American democracy, I am royally pissed that my property has be stolen.

[Snotcicles]

8. I Guess you have something, the election was not stolen,

but it's integrity seems to have been.

[Land Shark]

27. the winner of the election is a matter of OPINION, even if you don't agree

it was stolen or that the evidence *proves* the same.

But the fact that people can disagree about the outcome of the election PROVES that OUR DEMOCRACY

****HAS*****

*****BEEN******

******STOLEN*******

Real democracy means all power comes from the people who are the ones ultimately in charge. If they are not seeking to have transparent elections that prove their own results, but rather are keeping the data and the trade secret methods of counting ballots SECRET from the public generally, that very fact means that they do not recognize the people as "the boss" so to speak, and also by not disclosing the data and methods of analysis (counting) it renders the conclusions of that data and analysis (election results) completely meaningless. Nonreproducible and nonverifiable results are scientifically invalid.

The election results are taken completely on faith by those who believe in them (i.e. the media), and those who don't believe in them have substantial indirect evidence through statistics and so forth that may or may not rise to the level of scientific proof, but in any case THOSE SEEKING TO ACTUALLY PROVE THINGS THROUGH FACT RATHER THAN MERE BELIEF ARE DERIDED, ESSENTIALLY FOR THEIR LACK OF FAITH, but this is called being an election "conspiracy theorist" or some other term to dismiss rather than consider.

The secret vote counting process in electronic voting as well as the above dynamic (in CAPS) are why there's more than one reason to call our elections FAITH-BASED ELECTIONS.

Note however that simply pointing to the unknowable nature of the election results does not require conspiracy of any kind, it's a pure and incontrovertible fact that the trade secret vote counting is not released or allowed to be examined.

[Land Shark]

23. These are OUR ELECTIONS, not the private property of ANYONE

Boy oh boy, you are off basethe very definition of a democracy is that ultimate political power and all legitimate power rests in the people and is transferred via elections. It is not Kerry's to do with as he see fits. I'm stunned you would characterize an election contest as private property.

[Emit]

7. I read this review of his book at Salon

(They mention DU in the review, btw.) It's, needless to say, an unfavorable review and brings up that issue that was discussed a couple of weeks ago about his conversation with Kerry about the stolen election.

I will be reading his new book to get my own perspective and form my own opinion. Having followed the election fraud issues since before the 2004 election, I suspect I will find what Miller has to say not so surprising or unbelievable. Also, one of the major reasons I got involved with researching Bush & Co., the neoncons, and current politics is because of the rise of the religious right. Knowing what I know now about how they believe that all 'liberals' are evil secularists who have to be gotten rid of (based on my own personal conversation with fanatical fundamentalists that I know), and having done my research finding that this movement has been in the making for over a decade, I am interested in what Miller has to say.

Here's an excerpt of Salon's review of his book:

In an ideal world, one wouldn't feel compelled to review -- nor to say much of anything about -- a book like "Fooled Again." In an ideal world, books like these -- vacuous, tendentious collections of pseudo-journalism that promise 10 times as much in their titles as they deliver between the covers -- would die quietly off in the media distance, ignored by everyone, inciting nobody, collecting dust and a heap of embarrassment for their overheated authors.

But if I sound somewhat exercised about "Fooled Again" it's because I know we don't live in that world in which bad books are guaranteed to fall from our collective radar -- god knows that's not how things work around here. Instead, in this world, the world of Free Republic and Democratic Underground, half-truths and partisan theories rattle about endlessly over e-mail and blogs until they achieve a sheen of truth, however insubstantial they may be. Miller's book is already getting much play: Aside from a national book tour, he's making the rounds on shows like "Democracy Now!" (which, to its credit, also invited a skeptic of Miller's theories), and in August, Harper's magazine published a lengthy excerpt from "Fooled Again" (and, depressingly and unsurprisingly, did not question Miller's assertions).

http://www.salon.com/books/review/2005/11/14/miller/index_np.html

[glitch]

9. Yikes! Now that's a snooty review. It does not do Salon credit.

Too bad for Salon. I'll take Harper's any day.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

37. Salon

I'm letting my subscription expire. That thing has gotten tiresome and not worth reading.

[bloom]

15. pseudo-journalism

like what the New York Times printed by Judith Miller or like what was detailed in the Rolling Stone mag. - on the Rendon group (perception manipulation)?

sheesh.

[Stephanie]

21. Mark has a rebuttal to that review

I don't know if Salon is going to publish it.

[Land Shark]

22. There's also quite a bit of rebuttal here on DU in Election reform

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x401618>

[Stephanie]

25. thanks - I just sent that to him

Here is his response to Salon:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5432845

[Land Shark]

26. Detailed responses to this review are contained in DU at this link

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x401618> and also in letters to the editor at salon, but the editors essentially chose as "editor's picks" letters favoring Manjoo 4-1 while (allowing for a few neutrals) the overall total of all letters was 2 or 3 to 1 in favor of Mark Crispin Miller.

[HamdenRice]

10. That's why we need to fight to keep MORNING SEDITION ...

on AAR. They are one of the shows that takes the allegations of vote fraud seriously, and have given Mark Crispin Miller exposure along with Rhandi Rhodes.

[marions ghost]

11. I have ordered this book...

Having followed the bizarre aftermath of election 2004, I have been waiting for this to come out. It's no big surprise that Miller is having trouble getting publicity. There is a pervasive cult of denial surrounding the election issues. Even the 'progressive' media, such as it is, has an aversion to acknowledging that our elections can easily be stolen. Many people do not even want to look at the numerous arguments. I guess things are so bad in general that belief in the possibility of the government NOT being replaced by the electoral process may be the fear that is driving this. There is also a lot of ignorance about the true nature of the election system and how it works. Local state elections boards have been sold inauditable, overpriced, flawed and insecure electronic voting systems (paid for by HAVA funds) and this will indeed further undermine our already troubled voting process. But most voters hardly even know about this, thanks to the media.

I urge everyone to ignore reviews and READ THE BOOK!

[Angry Girl]

28. I think Americans still believe deep down in Mom, apple pie, and justice

A stolen election would crush that belief structure....

[Land Shark]

14. He was great in his seattle appearances - 3 of 'em! n/t

his schedule is at www.markcrispinmiller.com

[nashville_brook]

19. how about a Mark Crispen Miller Christmas -- books make great gifts

we've bought many of his Patriot Act dvd's -- they get eaten up. it's a good intro to the Theocracy Movement for the uninitiated.

and lets all write jon stewart. send them goofy pictures illustrating why they should have mark crispin miller on.

or top ten reasons....

these will be fun projects as ya'll get the old holiday slide at the office. the big dogs have aleady sneaked out -- time to guerilla market!

[IndyOp]

29. I am not sure what Mark Crispin Miller was referring to but

if you want to know about the connection between the right-wing theocrats and the criminal voting-machine companies do a Google search for "Howard Ahmandson" -- he is a Christian Dominionist who provided the start-up funds for a voting machine company run by the brothers who are now CEO's at Diebold and ES&S.

Seriously. Obvious connection.

[Shallah Kali]

31. article | Diebold, Electronic Voting and the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy

There is alot of info in this article so please click though and read the entire article:

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

Ahmanson is also a chief contributor to the Chalcedon Institute that supports the Christian reconstruction movement. The movement’s philosophy advocates, among other things, “mandating the death penalty for homosexuals and drunkards.”

The Ahmanson family sold their shares in American Information Systems to the McCarthy Group and the World Herald Company, Inc. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel disclosed in public documents that he was the Chairman of American Information Systems and claimed between a $1 to 5 million investment in the McCarthy Group. In 1997, American Information Systems purchased Business Records Corp. (BRC), formerly Texas-based election company Cronus Industries, to become ES&S. One of the BRC owners was Carolyn Hunt of the right-wing Hunt oil family, which supplied much of the original money for the Council on National Policy.

In 1996, Hagel became the first elected Republican Nebraska senator in 24 years when he did surprisingly well in an election where the votes were verified by the company he served as chairman and maintained a financial investment. In both the 1996 and 2002 elections, Hagel’s ES&S counted an estimated 80% of his winning votes. Due to the contracting out of services, confidentiality agreements between the State of Nebraska and the company kept this matter out of the public eye. Hagel’s first election victory was described as a “stunning upset” by one Nebraska newspaper.

Hagel’s official biography states, “Prior to his election to the U.S. Senate, Hagel worked in the private sector as the President of McCarthy and Company, an investment banking firm based in Omaha, Nebraska and served as Chairman of the Board of American Information Systems.” During the first Bush presidency, Hagel served as Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer of the 1990 Economic Summit of Industrialized Nations (G-7 Summit).

[IndyOp]

38. Thanks Shallah - that was the article I was referring to! (nt)

[Shallah Kali]

44. YW :-) MotherJones also mentions the above in this article

Nation Under God
News: Let others worry about the rapture: For the increasingly powerful Christian Reconstruction movement, the task is to establish the Kingdom of God right now—from the courthouse to the White House.
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/12/a_nation_under_god.html

Reconstructionists aren’t shy about what exactly it is they are pursuing: “The long-term goal of Christians in politics should be to gain exclusive control over the franchise,” Gary North, a top Reconstruction theorist, wrote in his 1989 book, Political Polytheism: The Myth of Pluralism. “Those who refuse to submit publicly…must be denied citizenship.”

SNIP

The Old Testament—with its 600 or so Mosaic laws—is the inflexible guide for the society DeMar and other Reconstructionists envision. Government posts would be reserved for the righteous, as long as they are male. There would be thousands of executions a year, with stoning a preferred method because it would turn the deaths into “community projects,” as movement theologian North has noted. Sinners in line for the death penalty would include women who commit adultery or lie about their virginity, blasphemers, witches, children who strike their parents, and gay men (lesbians, however, would be spared because no specific reference to them can be found in the Books of Moses). DeMar told me that among Reconstructionists he is considered something of a liberal, because he’d execute gays only if they were caught indulging in sodomy. “I’m happy to just drive them back into the closet,” he said.

SNIP

Besides facilitating evangelism, Reconstructionists believe, government should largely be limited to building and maintaining roads, enforcing land-use contracts, and ensuring just weights and measures. Unions would not exist, and neither would unemployment benefits, Social Security, and environmental protection laws. Public schools would disappear; one of the movement’s great successes has been promoting homeschooling programs and publishing texts used by tens of thousands of homeschooling families. And, perhaps most importantly, the state is “God’s minister,” as DeMar puts it in Liberty at Risk, “taking vengeance out on those who do evil.” A major task for the government key Reconstructionists envision is fielding armies for conquest in the name of Jesus.

SNIP

Reconstruction’s alternative was “postmillennialism”: Christ would not return until the church had claimed dominion over government, and most of the world’s population had accepted the Reconstruction brand of Christianity. The postmillennial twist offered hope to the pious that they could change things—as long as they got organized. (Reconstructionists angrily denounce end-times visions like those of Tim LaHaye’s Left Behind series: If these are the Last Days, American Vision’s website points out, “then why bother trying to fix a broken world that is about to be thrown on the ash heap of history? Why concern ourselves with education, healthcare, the economy, or peace in the Mideast? Why polish brass on a sinking ship?”)

[EVDebs]

30. The origins of the Left Behind 'end times' theology is behind this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1877885

Also, look into Chris Hedges Soldiers of Christ II, Feeling the hate in Harpers
www.harpers.org/FeelingTheHate.html

and George Monbiot's
Their beliefs are bonkers, but they are at the heart of power
US Christian fundamentalists are driving Bush's Middle East policy
www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1195568,00.html

Monbiot mistakenly says dispensationalism/'futurism' began in the 1800s, apparently forgetting about the counter-reformation's Francisco Ribera being the originator of this viewpoint.

[occuserpens]

32. great links :-)

Monbiot on links between American and Israeli religious right

Basically, this article confirms that there are close links between American and Israeli religious right. In fact, these links are not limited to TX and all this is well known quite for some time. Thanks anyway, GU.

GU. George Monbiot. Their beliefs are bonkers, but they are at the heart of power

[DemGirl7]

39. I'll be reading the book soon for sure.

I'm getting it for my birthday which is coming up this monday, so I will hear Mark's voice, and I believe him already, like so many different DUers:)

[mzmolly]

41. Wow. Very interesting.

And very frightening. Being I have some of these RW crusaders in my family (IN laws) I don't doubt for a bit that they rationalize election theft, murder or anything else that suits their so called "Godly" agenda.

[Al-CIAda]

42. .