READER COMMENTS ON
"NYT Op/Ed Criticizes Republican Power Grab in Alabama HAVA Dispute"
(17 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 8:52 am PT...
My first reaction, after disgust, was that it's only Alabama, and perhaps it doesn't matter as much as Florida or Ohio on the national scale ... but then I realized that there are still enough contestable Congressional seats in Alabama, Georgia, Texas, etc., to have a big effect on who becomes the majority party in Congress. That's probably the point ... push your advantage where you can and set up strongholds to dominate the rest.
Now I'm feeling sick again.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 8/4/2006 @ 9:33 am PT...
The New York Times is at least consistent in its inconsistency.
They recognize dirty politics, as with the Alabama situation and with Tom DeLay's gerrymandering of Congressional districts in Texas. They editorialized about that at length. But somehow the NYT can't bring itself to connect political dirty tricks with election fraud. They can't fathom that the same people who play dirty political tricks also steal elections.
Actually, they do fathom it...it's just that the New York Times Company's stockholders, and the paper's advertisers, would get very angry if they put it in writing. Editors would get fired. Ads would get pulled. Editorial honesty has its limits, you know.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 9:34 am PT...
Bush Republicans: "We don't need no stinkin' 'Rule of Law'"
Who's gonna stop 'em?
Somebody has to take 'em to court, right?
What if the judge is the one in bed with Dubya?
This is getting very ugly.
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 9:39 am PT...
OK. It's time to say it. This is my message to the Republicans out there (though I doubt there are many here at BradBlog --- the constant stream of impossible-to-refute facts that make them look bad would be hard to take) and I recommend we start giving it out to our Republican "friends" and "family" and others.
There is NOTHING good (or even Republican or conservative) about the Republican Party any more. The Party's actions have shown that they have no respect for the Constitution or the American people.
SO, now is the time for any Republicans who disagree with the behavior of this criminal Republican Administration to LEAVE YOUR PARTY! Resign! Quit taking the name "Republicans." I'm not asking you to join or vote for another party, especially not the Democratic Party --- I know you hate "librals" and "weak democrats" and still believe all those other myths you have been fed by the Republicans and FOX --- just stop agreeing to be a "Republican" as long as they behave like this.
Please, just know, when the revolution comes, if you were still a Republican in 2006, you are "fair game" in my book.
If you're with "them" you are the enemy --- it's that simple. SO, start scraping that "W" or "Bush/Cheney04" sticker off of your SUV and join our Democracy again.
Or, maybe like this Republican Administration and Republican Rubber-Stamp Congress, you care more about your PARTY than you do about your COUNTRY!
That's my message to Republicans.
And my message to Democrats and Progressives and those who want a return to a Democratic Republic is this: stop consorting with the enemy and apologizing for them.
And start getting ready for the battle of your life.
November 2006 is where our future will be decided. November 2008 is just for show. If we lose this year, we have lost forever.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 10:02 am PT...
You are right on man. We have to fight this fight in every county, in every state, in every court and on every street corner. We have to take the message to all groups, to the schools, the universities, and continue hammering the major MSM. We have to change and enforce the laws.
Without every citizen jumping in and refusing to consent to this b.s., November 2006 WILL be the end. I urge every reader of this blog to go to www.electiondefensealliance.org (EDA) and volunteer to do something, ANYTHING, to stop this madness. EDA is working with Brad, BBV and other progressives to bring transparency and legality back to elections in America before it becomes AmeriKA.
EDA can help anyone set up an election monitoring program quickly and easily. If they know we are watching and reporting, just maybe they will back off. If not, we have to drag them into court.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 11:20 am PT...
This is how it feels to be taken over, lock, stock and barrel - and it's nauseating. The world is running out of control, politically and ecologically, and our hands are being tied so we can't change things before total disaster overwhelms us all. God! When do we just refuse to get out of bed in the morning?! Because - make no mistake - that's what the mob running this show is aiming to accomplish: rendering is so paralyzed and despondant that we lose all our power to resist.
Ari's right: this is sickening. And we are in danger of sickening too. We need a banner and a rallying cry. But most of all, we need each other!!!
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 11:26 am PT...
So many typos in the above! I don't have the preview window today...sorry.
"...rendering us so paralyzed and despondent that we lose all our power to resist."
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 11:39 am PT...
That is where the only electronic voting machine certifier in all of the vast United States "works". I wonder if the same judge gave him all that power?
He must be really, really busy these past decades of his legacy ... hundreds of thousands of machines and only one republican operative to approve them (link here)!
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 11:52 am PT...
Do you have a link to the case, a case name, or a location where the lawsuit was handled?
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 12:49 pm PT...
We are intelligent people. We are well read. We are tracking the present and studying the past. We understand group dynamics. We can communicate.
Most of all, we are capable of CRITICAL THINKING, OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS, and willing to QUESTION AUTHORITY.
We do NOT have to lose to these evil and short-sighted bastards who care about nothing more than personal power and wealth.
Suggestion for our motto:
NOT ON OUR WATCH
Germany 1933 /=/ USA 2006
Dissent is Patriotism!
(where "/=/" is actually the "does not equal" sign)
Or, perhaps we should piggyback on an existing (albeit weak) cultural meme and use the "V in circle" symbol from the recent allegorical film: V IS FOR VENDETTA.
Question the lies!
Those who do not study and understand history are going to be bystanders in its repetition.
I believe it's time to call it like we see it --- this is Fascism (corporate control of government) and we MUST stop it. If we do not make a stand against this creeping evil, it will absorb our entire government and possibly destroy the planet in the process.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 1:29 pm PT...
Another message for the judge in the case:
"People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution; they don't put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible"
(Jamin Raskin, professor of constitutional law WAU)
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 1:54 pm PT...
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 3:19 pm PT...
Does anyone have any background on the org linked in #5 by Leftisbest? Went over and checked it out and recognized a couple of names (Palast,Mark C. Miller) however I've gotten very careful about signing on with any group or donating funds just because their website looks good and says what I wnat to here. I know that alot of you guys live in the bay area so could some of you Left Coast locals provide more background. No offense Leftisbest but I've been burned by a couple of "Progressive Democratic" groups before. Hope you understand my caution.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 3:35 pm PT...
I think if you read the new top post on the front page, you will find the Election Defense Alliance inside "The Lame Apologist Returns". That should help.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 6:06 pm PT...
Agent 99...........Thanks. Glad you directed me back to the lead story. I planned to read it later but WP's slapdown on the fauxjournalist who goes by "the behind name" of Bookman warmed my heart. Back to this thread, I've been harping on people since Reagan's Adm. that the court system was being stacked with Goosestepping Bastards. Everyone including my family thought I was growing funny shrooms in the garden. Well on this and other rants, I wish I had been wrong.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 6:38 pm PT...
I'm sorry, I'm too slow to follow that. What are you trying to say about the "Election Defense Alliance"?
I've looked at their site, EDA and I am quite disturbed by how they just seem to be posting a list of stories, that are taken from other places. There's doesn't seem to be any "there" there. Like, you can't comment on anything--though, why would you, when your comments really belong with the original articles.
I don't think this is the real deal. It just feels wrong to me. You'd think that there would be one lead person that could be identified with this place, right? wHo would that be?
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2006 @ 7:22 pm PT...
I just pointed MEP there because they are mentioned in the piece as having voted no confidence in the CA-50 race, along with other, more recognizable organizations. I think that web pages have many different characters. If there is no "about us" section, no way to check their credentials, you have no reason to trust them. If you can look up what they have done, who they stand with, what kind of articles they post, get some feedback somehow, then you can make up your own mind. I do not know about the organization either. I know that they made a public showing against the travesty in San Diego. I only knew to point to that post to help people start to know about them.
I know what you mean about this trust in web sites stuff, though. You click on some links, and find that you have no easy way to tell whether you should believe their stuff, or subscribe to their views, or support their work. "Trust, but verify." Sometimes the only verification that will come is just the passage of time. Sometimes you just have to keep looking to know if you can trust them or not.