Kerry revives 2004 election allegations

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON - Sen. John Kerry didn't contest the results at the time, but now that he's considering another run for the White House, he's alleging election improprieties by the Ohio Republican who oversaw the deciding vote in 2004.

An e-mail will be sent to 100,000 Democratic donors Tuesday asking them to support U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland (news, bio, voting record) for governor of Ohio. The bulk of the e-mail criticizes Strickland's opponent, GOP Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, for his dual role in 2004 as President Bush's honorary Ohio campaign co-chairman and the state's top election official.

"He used the power of his state office to try to intimidate Ohioans and suppress the Democratic vote," said Kerry's e-mail.

Kerry, D-Mass., conceded the election when he lost Ohio and its 20 electoral votes. A recount requested by minor-party candidates showed Bush won by about 118,000 votes out of 5.5 million cast. But Kerry's e-mail says Blackwell "used his office to abuse our democracy and threaten basic voting rights."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060828/ap_on_el_ge/ohio_kerry

[Deja Q]

1. Too late, Kerry.

In 2008, when the same thing happens again, will it take you another 18 months before you speak out?

[blm]

7. Let's attack one of the few Dems who even speaks about election fraud.

That's just what we need to do.

Why don't you realize this - Kerry was a prosecutor, one who was always careful about what LEGAL EVIDENCE he had to make his cases.

YOU didn't have any legal evidence to continue in court on Nov. 3, 2004, and the Dem party team of election lawyers who decided there was no way to continue didn't have any, either.

We have very few Dem lawmakers who even believe in election fraud, especially with the machines, and your intention is to discard one of the most prominent?

smart

[Seabiscuit]

171. The problem wasn't lack of existing legal evidence; the problem was

that Kerry collected millions in donations from us for a special fund to pay for a legal team he was assembling to challenge any suspicious results/voting irregularities. He never returned our money to us. Then as soon as the polls closed and projections showed Bush was ahead in Ohio, he conceded and sent all his lawyers in Ohio home, all of whom were royally pissed. Edwards was royall pissed as well, and it showed on TV. Kerry had just trotted Edwards out in front of the cameras the night before to renew their pledge to "fight until every last voted is counted" (their phrase for a legal battle for recounts in contested states like Ohio).

Legal evidence doesn't just appear magically the morning after an election. It is developed over weeks and months through investigation, which was the job his legal team in Ohio was there to do. Had Kerry given them a chance to do their job, they undoubtedly would have handled it competently, and gathered all the evidence necessary to prove the Republicans stole the Ohio election. Kerry would have been our President.

I support the things Kerry has been saying since the election about just about everything he talks about.

The problem is, he's 2 years late and too many millions of our dollars short. He wimped out on so many levels in 2004 I went to the polls feeling sicker to my stomach than I did when I voted for Anderson in 1980 as a protest against the weak Dem party which opposed Reagan.

[Name removed]

188. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MH1]

9. 18 months?

You just haven't been listening. Kerry's spoken out plenty of times before now.

Where's the rest of the Dems?

[elehhhhna]

85. I heard enough when he conceded. Kerry is sooooo 2003.

Forget it John.

[saltpoint]

86. It was widely felt in late fall/early winter of 2003-04 that Kerry could

not win the Democratic nomination.

He did, though.

Since he's still in office now, very ably representing his constituents in blue Massachusetts, and since he continues to garner around 100% from liberal interest groups in his voting record, and since George W. Bush is a flagrant liar and cheat, I think he's very much right now.

He's one of maybe 40 people who by law of averages will be in contention for the U.S. presidency.

A handful are Republicans; a larger handful are Democrats.

John Kerry is one of them.

[elehhhhna]

98. I get you. It's not personal.

But he's as crappy a campaigner as a bag of broken hammers.

In the words of John Edwards, "We CAN do better."

[saltpoint]

102. Edwards was not commenting on his running mate with that quote.

Don't forget, Kerry won the election. Bush-Cheney cheated in Ohio, stealing 20 electoral college votes and with them the national election.

If Kerry-Edwards had run a bad campaign 1) they would not have won as they did and 2) neither would be in serious contention for the nomination in 08. Both are.

[elehhhhna]

114. Not big on irony, huh?

[saltpoint]

115. I'm big on Democrats.

It's an old habit.

[elehhhhna]

123. Look, I only post my thoughts within the family here.

I don'thave to lockstep behind anybody, though. That's for the Republic Party.

P.S. Sit down for this one: I loathe Lieberman. Started when he was a Dem.

It's an old habit.

[saltpoint]

124. You describe your hobby as "smarting off."

I think that's your old habit.

[elehhhhna]

126. Perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with the DU

rules of engagement. We are on very shaky gound here.

Over and out.

[saltpoint]

128. I'm up to date on the rules. You were the one who posted

"smarting off."

It's in your profile.

Thanks.

[MH1]

167. "Within the family"?????

You can't be serious?

This is a PUBLIC message board.

Sheesh.

[blm]

169. You're saying that Bush camopaigned better? Or did the RNC campaign better

than the DNC? Seems to me that the RNC spent four years PREPARING to crush the Dem winner of the election through vote suppression and machine fraud. How did the DNC counter those efforts over that four year period?

It looked to me like Kerry ran his campaign SUPERIOR to Bush crafting better policy positions, submitted better plans, and gave better speeches and rallies, and then won the debates decisively.

How did the DNC do?

How did the left media do?

[nmliberal]

178. And he won, in spite of being 'swift-boated' and

slimed by the chicken-hawks.

Sometimes, I think it is hard on the first 2% (like we at DU) to know the truth, months, years even decades before the rest of the population knows.

I loved Kerry when he spoke for the Detroit Winter Soldiers and I have never stopped.

[MH1]

21. Yep, looks like someone needs to pay attention.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/01/18/kerry_alleges_voters_were_suppressed?mode=PF

Kerry alleges voters were 'suppressed'
Links poll issues to King's struggle

By Scott S. Greenberger, Globe Staff | January 18, 2005

In his first high-profile address since conceding the presidential election, Senator John F. Kerry used Boston's annual Martin Luther King Jr. memorial breakfast yesterday to decry what he called the suppression of thousands of would-be voters last November.

"Thousands of people were suppressed in their efforts to vote. Voting machines were distributed in uneven ways," the former Democratic nominee told an enthusiastic audience of 1,200 at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center in South Boston.

"In Democratic districts, it took people four, five, 11 hours to vote, while Republicans through in 10 minutes. Same voting machines, same process, our America," Kerry said.

In an e-mail message he sent to his supporters on the day before Congress certified the election results earlier this month, Kerry cited "widespread reports of irregularities, questionable practices by some election officials, and instances of lawful voters being denied the right to vote" in the battleground state of Ohio.

But he also said his legal team had found no evidence that would alter the outcome. President Bush defeated Kerry in Ohio by 119,000 votes.

[saltpoint]

It's not too late to campaign for Democrats in Ohio. That's what Kerry

is doing.

It's not too late for any American citizen to object to Democrat Strickland's Republican opponent's complicity in the theft of the 2004 election in Ohio.

If I can say Blackwell is a cheating, lying asshole, so can Kerry. So can RFK, Jr. So can anybody who thinks Blackwell is a deceitful weasel backed by far-right fundie nutcases. Kerry's not only within his rights, his campaigning for Blackwell's opponent is very close to required conduct of party standard-bearers for most of the history of this country.

Kerry's remarks target Republicans in general and Blackwell in particular. That's leadership. Let's dump Blackwell, let's elect Strickland in Ohio, and let's stop slamming Democrats.

[karynnj]

Kerry spoke out many many times in the last 18 months

Here is one of the first - January 18,2005 - when there were NO big Democrats backing him. Clinton was babbling about Kerry not taking his advice and endorsing all the gay bashing amendments - that this might have led to a Bush landslide, as Kerry was among the first to back gay rights on the Senate floor, was lost on him. Many Senate Democrats and the media stabbed him in the back and acted as though it was presumptuous that he should still have a role as a party spokes man - though that is the norm.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/01/18/kerry_alleges_voters_were_suppressed?mode=PF
"In his first high-profile address since conceding the presidential election, Senator John F. Kerry used Boston's annual Martin Luther King Jr. memorial breakfast yesterday to decry what he called the suppression of thousands of would-be voters last November.

"Thousands of people were suppressed in their efforts to vote. Voting machines were distributed in uneven ways," the former Democratic nominee told an enthusiastic audience of 1,200 at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center in South Boston."

"In Democratic districts, it took people four, five, 11 hours to vote, while Republicans through in 10 minutes. Same voting machines, same process, our America," Kerry said.
<snip>
In an e-mail message he sent to his supporters on the day before Congress certified the election results earlier this month, Kerry cited "widespread reports of irregularities, questionable practices by some election officials, and instances of lawful voters being denied the right to vote" in the battleground state of Ohio.


Recently - here are his words from the floor of the Senate:

"Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oregon for his discussion of an important way of having accountability in voting . I must say that I saw how that works out in Oregon. It works well. It works brilliantly, as a matter of fact. People have a lot of time to be able to vote. They don't have to struggle with work issues or being sick or other things. They have plenty of time to be able to have the kind of transparency and accountability that makes the system work. There are other States where you are allowed to start voting early--in New Mexico and elsewhere.
It is amazing that in the United States we have this patchwork of the way our citizens work in Federal elections. It is different almost everywhere. I had the privilege of giving the graduation address this year at Kenyan College in Ohio, and there the kids at Kenyan College wound up being the last people to vote in America in the Presidential race in 2004 in Gambier, at 4:30 in the morning. We had to go to court to get permission for them to keep the polls open so they could vote at 4:30 in the morning.

Why did it take until 4:30 in the morning for people to be able to vote? They didn't have enough voting machines in America. These people were lined up not just there but in all of Ohio and in other parts of the country. An honest appraisal requires one to point out that where there were Republican secretaries of state, the lines were invariably longer in Democratic precincts, sometimes with as many as one machine only in the Democratic precinct and several in the Republican precinct; so it would take 5 or 10 minutes for someone of the other party to be able to vote, and it would take literally hours for the people in the longer lines. If that is not a form of intimidation and suppression, I don't know what is.

So I thank the Senator from Oregon for talking about the larger issue here. He is absolutely correct. The example of his State is one that the rest of the country ought to take serious and think seriously about embracing.
This is part of a larger issue, obviously, Mr. President. All over the world, our country has always stood out as the great exporter of democratic values. In the years that I have been privileged to serve in the Senate, I have had some extraordinary opportunities to see that happen in a firsthand way.

Back in 1986, I was part of a delegation that went to the Philippines. We took part in the peaceful revolution that took place at the ballot box when the dictator, President Marcos, was kicked out and ``Cory'' Aquino became President. I will never forget flying in on a helicopter to the island of Mindanao and landing where some people have literally not seen a helicopter before, and 5,000 people would surround it as you swooped out of the sky, to go to a polling place where the entire community turned out waiting in the hot sun in long lines to have their thumbs stamped in ink and to walk out having exercised their right to vote.

I could not help but think how much more energy and commitment people were showing for the privilege of voting in this far-off place than a lot of Americans show on too many occasions. The fact is that in South Africa we fought for years--we did--through the boycotts and other efforts, in order to break the back of apartheid and empower all citizens to vote. Most recently, obviously, in Afghanistan and Iraq, notwithstanding the disagreement of many of us about the management of the war and the evidence and other issues that we have all debated here. This has never been debated about the desire for democracy and the thrill that everyone in the Senate felt in watching citizens be able to exercise those rights .

In the Ukraine, the world turned to the United States to monitor elections and ensure that the right to vote was protected. All of us have been proud of what President Carter has done in traveling the world to guarantee that fair elections take place. But the truth is, all of our attempts to spread freedom around the world will be hollow and lose impact over the years in the future if we don't deliver at home. The fact is that we are having this debate today in the Senate about the bedrock right to vote, with the understanding that this is not a right that was afforded to everyone in our country automatically or at the very beginning. For a long time, a century or more, women were not allowed to vote in America. We all know the record with respect to African Americans. The fact is that the right to vote in our country was earned in blood in many cases and in civic sweat in a whole bunch of cases. Courageous citizens literally risked their lives. I remember in the course of the campaign 2 years ago, traveling to Alabama--Montgomery--and visiting the Southern Poverty Law Center, the memorial to Martin Luther King, and the fountain. There is a round stone fountain with water spilling out over the sides. From the center of the fountain there is a compass rose coming back and it marks the full circle. At the end of every one of those lines is the name of an American with the description, ``killed trying to register to vote,'' or ``murdered trying to register.'' Time after time, that entire compass rose is filled with people who lost their lives in order to exercise a fundamental right in our country.

None of us will forget the courage of people who marched and faced Bull Connor's police dogs and faced the threat of lynchings, some being dragged out of their homes in the dark of night to be hung. The fact is that we are having this debate today because their work and that effort is not over yet. Too many Americans in too many parts of our country still face serious obstacles when they are trying to vote in our own country.
By reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act, we are taking an important step, but, Mr. President, it is only a step. Nobody should pretend that reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act solves the problems of being able to vote in our own country. It doesn't. In recent elections, we have seen too many times how outcomes change when votes that have been cast are not counted or when voters themselves are prevented from voting or intimidated from even registering or when they register, as we found in a couple of States, their registration forms are put in the wastebasket instead of into the computers.

This has to end. Every eligible voter in the United States ought to be able to cast his or her ballot without fear, without intimidation, and with the knowledge that their voice will be heard. These are the foundations of our democracy, and we have to pay more attention to it.

For a lot of folks in the Congress, this is a very personal fight. Some of our colleagues in the House and Senate were here when this fight first took place or they took part in this fight out in the streets. Without the courage of someone such as Congressman JOHN LEWIS who almost lost his life marching across that bridge in Selma, whose actions are seared in our minds, who remembers what it was like to march to move a nation to a better place, who knows what it meant to put his life on the line for voting rights , this is personal.
For somebody like my colleague, Senator TED KENNEDY, the senior Senator from Massachusetts, who was here in the great fight on this Senate floor in 1965 when they broke the back of resistance, this is personal.
We wouldn't even have this landmark legislation today if it weren't for their efforts to try to make certain that it passed.

But despite the great strides we have taken since this bill was originally enacted, we have a lot of work to do.
Mr. President, I ask for an additional 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, on this particular component of the bill, there is agreement. Republicans and Democrats can agree. I was really pleased that every attempt in the House of Representatives to weaken the Voting Rights Act was rejected.
We need to reauthorize these three critical components especially: The section 5 preclearance provisions that get the Justice Department to oversee an area that has a historical pattern of discrimination that they can't change how people vote without clearance. That seems reasonable.
There are bilingual assistance requirements. Why? Because people need it and it makes sense. They are American citizens, but they still may have difficulties in understanding the ballot, and we ought to provide that assistance so they have a fully informed vote. This is supposed to be an informed democracy, a democracy based on the real consent of the American people.
And finally, authorization for poll watching. Regrettably, we have seen in place after place in America why we need to have poll watching.
A simple question could be asked: Where would the citizens of Georgia be, particularly low-income and minority citizens, if they were required to produce a government-issued identification or pay $20 every 5 years in order to vote? That is what would have happened without section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Georgia would have successfully imposed what the judge in the case called ``a Jim Crow-era like poll tax.'' I don't think anybody here
wants to go back and flirt with the possibility of returning to a time when States charged people money to exercise their right to vote. That is not our America.
This morning, President Bush addressed the 97th Annual Convention of the NAACP after a 5-year absence. I am pleased that the President, as we all are, ended his boycott of the NAACP and announced his intention to sign the Voting Rights Act into law.

But we need to complete the job. There are too many stories all across this country of people who say they registered duly, they reported to vote, and they were made to stand in one line or another line and get an excuse why, when they get to the end of the line, they can't vote. So they take out a provisional ballot, and then there are fights over provisional ballots. There are ways for us to avoid that. Some States allow same-day registration. In some parts of America, you can just walk up the day of an election, register, and vote, as long as you can prove your residence.
We have this incredible patchwork of laws and rules, and in the process, it is even more confusing for Americans. We need to fully fund the Help America Vote Act so that we have the machines in place, so that people are informed, so that there is no one in America who waits an undue amount of time in order to be able to cast a vote.
We have to pass the Count Every Vote Act that Senator Clinton, Senator Boxer, and I have introduced which ensures exactly what the Senator from Oregon was talking about: that every voter in America has a verifiable paper trail for their vote.
How can we have a system where you can touch a screen and even after you touch the name of one candidate on the screen, the other candidate's name comes up, and if you are not attentive to what you have done and you just go in, touch the screen, push ``select,'' you voted for someone else and didn't intend to? How can we have a system like that?
How can we have a system where the voting machines are proprietary to a private business so that the public sector has no way of verifying what the computer code is and whether or not it is accountable and fair? Just accounting for it.

Congress has to ensure that every vote cast in America is counted, that every precinct in America has a fair distribution of voting machines, that voter suppression and intimidation are un-American and must cease.
We had examples in the last election of people who were sent notices--obviously fake, but they were sent them and they confused them enough. They were told that if you have an outstanding parking ticket, you can't vote. They were told: Democrats vote on Wednesday and Republicans vote on Tuesday and various different things.
It is important for us to guarantee that in the United States of America, this right that was fought for so hard through so much of the difficult history of our country, we finally make real the full measure of that right.
I yield the floor. I thank the Chair and I thank my colleague for her forbearance.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.

[saltpoint]

145. No. The song goes, "It's too late, baby" -- by Carole King. For Kerry,

the time's as good now (or better) than it was when he ran in 2004 in those early primaries. The polls had him way down and the political obits were scrawled from Seattle to Macon.

Then he went to work, invested some of his own cash into Iowa, and came from behind to win.

We don't know if he's going to run again or not.

If he does, though, there just might be quiet a few folks out there who still like him.

[karynnj]

146. He also has worked diligently on most of the key issues

expanding on the good ideas he had in 2004. If Terrorism, foreign policy and Iraq are the main issues, most of the named contenders simply can't compare.

Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman may have been surprised that Kerry's sound bite tested the highest in a couple of focus groups, but I'm not. Kerry was compelling and an easy winner in the primaries, but his October rallies, speeches and debates were better. Since the election, he has actually improved. Watch this speech or any other on his web site - if you doubt that.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2006_05_11.html

It may be that in 2004, not enough people believed that there was a saner way to fight terrorism than attacking unrelated (or even related) countries. Kerry was far ahead of others on this - as seen if you read the "New War".

[stepnw1f]

163. It's Never Too Late

He is helping to highlight some of the many irregularities that happened in 2004 to inform the masses of something possible for 2008 and this year.

The more people speak up about this issue, the more informed this country will be before the next election.

[texpatriot2004]

2. Kerry Won! nt

[Atman]

3. A day late, a dollar short, and a several thousand Ohio votes behind.

Sorry, John. You had your fifteen minutes. Shoulda fought it when it was hot.

[blm]

8. FUCK FIFTEEN MINUTES!!!! What the fuck would you know about BushInc over

the last 35 focking years if Kerry was only a 15minute man to be discarded?

You wouldn't know HALF the shit that's out there about the BFEE if he was the person YOU all like to PRETEND he is to make yourselves sound cooler or make a less productive lawmaker sound MORE productive.

Fock That!

Get a REAL history book and subtract evrything Kerry's done over the last 35 years and see what you have left.

[MH1]

16. Well, the poster seems to be confused.

I don't think Kerry is in it for fame or ever was, so the "fifteen minutes" bit is rather irrelevant and silly anyway.

Not to mention Kerry's been kicking ass in the Senate for over 20 years, and if a few folks who post on an internet forum don't pay enough attention to their government to know that, I'm sure Kerry really doesn't give a rat's ass - he'll just keep doing what he thinks needs to be done to serve his constituents and move the country forward, or at least stop the hemorraghing brought on by *Co.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MH1]

38. Wow, good list of republican talking points there.

Lost?

[ProSense]

74. That post is the

reason why some of these flamers in Kerry threads need to be recognized for who they really are, and they have nothing to do with the Democratic Party!

[ProSense]

45. Was a dumb statement! n/t

[OhioBlue]

69. what kind of koolaid have you been drinking?!?

Seriously, you dismiss his progressive credentials because he married a wealthy republican (who by the way is progressive and has denounced the Republican party b/c of her disgust over what they have become) And... his intellect is an act.... really.... what the hell do you base that on???? and by the way... I have no doubt in my mind that whatever *passing* grade the shrub got was by cheating or his parents paying off a prof...

whatever - give me a break... listen to both men speak you know the shrub's IQ has got to be 80-95 and Kerry's 140-160.

[karynnj]

94. What garbage

John Kerry married the woman he loved, Teresa. Teresa, who was more liberal than the moderate Republican who was her first husband, has more credentials than most on progressive issues. She has actively worked on environmental issues and was a major force in cleaning up Pittsburg. She also is working on issues from woman's pension rights to health care. Kerry would be wealthy now even without Teresa as he inherited money from his parents.

As to grades - for the 4 years, Kerry's were clearly higher. They compared only the first 3 years because the grade method changed in Bush's last year. Bush's grades were pretty uniform. Kerry's freshman year was awful though not bad enough for Yale to suggest he drop being on 4 varsity or Jr Varsity sports, the debate club (where he was a star), the political union (where he spent about 15 hours a week and although a Democrat on a Republican campus, was elected President for his Jr and Sr years) or the flying club he was in. Besides all that, he had a part time job!. Kerry improved each year - so the 4 yr average was much better than that of the first 3. They also didn't take the same classes. Kerry, for instance, got a "C" in French, though he was fluent in French since childhood - clearly he didn't take FR 101.

Clearly the grades reflect what he said of his academic career to Brinkley (before the grades were out) "he was a competent but not consciencious student". He also said he could have used a mentor and other things that implied he was not proud of how he did. As to intelligence, the new Madeline Albright book on foreign policy quotes John Kerry's 1966 Yale speech and comments on it very positively. The likelihood is that Kerry, a top student at the boarding schools in Europe, MA, and NH was more excited by meeting top political figures via the political union and participating in the debate club. (Reading Kerry's journal comments in Tour of Duty show a very well read, thoughtful mind and a real talent for words. ) He looked pretty brilliant in the debates as well.

[rodeodance]

78. nice post. well said

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

23. I love how tireless you are

:yourock:

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blm]

40. I dare EASY! He's been on this since Jan.05, and has increased his volume

as the EVIDENCE warrants. Plenty of articles have been up here throughout the last 19months reKerry and his remarks about election fraud.

And get real about the election system - Kerry wasn't able to do ANYTHING AFTERWARDS. It was the Dem PARTY'S responsibility to secure the machines and counter RNC suppression tactics for the four years before the election.

Kerry told US what the DNC told HIM - that there was an election legal team in place that would be dealing with any election problems. They would have said that to ANY nominee and the nominee would do what Kerry did and TRUST that the Dem party infrastructure was handling their end of the campaign.

And it was YOU who chose to mock Kerry as a 15minute throwaway - if you didn't want your ass handed to you, you shouldn't have bared it. And I say that with ANGRY AFFECTION to someone who should know better.

[Rose Siding]

59. Actually, it was Congress' responsibility to secure the voting process

[blm]

71. To legislate it while the Dem election board members oversee it.

But it was the RNC that employed the vote SUPPRESSION tactics, some of which were quasi-legal. THAT is what the DNC should have countered with legal challenges from 2001-2004.

[karynnj]

95. It's a state responsibility - which makes it harder

There is no uniformity at all between states.

[MH1]

47. Not true

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/4/23/115230/700/26#c26

I worked as a Green volunteer . . .

on the recount here in Ohio and you're right, Kerry's team was here all the way. In one of the counties I witnessed in, his witnesses worked late into the night with our coordinator and uncovered false numbers that led to the revelation that every ballot in the county had been recounted w/o witnesses between the certified vote and the official recount itself.

< snip >

by ponderer on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:14:12 PM EDT

He's been speaking out over and over again about the fraud in Ohio and elsewhere.

Meanwhile, it may have escaped your attention, but he has constituents in Massachusetts, and has a job to do that involves many more issues than election fraud - issues that touch people far more directly every single day.

[ProSense]

67. How dare you spread disinformation!

When was Kerry ever out of the spotlight and not speaking out? He is one of the people responsible for shining the damn spotlight on every issue since 2004!

[elehhhhna]

99. I got your back, Atman! Bit late of him to fight the

swiftboaters, too, imo.



There's no going back, John.

[saltpoint]

105. Not your decision to make.

The OP does not raise the issue of the Swiftboat liars.

It is unconnected to the OP's point.

[elehhhhna]

113. Oh I forgot we operate in a vacuum. So Sorry!

[saltpoint]

116. Your apology is owed not to me but to the millions of Democrats

who supported John Kerry in 04.

Your posts in this thread are dismisive and disrespectful.

[elehhhhna]

127. Drama much? Fine. You win.

I'm apologizing to the mirror right now.

btw, you misspelled dismissive.

[saltpoint]

130. I don't want your apology. I would have prefered an adult discussion

about the OP's point, but you arrived with a different agenda and a flippant, tear-it-up attitude.

Thanks.

[saltpoint]

131. It's spelled correctly, in fact. : dismissive

[elehhhhna]

134. oops you'd better misread your post #129. Again.

[saltpoint]

137. My typo transgression on the missing 's' but my point stands:

You came here to slam a Democrat.

You were flippant. You were rude and d-i-s-m-i-s-s-i-v-e.

You entered the thread to "smart off" as your profile indicates.

You were disrespectful to all but one of the people you responded to.

You had nothing of substance, nor developed points, to bring to the OP's discussion.

You cut off people without earning any of the dialogue, choosing instead to slam a Democrat and hop away.

At no time did you offer a context for your remarks and at least twice you shifted the context to accommodate your "smarting off."

You were called on these points and you failed to respond.

Thanks.

[elehhhhna]

135. dupe and buh bye

[blm]

191. So Aug2002 was too late for Gore to warn Dems about election fraud?

Logic anyone?

[elehhhhna]

140. Look, if that's the whole criteria, lets' run Ted Kennedy in '08!

[Name removed]

147. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

160. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[karynnj]

164. Pretty lame and foolish

I respect Kennedy and have since the 1960s. I admire him as someone who fought off some personal demons while writing and passing a huge amount of landmark legislation. I responded to that post because the TONE could most easilly be interrepted as negative to Kennedy.

I actually think that while Kennedy has been a legistor, par excellant, Kerry has more gravitas. The relationship between these two Massachusetts Senators is interesting - and they are at this point very close allies.

My posts are pretty clear to most people. I am a liberal Democrat and I support Kerry. I challange you to find anything I have ever written that is right wing. I also think that Pickles would be very unlikely to have written anything I have ever written on either Kerry or Bush. I think an apology is in order.

[rodeodance]

77. He is still not fighting it. but instead is getting in Blackwells face.

[politicasista]

87. The problem is that other Dems are silent n/t

[elehhhhna]

100. TRUEFACT!

[babylonsister]

4. "People will say anything for money," Huh?

What does that mean in relation to Kerry? Sounds like they're making excuses to me.


Does anyone have that Blackwell quote about basically having the election in the bag?

[krispos42]

5. John we would have backed you if you had started kicking and screaming

But you didn't. It's a little late now. Let Kennedy and Papantonio's lawsuit move forward.

[MH1]

13. Yeah, sure

Like we "backed" Gore in 2000, when it was OBVIOUSLY stolen by ILLEGAL means?

The 2004 election was stolen by methods that were PERFECTLY LEGAL. If "we" didn't do shit to help Gore in 2000, WHY THE FUCK would Kerry expect "our" "help" to be sufficient to overturn a LEGAL election?

:banghead:

[blm]

14. Brilliant deduction - as if Kennedy and Kerry never discussed this BEFORE

or during the writing of the article. As if it happened in vacuum world.

[karynnj]

29. You and who else?

Bill Clinton was already saying that he liked both Bush and Kerry and babbling that Kerry rejected his advice to support all the gay bashing amendments - which with Kerry's record would have been a disaster - not to mention Kerry has integrity and values it.

The media that squashed the Tang story that had at least some merit - while giving thousands of hours of free media to people proven to have lied. (From the beginning Kerry's fitness reports showed these people WHO IN THE 60s wrote these glowing reports to be lying now - since the election it has even been proven at least some made money doing it. Is that the media that would have backed him? As Bush started the invasion of Fallujah?

Would the Democrat Senators who have tried to designate almost everyone BUT Kerry as their spokesman - though he was easily nominated by Democratic people?

[hedgehog]

6. Unbelievable!

Are members of Skull and Bones required to give each other 18 months notice?

[Copperred]

10. demand voting reform now....

[blm]

11. You're not Skull and Bones so your record against govt. corruption is WHAT

.

[MH1]

15. Would you care to elaborate on your little conspiracy theory? nt

[babylonsister]

17. I've read this too often. What does Skull and Bones have to do

with Kerry's integrity? Or any possible relationship between Kerry, dimson, and/or the rest of the members from their college days?
I truly can't see a connection other than a group in college that they were both in. They are far removed from each other, from party to ideology to personality.
People change and grow, at least some of them. So help me understand what I'm missing here.

[saltpoint]

18. Agreed. When "skullduggery" is evidenced that Skull&Bones members

should be held accountable for specific transgressions, I'll be willing to listen.

To convict people on bias alone is an attack.

I was in the goddamned Cub Scouts in 3rd grade and quit by the end of the school year. That doesn't make me a paramilitary rightwinger.

This Skull&Bones bullshit is useless blather.

[babylonsister]

19. I had written that my dad was a Mason years ago,

and dropped out, but I don't even know what a Mason is, so thought better (til now).
Mom was a cub scout leader.

Yes, S&B is useless blather to me as well, Old Crusoe, unless someone can convince me otherwise. That hasn't happened yet.

[saltpoint]

25. Meanwhile, babylonsister, a roundhouse howdy to ya tonight on DU

and good wishes here at the end of summer.

[babylonsister]

80. Right back at you, my friend!

Best wishes, and hopes for November! :toast:

[karynnj]

39. But Old Crusoe, I think Bush was in Boys scouts too

and Kerry - How do YOU explain this insidious connection? Both my brothers were too. :)
(But Laura was probably a girl scout - and I was too.)

[MH1]

41. OMG - my brothers too!!

THEY were in Boy Scouts! Oh nooooooo!!!

Do you think they might be in some nefarious cabal with Bush and Kerry?

:eyes:

[karynnj]

48. Probably and my brothers too!

[saltpoint]

42. O dear god! We're all fascists!

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saltpoint]

12. Strickland is headed for a devastating win over Kenneth Blackwell,

and for Blackwell to lose this race is a bittersweet outcome after he played hit man for Bush-Cheney in cheating Kerry-Edwards in 2004.

Kerry here reminds recipients of that email that whether he legally is held responsible or not, Blackwell subverted the spirit of citizenship in a constitutional democracy. I'm not siding with Kerry because I am a Democrat, or because I think he's right. I'm a Democrat, and Kerry IS right, but the target here is the Republican Party (which has cheated in other elections as well -- against Gore, against Tilden, etc.), and which is no longer the party of Lincoln and is now a confederacy of corporate con-men and fundie nutbags. The criticism is from History and not from partisanship.

Kerry's on solid ground with this criticism, as he usually is. Ohioans in polls say they are not fond of Blackwell and appear likely to give Ted Strickland a big win in November. Strickland's a good man, and I don't subtract from that here, but Blackwell lost the election in 2004 by cheating to win against Kerry, by playing the Buckeye Sniper for George W. Bush and Karl Rove et al.

Say bye-bye to the nice people, Ken.

[autorank]

56. You may be "Old" but you're still Carousing!

I'm going to the Strickland inauguration (unless Blackwell totally loses his mind and tries what he succeeded at in the special issues election last year). It will be the greatest statement of freedom and democracy ever made in this country. Ohio is an oppressed state, occupied by the corrupt and inept and Blackwell is the glue and the brains that makes it all work. Adios dude, and watch for the special prosecutor with your name on it.

[saltpoint]

60. hey there autorank. Yeah. I got a little spin left on the fast ball.

And like many on these boards, I'm volunteering for Democrats to sweep these shithead Republicans out of office.

In Ohio, I love the energy for Brown and Blackwell -- and for several other races, including Victoria Wulsin vs. mean Jean Schmidt. I am paying close attention to the Ohio returns on Nov. 7th and I'm hoping to see that tv screen light up with the most lurid, vivid shade of Democratic BLUE you ever saw in your life.

I hope you're doin' well, and all good wishes to ya.

[bluestateguy]

20. I think this is just talk on his part, now that Blackwell is running for

governor.

While I think there were improprieties favoring Bush, I still think Bush won legitimately. However, I stand by my contention that the 2000 election was stolen.

You can't just go screaming "Diebold!" and voting machine conspiracies every time every time you lose an election.

For entirely different reasons, I think Kerry is the wrong candidate for 2008.

[blm]

24. Why don't you refute Kennedy's article point by point, then.

.

[karynnj]

43. I agree that 2000 was stolen and it is provable

It is highly likely that Kerry would have won Ohio except for the extremely long lines in Democratic strongholds, some manpulation of changing polling places and some registrations (mostly Democrats) that were "lost". NONE of these are things Kerry could have challanged because you can't claim (or even prove in a legal sense) votes never cast.

The primaries will pick the candidate and it will depend on the issues important at that time and the relative stature of the potential candidates - if National security or the Iraq war is still the major issue, Kerry may well be the best candidate. (Not because he was a hero in VN, but because he was among the few to consider non-state terror an issue pre 911 and because more people now see that he was right on this in 2004. On Iraq, who else has a comprehensive plan - Kerry/Feingold is a plan.

[AngryOldDem]

204. Bush did NOT win Ohio legitimately

Enough independent sources and investigations have borne that out.

And I find it more than a little ironic that most of the voters Blackwell disenfranchised in 2004 -- African-Americans -- he's now going after big time through his shameless courting of black ministers throughout the state.

Hey, Ken, just make sure that this time around you have enough voting booths and precincts open in heavily minority areas. :sarcasm:

[David Zephyr]

22. Everyone needs to get off of Kerry's back.

Shoot me, flame me, whatever, but John Kerry's statement helps the cause. It spotlights Ohio just before the upcoming election.

I'd rather him speaking about it than not.

Let's stop with the Kerry bashing. He's a great guy and I am glad he's on our team.

[karynnj]

50. Thank you

Kerry has fought every bad Bush action at least as hard as anyone else since January 2001. He was alone in criticizing Bush at Tora Bora - and was bashed by most Democrats for doing it.

[saltpoint]

51. I appreciate the pro-Democratic Party energy in your post, David Z.

As we turn into the autumn press for 06, I think it matters a great deal that we remain unified and in high spirits for the party.

Kerry's email does exactly what you say it does, and Ted Strickland and Ohio voters are the ultimate beneficiaries.

[Ohio Joe]

175. Thank you

The Kerry bashing was getting me down.

[Placebo]

26. Screw you, Mr Kerry.

You had your chance and blew it. You'll never be president now!

[saltpoint]

28. Yeah! Screw you, Kerry, for campaigning for fellow Democrats in the

06 election.

Screw you for tying Blackwell to the Republican theft of the Ohio vote in 04.

Screw you for lending your time and talents to building the party by helping to elect other Democrats across the country.

Why, it's just goddamned intolerable what John Kerry is up to. Damn his wicked soul.

[Placebo]

117. Kerry wimped out.

He's not worthy of the office after how he totally caved after ONE DAY.

[saltpoint]

132. Placebo, you've got more sense than to make a claim like that.

You know it isn't true and you know why.

[blm]

46. He did his job and won - How did the Dem party infrastructure do, Placebo?

Were they strong enough in Ohio to counter the 4yrs of vote suppressing tactics the RNC focused on? Did the DNC have the machines secured for ALL the candidates on the ballot?

Was the Dem party legal team for elections well schooled on all the election fraud tactics?

And how did the left media do matched against the RW machine?

And how did Kerry match up against Bush again?

Or was it Kerry's job to run the DNC, the left media AND beat Bush?

[elehhhhna]

109. I must concede you have one hell of a point there.

[blm]

161. I appreciate the notice. When people get distracted from the REAL problem

the REAL problem goes uncorrected.

These elections are being lost in the years ahead of the actual vote.

[whometense]

193. Bingo.

The democratic party structure Kerry had "supporting" him was pathetic. They let down an excellent candidate and a great man. Not to mention the entire country.

Kerry fought back against everything he's accused of ignoring. His response was (a) not covered by the media and (b) not echoed by an aggressive raft of democratic counterpunchers.

[blm]

197. Same thing in 2000. Gore won but the PARTY infrastructure couldn't secure

the win during the vote count when it was most important. Many of those Dems who lost their vote lost it to an RNC who worked for the entire four years BEFORE the election to purge voter rolls and develop vote suppression tactics and control over the voting machines input and putput.

What was the DNC and their team of election lawyers and advisors doing all that time?

[whometense]

211. good question.

I have no idea.

[wisteria]

195. Very good observations. n/t

[ProSense]

49. Poor thing!

Still trying to protect a BS talking point!

[karynnj]

53. From other posts, it seems you support Hillary as electable

Maybe if her husband's allies - like Carville and Begala - would have been the least useful in 2004, Kerry would be President.

[blm]

79. Maybe if Clinton and McAuliffe hadn't let Ohio Dem infrastructure collapse

after 1996 and get even worse after 2000, the Dem party would have been out there COUNTERING all the vote suppression and election fraud that was used to make sure that any Democrat who won could never make it through the election fraud gauntlet to accept their place in the oval office.

[JanusAscending]

143. Boo Hoo,

You sound a lot like a child who doesn't like losing, so he's going to "take his ball and go home" Poor baby! I wonder how hard you worked to get Kerry elected. If you worked as hard as some on this board did, you don't quit before the game is finished. Kerry's going back in for the second round baby, and he won't quit until he's been KNOCKED OUT!! Your statement sounds familiar, oh ..I remember....but I won't stoop to your level by calling you out.:nopity:

[Dover]

27. Kerry didn't lift a finger to back people up who were contesting

that fraud. They needed his voice and the voice of the party to share their outrage.

So why should they rally behind him now?

Same thing with Gore.

Maybe they should study the leadership in Mexico's voter fraud for how one makes a stand.

[saltpoint]

30. Kerry is not running for governor in Ohio. Ted Strickland is.

Kerry is campaigning FOR Strickland against Blackwell.

[Dover]

36. Kerry is also, according to the article, going to run again as well.

Sen. John Kerry didn't contest the results at the time, but now that he's considering another run for the White House, he's alleging election improprieties..,

[saltpoint]

44. He's over 35 & is an American citizen, native-born.

You got a problem with those provisions of the Constitution?

John Kerry can run for president if he wishes.

He's a titan next to many elected U.S. presidents since the founding days; and he deserves more respect than he's getting in this thread.

[saltpoint]

133. The Constitution's requirements are:

_ _ _

US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.
_ _ _

[Dover]

37. **dupe post

[MH1]

33. Bullshit

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/4/23/115230/700/26#c26

I worked as a Green volunteer . . .

on the recount here in Ohio and you're right, Kerry's team was here all the way. In one of the counties I witnessed in, his witnesses worked late into the night with our coordinator and uncovered false numbers that led to the revelation that every ballot in the county had been recounted w/o witnesses between the certified vote and the official recount itself.

< snip >

by ponderer on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:14:12 PM EDT

[karynnj]

64. Kerry was an excellent prosecutor

Even now, per his comments in Ohio, where he gave a fantastic commencement speech that lauded the kids at Kenyon College who spent 10 hours in line to vote - he said that there was cheating - but much of it was legal. There was no law requiring a fair distribution of voting machines.

The lost "votes" RFK jr estimated include mostly votes NEVER CAST. This was not FL, where a recount would work. Kerry's voice would not have changed the designation of the electors. The US constitution, in fact, doesn't even require an election. The state can choose the method of selecting electors. So, even if by early December 2004, Kerry's team had filed a suit and won a ruling that the election was fradulent in Ohio (Republican) courts, and all appeals were lost by the Republicans up through the Supreme Court- there is nothing that requires another election. The Ohio legislature would have the right to determine them - oh, it's Republican. If there was proof, Kerry would likely have done it anyway - but without sufficent proof - it would be a disaster, not just for Kerry, but for the Democratic party.

[babylonsister]

81. Perhaps you are the one who needs to study. Just sayin'. nt

[O.M.B.inOhio]

84. Same for Gore?

Kerry lost my support (and I gave time, money, heart in 2004) when he rolled over immediately and did so little to support the people who were fighting to have Ohio citizens' votes counted. His current statement is limp; the violation goes beyond suppressing turnout and whatever else he drones about. Is is useful for him to call Fraud now? Does his voice open us up to Sore Loser backlash more than it adds credibility to the cause? Would it be better if he motivated other Senators, congress people, journalists, experts to speak out on what happened in 2004 but stayed in the background? I don't know. But why so harh to Gore? He fought hard for a long time. The silence on the Senate floor was shameful, but certainly he did what a reasonable, intelligent person might have thought was right. It would have been inconceivable in 2000 what damage the Bush Administration was capable of. A little national embarrasment, some graft and cronyism, exploitation of public land, a tougher struggle for working people for a few years, and perhaps worst of all, a Supreme Court appointee.... Not a $10B budget turnaround, asleep at the wheel on security allowing terrorist attacks on our soil, illegitimate war, 100,000+ dead and maimed, seeds of hate abroad.... Kerry had seen it for over 3 years and should have been prepared to sacrifice everything to put an end to the Bush Junta. I'm not sure I could bring myself to shake John Kerry's hand if I met him (unless he were giving me back my donation to the fund he set up to protect against election funny business) Now, I would campaign hard for the re-election of Al Gore.

[karynnj]

150. In 2000, there was a gap of around 500 votes -

with plenty of reason to investigate those votes (because of hanging chads etc) that were not counted. There were, in fact, over the entire state, enough resolvable votes that Gore did WIN.

In Ohio the gap was over 100,000. There were not enough ambiguous votes that could be found. The RFKjr article counts estimated vote NEVER CAST due to vote suppression in several forms. Kerry likely did, with the help of people like you, persuade enough people to go out to vote for him. Kerry HAS spoken out about the problems in the election process. He, as much as anyone, is one of the victims. There was no way to fight this in court - and the nationwide popular vote would have eliminated any populist support. (Why do you think they likely chated where they didn't need to.)

It IS true the problem mey go beyond the things he speaks of, but the things he speaks of are appalling. He is rightfully cautious to speak only of those things that are provable - You've seen the right wing bury entire issues one piece is proven wrong (or even can't be proven 100%). Kerry has been doing a good job by bringing light to the type of disenfanchisement that likely has always occured to some degree - but has gotten worse.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

168. You speak wisely, I think. Maybe the difference is...

<<He is rightfully cautious to speak only of those things that are provable - You've seen the right wing bury entire issues one piece is proven wrong (or even can't be proven 100%).>>
I don't think it was right to concede because fraud was not proven in the first 24 hours (except to a statistician, maybe.) If there's a bank robbery, the police don't expect the address where the money is stashed before they leave the station. Not after seeing the fraud before. But this is a matter of judgment. Yes, certainly the media have routinely sucked credibility from Dems' issues for the merest detail of error or uncertainty, but swallowed Administration dogma whole and regurgitated it out as 'news.' But surely there is a way to control the news. Stick to the script: "We have thousands of suspicious incidents. We will present 55 to the American people and Federal investigators. Here they are.... Now, let us first address the terror threat in Warren County, OH. Once that is resolved to our satisfaction, we'll move on to the vote tally in Gahanna, OH." I don't know. A cash reward for whistleblowers, leading the MSM by innuendo as well as hard facts?

What occurs to me now is that Kerry and the Democratic apparatus continued to behave as though the solutions to our political problems lie in the political/legal arena, while the GOP is doing its most cunning operations outside the realm that Dems understand to be 'politics.' Maybe the Dems are behaving in a way that is right in traditional American politics, but the neocons have working with another paradigm and never told their opponents. It's a gentlemanly saber duel and our opponent brought a gun.

[karynnj]

179. I think that Kerry probably is at least as willing to see the under

side of what happened. I recently read his book, "the New War" which explains how global crime networks were hard to fight by individual countries. He outlines how these crime networks were succeeding in controlling some countries in some ways. He was not speaking of the US, but this was beyond what I ever read by any establishment politician or official.

Kerry was the only Senator willing to go up against BCCI, knowing they had bought off top moneymen in the Democratic party. He saw there how many people the tentacles of this criminal enterprise had reached within the American government. The question is how can you go after these things - that frankly few would believe or want to believe without any supoena power. You also need to consider that now, as then, not all Democrats would have been on Kerry's side.

The surprising thing is that a man who, at least 3 times, took honorable positions that could have destroyed any hope of keeping any elected office managed to become the nominee. Kerry was the real grassroots candidate - neither the media or party picked him.

[BlueIris]

152. Learn to read. Then, go read the rest of the thread. You'll feel better.

Actually, you should have learned to read, especially real news, before the media, Diebold and the neo-cons kept Bush in office in '04. You'd feel a lot better if you'd been able to understand from that point on how much Kerry and our other true Democrats did for you and this party after election day. Also, you wouldn't be embarrassing yourself with your display of your laziness and ignorance the way you are right now.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

165. I can read, but still don't find any point to your attitude.

My lazy and ignorant ass was canvassing for Kerry; donating beyond my means to the Democratic Party, MoveOn, and to Kerry's anti-fraud fund; and working on the Green Party recount team, finding that the Blackwell and local election Boards were not following legal procedure and feeling that Kerry and the Party apparatus were not behind us. Forgive me if I did not read Kerry's brilliant, revealing speech on p.C23. I read his concession. I didn't read the part that went, "and I'll be damned if I concede before we find out why a Board of Elections declared a terrorist threat and kicked out observers." Sorry I missed the part that identified statistically impossible tallies. I must have been busy with a coloring book when he assembled the national press in Columbus and demanded explanations from Blackwell. I missed the time he brought Sherole Eaton to Washington to tell her story. He must have been standing behind Conyers at all the meetings where citizens were invited to discuss their election day experiences. He should have clogged up the workings of government, lit himself on fire, whatever it took to get through the MSM embargo of election fraud coverage. Instead, all most Americans heard was, "Boy, that wacky recount is over and all's well. Go back to sleep."
Oh, and I did not read his statement of support for Sen. Boxer. So if Sen. Kerry gave great speeches to the mice in his basement, I apologize for thinking his public efforts ineffectual.
Please have a bowel movement and comment when you can be civil. I would like to hear how Kerry used his army of lawyers to prevent Bush from keeping power.

[sybylla]

170. Well said!

As an active supporter of JK who donated and worked and donated again, even the day after the election to his legal fund, I heartily share in your deep disappointment. I missed all those things, too, that those who continue to support Kerry must have witnessed to claim he is such a tireless defender of the right to vote and have that vote counted.

Seems to me that when Kerry had the capital to do so much, he cowered instead.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

244. Thanks.

Now, I do feel that John Kerry is an excellent politician. But what we needed in 2004 was a hero.

[ProSense]

174. What you hear may not be to your liking, but

don't misrepresent the facts:

I worked as a Green volunteer . . .

on the recount here in Ohio and you're right, Kerry's team was here all the way. In one of the counties I witnessed in, his witnesses worked late into the night with our coordinator and uncovered false numbers that led to the revelation that every ballot in the county had been recounted w/o witnesses between the certified vote and the official recount itself.

< snip >

by ponderer on Sun Apr 23, 2006 at 02:14:12 PM EDT

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/4/23/115230/700/26#c26

"In his first high-profile address since conceding the presidential election, Senator John F. Kerry used Boston's annual Martin Luther King Jr. memorial breakfast yesterday to decry what he called the suppression of thousands of would-be voters last November.

"Thousands of people were suppressed in their efforts to vote. Voting machines were distributed in uneven ways," the former Democratic nominee told an enthusiastic audience of 1,200 at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center in South Boston."

"In Democratic districts, it took people four, five, 11 hours to vote, while Republicans through in 10 minutes. Same voting machines, same process, our America," Kerry said.

Snip...

In an e-mail message he sent to his supporters on the day before Congress certified the election results earlier this month, Kerry cited "widespread reports of irregularities, questionable practices by some election officials, and instances of lawful voters being denied the right to vote" in the battleground state of Ohio.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/01/18/kerry_alleges_voters_were_suppressed?

August 31, 2005

Kerry and Edwards to Stay in Recount Case!!! Trial to Start in August 2006

Don McTigue, attorney for John Kerry and John Edwards, appeared in federal court in Toledo, before Judge Carr, on August 30th, and told the Court that Kerry and Edwards intend to remain in the case.

Judge Carr set an August 22, 2006 trial date.

Additionally he consolidated the two recount cases, Rios v. Blackwell and Yost v. Cobb & Badnarik. He gave the plaintiffs until September 15th to file amended pleadings (plaintiff's counsel had requested an opportunity to streamline their claims).

Judge Carr set a discovery cut-off of May 1, 2006, and ruled that any summary judgment motions must be made by May 15, 2006.

http://fairnessbybeckerman.blogspot.com/2005/08/kerry-and-edwards-to-stay-in-recount.html

http://audio.wegoted.com/podcasting/122105SenatorKerry.mp3

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/bits/2006_0517_kerry.mp3

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, before Senator Kerry leaves the floor, I want to thank him. The issues he raised absolutely have to be a part of this debate. I will address them after he leaves. The reason I stood up and objected to the Ohio count is because I knew firsthand from the people of Ohio who came and talked with me through STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES that they were waiting in lines for 6, 7 hours. That is not the right to vote. I think Senator Kerry's remarks and the remarks of the Senator from Oregon are very important.

So let a message go out from this Senate floor today that we are not stopping our efforts to make sure people can vote with the very important passage of this very important legislation. I am very pleased to follow him in this debate.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?">Page: S7993

[O.M.B.inOhio]

225. I acknowledge the post-election rhetoric, but it's all to limp.

Long lines, efforts to suppress votes, etc. All with the implication that they would not have added up to a Democratic win. It's in the spirit of "Let's get it right for next time," not "Every bastard who participated in suppression must go to jail," and certainly not, "They stole it." Where's the urgency? Kerry's a very smart man who must to understand that the lives of millions of people are impoverished and thousands of lives ended when Bush is allowed to stay in power. Where's the question of private, unaccountable companies performing this sacred function. Maybe there's some reference in some speech somewhere. How hany Americans know the facts of the case. A politician's speeches are fine, but maybe there was a time to take it outside of the realm of traditional politics, as the GOP does. After Kerry's concession (which had implications for the recount campaign) his speeches wash over like so many words. You can cite good stuff in the occasional Kerry speech, but what good were these rhetorical gestures? Which piece of inhuman filth is befouling the White House when he's not taking long vacations?

[Name removed]

34. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Laurab]

52. I knew I'd see a "Too late" but 1st damn response?

WHEN will people get over the 2004 election and start looking at what people are doing NOW? WHEN will people get their facts straight about what Kerry's done since 2004?

Most of all WHEN will they realize there was NO FUCKING PROOF?

For some people, John Kerry can't and won't ever do anything right. No matter how much it needs to be done, it's "too little, too late" et al. He's done a LOT of good things, spoken out about a lot of things that needed to be spoken out about, and still, he gets attacked more on this board than probably anywhere else except freeperville.

I, for one am glad he's speaking out, glad he's helping his fellow democratic candidates and party, and I just plain don't understand how people can find fault with what he's doing. This is 2006.

[Der Blaue Engel]

57. It's pretty disgusting, isn't it?

Time to start rebuilding my Ignore list, which makes me sad.

[MH1]

63. Kind of shines the light on some folks' priorities

doesn't it?

[sendero]

157. Some "folks priorities"..

.. are for unelectable Senators with more baggage than a 747 to get out of the god damned way and let someone who can actually win the fucking presidency get the nomination.

Don't like that, tough shit!

[autorank]

54. You're never late as long as you get there before the Lords Prayer!

Welcome hom Sen.John F. Kerry, D, MA.

We're going to need a whole lot of converts to the cause of real democracy in order to get some.
Let's welcome converts with open arms. I have not read any of the response of my good friends
up thread in order to make a clear response to this point.

It's all about the Prodigal Son. Let's be inclusive and open in welcoming the sincere supporters.
This is the truth. Kerry's like Lincoln said in self description: "I'm a slow walker but I never
walk backward."

Welcome home brother Kerry!!!

[MH1]

61. I'm surprised

You don't know that Kerry has been speaking out over and over again about election reform? That he is one of only a handful of Senate cosponsors on the various election reform bills in Congress?

I appreciate you're "welcome" instead of bashing like some on this thread, but I am disappointed that you express ignorance of Kerry's having been "home" for quite awhile on this.

I have to sign off but if you don't believe me, look at some of karynnj's posts on this thread.

[karynnj]

68. Thanks, MH

[autorank]

185. What, ? You're thanking him for calling me stupid? Very clever.

You should know that I worked for Kerry in 2004 and I subsidized my daughter taking a semester off from school and working for him full time. Here I come along and endorse the guys latest efforts and the whomever person above us says thanks but your an uninformed boob (essentially), he's been doing this all along (which is not exactly correct but so what).

Now you come alone and endorse his insult of me.

You can both take a hike. If this is how you politic for this guy, he's in big trouble. Immediately
resign and work for his opposition if you want to help him.

Really unbelievable and rude on your part and the other one up there MH something. Shame on both of you.

[MH1]

239. Whoa there

I was surprised that you "expressed ignorance" of Kerry's statements.

You DID do that in your post. Having seen your work, I was indeed surprised that you would do that.

I am sorry that you felt that I was calling you ignorant - I guess I am the "ignorant" one, because I still don't understand your post above, and now I am even more confused with your responses.

:shrug:

Whatever. We all do what we can, and I am just freakin tired of the bashing on this board.

[autorank]

184. I'm aware of Kerry's statements on tihs. But thanks for thinking

I was ignorant and making that point. Tres diplomatic;)

[TayTay]

89. Let every voice be lifted on this one

We have people dying for what this Prez says are 'our Freedoms' and yet bastards like Blackwell do things that deny people the right to vote, the very bedrock of that freedom. I would actually wonder how that base hack sleeps nights, except I remember that the soulless probably do not dream, they merely exist.

Thanks autorank. You and several other folks on DU have been fighting the good fight for so long and with such dedication, that it's an honor to talk with you here at DU.

The issue is the right to vote and have that vote be counted. The issue is not the character, personality, college records or anything else having to do with one person. It is getting 'all hands on deck' to preserve our very democracy.

Again, all hands on deck. This is a fight that we need allies to win. We don't need to push away anyone from this fight. You and I might have what would amount to minor differences as to who showed up and when for the fight, but they are minor differences. What matters is getting people in the Congress and in Statehouses across America to take action to preserve the foundation of democracy itself, the right to vote. All hands on deck, this is a fight in which we recruit, we don't kick people out. It's too important.

[saltpoint]

91. Have to take issue, TayTay, with your use of the phrase "base hack."

It's far too charitable.

___________________

:thumbsup: :dem: :hi:

[karynnj]

154. That's what's important - we need to fight going forward

[saltpoint]

93. autorank, I think your political instincts are as formidable as Kenny

Stabler's left arm.

And from your Raiders' logo, I'm betting the farm that you know Stabler was damned formidable.

[ProSense]

55. The level of nonsense being posted here

by Senator Kerry's detractors simply proves that he is being very effective and they are desperately worried by that!

[politicasista]

58. Another positive Kerry thread turning into a flame war

Go Figure. :-(

[babylonsister]

65. People see the first post and assume too much. We do have

our own sheeple. :-(

[ProSense]

72. I might be wrong, but

high post count aside, there are some trolls here!

[politicasista]

83. Agree n/t

[karynnj]

88. I think you're right or at least people being blatantly dishonest

There have been at least 10 times where Kerry has brought this issue up. The earliest times led to smearing and dirision on the right.

In November, 2004 Cam Kerry (for his brother) wrote an op-ed that spoke of the irregularities and vote suppression in November, 2004. He also was interviewed in that time by Will Pitt.

He spoke on MLK day in 2005 and was criticized for bringing up something like voter suppression on MLK day - to me it was mind boggling that anyone would not see that it would have been wrong for Kerry NOT to address this on MLK day.

On February 17, 2005 Kerry was a co-sponsor of the Count every Vote act and he sent information on it to his 3 million people e-mail list.

He also spoke in April, 2005 to Boston area kids who had submitted winning essays to the LWV.

Here is a statement that Kerry's Senate office issued when the DNC report came out - it was sent out and is on the JohnKerry web site (in addition to the Senate one). It provides a link to the DNC report that publicizes it. (From JohnKerry.com "On June 22, 2005, John Kerry helped raise awareness of the DNC Voting Rights Report, Democracy at Risk: the 2004 Election in Ohio, by sending copies of it out to hundreds of thousands of activists. " - Here's his message: http://www.johnkerry.com/features/count/dnc.html


"In July of 2005, John Kerry emailed the johnkerry.com list to enlist support for the national Keep the Vote Alive March, sponsored by the nation’s leading civil rights organizations and held in Atlanta on August 6th to commemorate the 40th Anniversary of the Voting Rights Act. Thanks to the generosity of johnkerry.com supporters, we were able to help fund buses to transport interested citizens to the march. " (from JohnKerry.com)

In Fall, 2005, Kerry marched in Boston with John Lewes for Renewing the Voting Rights act and spoke of problems in 2004

Kerry spoke in May, 2006 at Ohio Stickland rallies where the problems were recounted

and at the commencement of the Kenyon College students who stayed in line for hours.

Kerry spoke on the Senate floor when the Rosa Parks Voting act was discussed.

**This is mostly from memory - and doesn't count any times where, he answered questions on this but it was not the key issue.

Tell you what -Let's match Kerry to any other 2008 candidate - I'll match you on comments on this issue - and I'm sure that when you're done listing comments made by the candidate of your choice, there will still be major Kerry ones left.

[VegasWolf]

62. Too late Kerry. You should have fought back then. Look to Mexico on

how to fight since you have obviously forgotten. I voted for you in 2004 and that is the last time you will ever get my vote.

[MH1]

66. So if he's the 2008 nominee you will vote repuke?

Got it.

[saltpoint]

70. You're in a bind, then, if Kerry wins the nomination.

No one thought he'd win it in 04 either, by the way.

But he did.

[blm]

82. Is there a party backing the Mexican candidate or is he doing it himself?

Because I think you don't realize that the DNC was NOT going to back Kerry and it was the Dem team of election lawyers who said there was no legal case for them to contest or continue in court.

Now, what would Clinton and Terry Mac and all the others done if Kerry went against the word of the DNC and election lawyers - Clinton would have showed up on Larry King and said how sad he feels for John Kerry that he can't let go when Bush obviously won and that for the good of the country he must give it up. Bet on it.

[IndianaGreen]

73. and Blackwell took money from Diebold

and he will steal another election if given a chance.

[saltpoint]

76. --took money from Diebold and is a stockholder in that company.

And, not coincidentally to the subject, oversaw the election in which Diebold machines were used.

In one case -- I believe in Warren County (?) -- they were locked up overnight in a barn/warehouse. That doesn't sound like transparent democracy to me.

[fedupinBushcountry]

That is one of the biggest problems

Republican SOS's that control and make up election laws for their states and to supress democrats Kerry has been out there telling people to remember to elect Democrats as SOS's.

He found that many problems during '04 that we would take as illegal were in fact not and it astounded him how partisans (republicans) get around election laws in their states and do everything in their power to control the vote. This was his problem on many things that happened in '04, and even though he would of brought such anomalies to court he found that they would not hold up, due to manipulation of the laws by many SOS's.

[saltpoint]

97. The Bush connection seems evident to me with both Blackwell and

Katherine Harris in '00 -- Rethug SsOS whose conflict of interest Kerry is merely drawing reasonable attention to.

And doing so in support of Ted Strickland, not coincidentally Blackwell's opponent this year in Ohio.

And as for Blackwell, the polls now suggest that karma is a real thing. We sensible Americans don't always think in those terms, but while it may not be as instant as John Lennon warned, it still packs a wallop, and Ken Blackwell is about to get a little taste.

I believe Ted Strickland is going to bury Blackwell alive in Ohio on November 7th.

[fedupinBushcountry]

96. dupe n/t

[rodeodance]

75. I am so glad to see him do this. Revenge is beatiful at times.

[wisteria]

90. Wow, now this gets attention. Kerry has mentioned these 04 voting

issues before. Good to see his concerns are finally being heard.

[Rainscents]

92. I am so sick and tired of Kerry bashing...

Yes, I was disappointed in his action after election, however, he had been very few Senator we have left, been fighting for us. STOP IT DU'ers, lets stop being childish by forgiving and move on.

[elehhhhna]

101. He conceded. That ended the whole dammned thing. It was

as bad &/or poorly informed as his vote for the Iraq debacle.

[saltpoint]

103. It was in fact an informed decision. A former prosecutor, Kerry is not

in the habit of walking into a courtroom filing papers without evidence.

If you have evidence that he could have presented at that hour, you should have come forth and offered it.

Absent evidence, there is no forward movement. They did all they could.

Your characterization is wrong.

[elehhhhna]

107. Oh well then we're screwed forever. Let's lay down and Concede

November right now.

[saltpoint]

108. The grammar elves are on their way to your house right now, elehhhna.

And they're wearing Kerry t-shirts.

[elehhhhna]

111. LOL. I "here" you.

smartypants.

[saltpoint]

118. I'm in blue jeans, darlin'.

And I'm a Democrat.

I vote for 'em every chance I get.

[elehhhhna]

122. As do I,

smartydungarees!

[Name removed]

104. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MH1]

106. Looks like there's at least one vote for

continuing to be childish.

Thanks for your sentiments though!

[elehhhhna]

110. I can forgive a lot in a person but I sure as hell don't have to forget.

[saltpoint]

112. Neither is at issue. Building the party is. Kerry endorses and is

campaigning for Ted Strickland.

This would be the Ohio gubernatorial race.

[elehhhhna]

119. Good. Thats' what he should be doing. If I'm so off topic, why defend

future Presidential aspirations?

The PARTY failed him -- completely. But he had the media's attention in 11/04 and....? Crickets.

[saltpoint]

120. You missed the point. Kerry is campaining for Ted Strickland in Ohio.

The email message invokes Blackwell's (Strickland's opponent) complicity in the 04 fraud in that state as presiding official over state elections.

If you agree that Kerry's doing what he should be doing, why are you on these boards tonight slamming him?

Act like a Democrat for god's sake.

[elehhhhna]

139. That post is extremely presumptuous and insulting. The lockstep

thing works better elsewhere.

"And by their spelling ye shall know them"

Goodnight.

[saltpoint]

141. The association Kerry makes with Blackwell in the email message

has long precedent.

You missed that point also.

[elehhhhna]

142. Yep. I'm a moran, as evidenced by my one trazillion Greatest page

OP's.

I'm obviously a paid shill for Karl!

[saltpoint]

144. A startling confession, and completely unexpected.

Ok, if you say so.

[karynnj]

158. DID he really have the media attention in November 2004?

The same media gave scant coverage to all the speeches labelled major policy speeches by his campaign - on Iraq (at NYU), on terrorism (University of Pennsylvania), the environment, health care etc. Instead you saw talking heads saying Kerry spoke (here) and said ( ) about Bush. THEY INTENTIONALLY didn't either carry his message or even let you hear much of him speaking. Why do you think that the polls jumped as much as they did after the first debate - he was seen briefly unfiltered.

If that is the coverage he was given as the standard bearer, why after he lost do you think he would suddenly get coverage. The media and the Democratic establishment moved immediately to try to diminish his role in everything.

[EC]

121. Isn't Blackwell still in charge of elections?

Do we really think he's going to lose then? It'll be a miracle if Strickland wins...I'm sure those machines are already set to deliver...

[saltpoint]

125. You get ready for Nov. 7th. Strickland is going to bury Blackwell alive.

[elehhhhna]

136. I hope if he's Diebolded he's got more spunk than SOME candidates we know.

[Name removed]

138. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AngryOldDem]

220. This election will tell the tale...

...about just how healthy the electoral process is. Strickland has a pretty good lead over Blackwell now, and yes, Blackwell is in charge of elections in his role as Secretary of State.

As an Ohioan, I am taking nothing as a given here because I don't trust Ken one friggin' iota.

[Vidar]

129. Better late than never. While he's no Feingold, he's still one of our

best senators.

[TayTay]

148. I would agree with that.

And vice versa. (I have a hard time with Feingold voting to confirm Judge Roberts to the Supreme Court. He could have done better.)

But, I still like Sen. Feingold and think he is a very good Dem Senator.

[Vidar]

149. I missed that one. You are correct.

[blm]

162. You are welcome to list the actual BATTLES Feingold led in the senate so

that we may better compare the battles he took on with the battles Kerry has taken on.

From my read of the actual congressional record, I'd wish Feingold HAD taken on REAL battles during his 14yrs in office instead of staying quiet for most of that time.

[HuffleClaw]

151. NOW he speaks up?

at the time, HAD the democrats presented a united front against the horror of ohio things may well have turned out differently. but, of course they didn't.

[BlueIris]

153. Oh, please.

Where were you after Election Day, sweet pea? Sitting on your keister like so many other sad slackers, bitching about what the Party needed to do for you? Sans anything resembling a free media or support from lazy, ignorant, whiny cry babies too chicken and again, LAZY to read real news, (what little of it there was or is now) critically evaluate information, follow or support the actual activities of real Democrats (or anyone else) and then take action to represent reality? The responsibility to get the word out was on us even more than it was on Kerry or any other elected officials. We failed them, (and some of us failed more tragically than others) not the other way around.

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

159. Guess you haven't been following the action!

"In his first high-profile address since conceding the presidential election, Senator John F. Kerry used Boston's annual Martin Luther King Jr. memorial breakfast yesterday to decry what he called the suppression of thousands of would-be voters last November.

"Thousands of people were suppressed in their efforts to vote. Voting machines were distributed in uneven ways," the former Democratic nominee told an enthusiastic audience of 1,200 at the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center in South Boston."

"In Democratic districts, it took people four, five, 11 hours to vote, while Republicans through in 10 minutes. Same voting machines, same process, our America," Kerry said.
<snip>

In an e-mail message he sent to his supporters on the day before Congress certified the election results earlier this month, Kerry cited "widespread reports of irregularities, questionable practices by some election officials, and instances of lawful voters being denied the right to vote" in the battleground state of Ohio.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/01/18/kerry_alleges_voters_were_suppressed?mode=PF

August 31, 2005

Kerry and Edwards to Stay in Recount Case!!! Trial to Start in August 2006

Don McTigue, attorney for John Kerry and John Edwards, appeared in federal court in Toledo, before Judge Carr, on August 30th, and told the Court that Kerry and Edwards intend to remain in the case.

Judge Carr set an August 22, 2006 trial date.

Additionally he consolidated the two recount cases, Rios v. Blackwell and Yost v. Cobb & Badnarik. He gave the plaintiffs until September 15th to file amended pleadings (plaintiff's counsel had requested an opportunity to streamline their claims).

Judge Carr set a discovery cut-off of May 1, 2006, and ruled that any summary judgment motions must be made by May 15, 2006.

http://fairnessbybeckerman.blogspot.com/2005/08/kerry-and-edwards-to-stay-in-recount.html

http://audio.wegoted.com/podcasting/122105SenatorKerry.mp3

http://www.stephaniemiller.com/bits/2006_0517_kerry.mp3

DECEPTIVE PRACTICES AND VOTER INTIMIDATION PREVENTION -- (Senate - November 10, 2005)
GPO's PDF

--- Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I proudly join as a cosponsor of Senator Obama's Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2005. This important legislation will protect voters from the deceptive practices that aimed to keep them from the polls on election day.

Free and fair elections are the foundation of our democracy--a democracy built on the unassailable principle that every single American should have an equal say in their government. No American should ever approach their polling place in fear. No American should ever worry that they will somehow be penalized for exercising their fundamental right to vote . No American should ever be tricked into thinking they do not have the right to vote .

The Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevent Act takes great strides towards ensuring that no American will ever be denied the right to vote . It both criminalizes deceptive practices and provides affected individuals with a private right of action. It prevents the negative effects of deceptive practices by ensuring voters get accurate election information. It also requires the Attorney General to report allegations of deceptive practices, the actions taken to correct them, and any prosecutions resulting from those allegations.

We have worked hard to bring fair and free elections to people around the word-including the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. We must do everything in our power to ensure that our own elections are at least as fair and as free.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbn...



S.1975
Title: A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.
Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack (introduced 11/8/2005) Cosponsors (4)
Related Bills: H.R.4463
Latest Major Action: 11/8/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COSPONSORS(4), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham - 12/12/2005
Sen Feingold, Russell D. - 12/12/2005
Sen Kerry, John F. - 11/10/2005
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. - 12/12/2005

Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2005

(Introduced in Senate)

S. 1975 IS

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

S. 1975

To prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

November 8, 2005

Mr. OBAMA introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

A BILL

To prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act of 2005'.

SEC. 2. DECEPTIVE PRACTICES IN ELECTIONS.

(a) Civil Action-

(1) IN GENERAL- Subsection (b) of section 2004 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1971(b)) is amended--

(A) by striking `No person' and inserting the following:

`(1) No person'; and

(B) by inserting at the end the following new paragraph:

`(2) No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall knowingly deceive any other person regarding--

`(A) the time, place, or manner of conducting a general, primary, run-off, or special election for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, or Delegate or Commissioner from a territory or possession; or

`(B) the qualifications for or restrictions on voter eligibility for any election described in subparagraph (A).'.

(2) PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION-

(A) IN GENERAL- Subsection (c) of section 2004 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1971(c)) is amended--

(i) by striking `Whenever any person' and inserting the following:

`(1) Whenever any person'; and

(ii) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

`(2) Any person aggrieved by a violation of subsection (b)(2) may institute a civil action or other proper proceeding for preventive relief, including an application in a United States district court for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order.'.

(B) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS-

(i) Subsection (e) of section 2004 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1971(e)) is amended by striking `subsection (c)' and inserting `subsection (c)(1)'.

(ii) Subsection (g) of section 2004 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1971(g)) is amended by striking `subsection (c)' and inserting `subsection (c)(1)'.

(b) Criminal Penalty- Section 594 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) by striking `Whoever' and inserting the following:

`(a) Intimidation- Whoever'; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

`(b) Deceptive Acts-

`(1) PROHIBITION-

`(A) IN GENERAL- It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly deceive another person regarding the time, place, or manner of an election described in subparagraph (B), or the qualifications for or restrictions on voter eligibility for any such election, with the intent to prevent such person from exercising the right to vote in such election.

`(B) ELECTION- An election described in this subparagraph is any general, primary, run-off, or special election for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate of the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner.

`(2) PENALTY- Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $100,000, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.'.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 3. REPORTING FALSE ELECTION INFORMATION.

(a) In General- Any person may report to the Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, or the designee of such Assistant Attorney General, any act of deception regarding--

(1) the time, place, or manner of conducting a general, primary, run-off, or special election for Federal office; or

(2) the qualifications for or restrictions on voter eligibility for any general, primary, run-off, or special election for Federal office.

(b) Corrective Action-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (2), not later than 48 hours after receiving a report under subsection (a), the Assistant Attorney General shall investigate such report and, if the Assistant Attorney General determines that an act of deception described in subsection (a) occurred, shall--

(A) undertake all effective measures necessary to provide correct information to voters affected by the deception, and

(B) refer the matter to the appropriate Federal and State authorities for criminal prosecution.

(2) REPORTS WITHIN 72 HOURS OF AN ELECTION- If a report under subsection (a) is received within 72 hours before the election described in such subsection, the Assistant Attorney General shall immediately investigate such report and, if the Assistant Attorney General determines that an act of deception described in subsection (a) occurred, shall immediately undertake all effective measures necessary to provide correct information to voters affected by the deception.

(3) REGULATIONS-

(A) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General shall promulgate regulations regarding the methods and means of corrective actions to be taken under paragraphs (1) and (2). Such regulations shall be developed in consultation with the Election Assistance Commission, civil rights organizations, voting rights groups, State election officials, voter protection groups, and other interested community organizations.

(B) STUDY-

(i) IN GENERAL- The Attorney General, in consultation with the Federal Communications Commission and the Election Assistance Commission, shall conduct a study on the feasibility of providing the corrective information under paragraphs (1) and (2) through public service announcements, the emergency alert system, or other forms of public broadcast.

(ii) REPORT- Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit to Congress a report detailing the results of the study conducted under clause (i).

(c) Reports to Congress-

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than 90 days after any primary, general, or run-off election for Federal office, the Attorney General shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report compiling and detailing any allegations of deceptive practices submitted pursuant to subsection (a) and relating to such election.

(2) CONTENTS-

(A) IN GENERAL- Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall include--

(i) detailed information on specific allegations of deceptive tactics;

(ii) any corrective actions taken in response to such allegations;

(iii) the effectiveness of any such corrective actions;

(iv) any suit instituted under section 2004(b)(2) of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1971(b)(2)) in connection with such allegations;

(v) statistical compilations of how many allegations were made and of what type;

(vi) the geographic locations of and the populations affected by the alleged deceptive information; and

(vii) the status of the investigations of such allegations.

(B) EXCEPTION- The Attorney General may withhold any information that the Attorney General determines would unduly interfere with an on-going investigation.

(3) REPORT MADE PUBLIC- The Attorney General shall make the report required under paragraph (1) publicly available through the Internet and other appropriate means.

(d) Federal Office- For purposes of this section, the term `Federal office' means the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, or Delegate or Commissioner from a territory or possession of the United States.

(e) Authorization of Appropriations- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney General such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.

S.450
Title: A bill to amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified paper record, to improve provisional balloting, to impose additional requirements under such Act, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham (introduced 2/17/2005) Cosponsors (6)
Related Bills: H.R.939
Latest Major Action: 2/17/2005 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. COSPONSORS(6), ALPHABETICAL : (Sort: by date)


Sen Boxer, Barbara - 2/17/2005
Sen Dayton, Mark - 3/7/2005
Sen Kerry, John F. - 2/17/2005
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. - 2/17/2005
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. - 3/1/2005
Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. - 2/17/2005

S.450

Count Every Vote Act of 2005

(Introduced in Senate)
Beginning
February 17, 2005

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

Sec. 104. Voter verification and audit capacity funding.

TITLE I--VOTER VERIFICATION AND AUDITING

SEC. 101. PROMOTING ACCURACY, INTEGRITY, AND SECURITY THROUGH PRESERVATION OF A VOTER-VERIFIED PAPER RECORD OR HARD COPY.

SEC. 102. REQUIREMENT FOR MANDATORY RECOUNTS.

SEC. 103. SPECIFIC, DELINEATED REQUIREMENT OF STUDY, TESTING, AND DEVELOPMENT OF BEST PRACTICES.

SEC. 104. VOTER-VERIFICATION AND AUDIT CAPACITY FUNDING.

`PART 7--VOTER-VERIFICATION AND AUDIT CAPACITY FUNDING

`SEC. 297. VOTER-VERIFICATION AND AUDIT CAPACITY FUNDING.

`SEC. 298. APPROPRIATION.

SEC. 105. REPORTS AND PROVISION OF SECURITY CONSULTATION SERVICES.

`SEC. 248. REPORTS AND PROVISION OF SECURITY CONSULTATION SERVICES.

SEC. 106. IMPROVEMENTS TO VOTING SYSTEMS.

TITLE II--PROVISIONAL BALLOTS

SEC. 201. REQUIREMENTS FOR CASTING AND COUNTING PROVISIONAL BALLOTS.

TITLE III--ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OF 2002
Subtitle A--Shortening Voter Wait Times

SEC. 301. MINIMUM REQUIRED VOTING SYSTEMS, POLL WORKERS, AND ELECTION RESOURCES.

`Subtitle C--Additional Requirements

`SEC. 321. MINIMUM REQUIRED VOTING SYSTEMS AND POLL WORKERS.

`Subtitle E--Guidance and Standards

`SEC. 299. STANDARDS FOR ESTABLISHING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED VOTING SYSTEMS AND POLL WORKERS.

SEC. 302. REQUIREMENTS FOR JURISDICTIONS WITH SUBSTANTIAL VOTER WAIT TIMES.

`TITLE X--REMEDIAL PLANS FOR STATES WITH EXCESSIVE VOTER WAIT TIMES

`SEC. 1001. REMEDIAL PLANS FOR STATES WITH EXCESSIVE VOTER WAIT TIMES.

Subtitle B--No-Excuse Absentee Voting

SEC. 311. NO-EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING.

`SEC. 322. NO-EXCUSE ABSENTEE VOTING.

Subtitle C--Collection and Dissemination of Election Data

SEC. 321. DATA COLLECTION.

`SEC. 323. PUBLIC REPORTS ON FEDERAL ELECTIONS.

Subtitle D--Ensuring Well Run Elections

SEC. 331. TRAINING OF ELECTION OFFICIALS.

`SEC. 324. TRAINING OF ELECTION OFFICIALS.

SEC. 332. IMPARTIAL ADMINISTRATION OF ELECTIONS.

`SEC. 325. ELECTION ADMINISTRATION REQUIREMENTS.

Subtitle E--Standards for Purging Voters

SEC. 341. STANDARDS FOR PURGING VOTERS.

`SEC. 326. REMOVAL FROM VOTER REGISTRATION LIST.

Subtitle F--Election Day Registration and Early Voting

SEC. 351. ELECTION DAY REGISTRATION.

`SEC. 327. ELECTION DAY REGISTRATION.

`SEC. 299A. ELECTION DAY REGISTRATION FORM.

SEC. 352. EARLY VOTING.

`SEC. 328. EARLY VOTING.

`SEC. 299B. STANDARDS FOR EARLY VOTING.

TITLE IV--VOTER REGISTRATION AND IDENTIFICATION

SEC. 401. VOTER REGISTRATION.

`SEC. 329. PROCESSING OF REGISTRATION APPLICATIONS.

`SEC. 299C. STANDARDS FOR MATERIAL OMISSION FROM REGISTRATION FORMS.

`SEC. 249. STUDY ON INTERNET REGISTRATION AND OTHER USES OF THE INTERNET IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS.

SEC. 402. ESTABLISHING VOTER IDENTIFICATION.

`SEC. 299D. VOTER IDENTIFICATION.

`PART 8--PHOTO IDENTIFICATION

`SEC. 298A. PAYMENTS FOR FREE PHOTO IDENTIFICATION.

`SEC. 298B. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

SEC. 403. REQUIREMENT FOR FEDERAL CERTIFICATION OF TECHNOLOGICAL SECURITY OF VOTER REGISTRATION LISTS.

TITLE V--PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES

SEC. 501. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES.

`CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES BY ELECTION OFFICIALS AND VOTING SYSTEM MANUFACTURERS
TITLE VI--ENDING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES

SEC. 601. ENDING DECEPTIVE PRACTICES.

TITLE VII--CIVIC PARTICIPATION BY EX-OFFENDERS

SEC. 701. VOTING RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS CONVICTED OF CRIMINAL OFFENSES.

`SEC. 330. NOTIFICATION OF RESTORATION OF VOTING RIGHTS.

TITLE VIII--FEDERAL ELECTION DAY ACT

SEC. 801. SHORT TITLE.

SEC. 802. FEDERAL ELECTION DAY AS A PUBLIC HOLIDAY.

SEC. 803. STUDY ON ENCOURAGING GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES TO SERVE AS POLL WORKERS.

`SEC. 250. STUDY ON ENCOURAGING GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES TO SERVE AS POLL WORKERS.

TITLE IX--TRANSMISSION OF CERTIFICATE OF ASCERTAINMENT OF ELECTORS

SEC. 901. TRANSMISSION OF CERTIFICATE OF ASCERTAINMENT OF ELECTORS.

TITLE X--STRENGTHENING THE ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION

SEC. 1001. STRENGTHENING THE ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION.

`SEC. 209. SUBMISSION OF BUDGET REQUESTS.

`SEC. 299E. TECHNICAL SUPPORT.

SEC. 1002. REPEAL OF EXEMPTION OF ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION FROM CERTAIN GOVERNMENT CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS.

SEC. 1003. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

[NoodleyAppendage]

173. Blah..blah..blah. Mighty quick with the Pro-Kerry talking points.

Again, we see the Kerry campaign ops at work on the DU boards.

J

[ProSense]

177. Mature! Let me get this straight: people who pay attention and

can do a Google search to find the facts are Kerry campaign operatives? The facts just happen to be pro-Kerry! Where are your facts?

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to proceed for 10 minutes and, following me, Senator Boxer be permitted to proceed for 15 minutes, and following her, Senator Schumer for 5 minutes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oregon for his discussion of an important way of having accountability in voting. I must say that I saw how that works out in Oregon. It works well. It works brilliantly, as a matter of fact. People have a lot of time to be able to vote. They don't have to struggle with work issues or being sick or other things. They have plenty of time to be able to have the kind of transparency and accountability that makes the system work. There are other States where you are allowed to start voting early--in New Mexico and elsewhere.

It is amazing that in the United States we have this patchwork of the way our citizens work in Federal elections. It is different almost everywhere. I had the privilege of giving the graduation address this year at Kenyan College in Ohio, and there the kids at Kenyan College wound up being the last people to vote in America in the Presidential race in 2004 in Gambier, at 4:30 in the morning. We had to go to court to get permission for them to keep the polls open so they could vote at 4:30 in the morning.

Why did it take until 4:30 in the morning for people to be able to vote? They didn't have enough voting machines in America. These people were lined up not just there but in all of Ohio and in other parts of the country. An honest appraisal requires one to point out that where there were Republican secretaries of state, the lines were invariably longer in Democratic precincts, sometimes with as many as one machine only in the Democratic precinct and several in the Republican precinct; so it would take 5 or 10 minutes for someone of the other party to be able to vote, and it would take literally hours for the people in the longer lines. If that is not a form of intimidation and suppression, I don't know what is.

So I thank the Senator from Oregon for talking about the larger issue here. He is absolutely correct. The example of his State is one that the rest of the country ought to take serious and think seriously about embracing.

This is part of a larger issue, obviously, Mr. President. All over the world, our country has always stood out as the great exporter of democratic values. In the years that I have been privileged to serve in the Senate, I have had some extraordinary opportunities to see that happen in a firsthand way.

Back in 1986, I was part of a delegation that went to the Philippines. We took part in the peaceful revolution that took place at the ballot box when the dictator, President Marcos, was kicked out and ``Cory'' Aquino became President. I will never forget flying in on a helicopter to the island of Mindanao and landing where some people have literally not seen a helicopter before, and 5,000 people would surround it as you swooped out of the sky, to go to a polling place where the entire community turned out waiting in the hot sun in long lines to have their thumbs stamped in ink and to walk out having exercised their right to vote.

I could not help but think how much more energy and commitment people were showing for the privilege of voting in this far-off place than a lot of Americans show on too many occasions. The fact is that in South Africa we fought for years--we did--through the boycotts and other efforts, in order to break the back of apartheid and empower all citizens to vote. Most recently, obviously, in Afghanistan and Iraq, notwithstanding the disagreement of many of us about the management of the war and the evidence and other issues that we have all debated here. This has never been debated about the desire for democracy and the thrill that everyone in the Senate felt in watching citizens be able to exercise those rights.

In the Ukraine, the world turned to the United States to monitor elections and ensure that the right to vote was protected. All of us have been proud of what President Carter has done in traveling the world to guarantee that fair elections take place. But the truth is, all of our attempts to spread freedom around the world will be hollow and lose impact over the years in the future if we don't deliver at home.

The fact is that we are having this debate today in the Senate about the bedrock right to vote, with the understanding that this is not a right that was afforded to everyone in our country automatically or at the very beginning. For a long time, a century or more, women were not allowed to vote in America. We all know the record with respect to African Americans. The fact is that the right to vote in our country was earned in blood in many cases and in civic sweat in a whole bunch of cases. Courageous citizens literally risked their lives. I remember in the course of the campaign 2 years ago, traveling to Alabama--Montgomery--and visiting the Southern Poverty Law Center, the memorial to Martin Luther King, and the fountain. There is a round stone fountain with water spilling out over the sides. From the center of the fountain there is a compass rose coming back and it marks the full circle. At the end of every one of those lines is the name of an American with the description, ``killed trying to register to vote,'' or ``murdered trying to register.'' Time after time, that entire compass rose is filled with people who lost their lives in order to exercise a fundamental right in our country.

None of us will forget the courage of people who marched and faced Bull Connor's police dogs and faced the threat of lynchings, some being dragged out of their homes in the dark of night to be hung. The fact is that we are having this debate today because their work and that effort is not over yet. Too many Americans in too many parts of our country still face serious obstacles when they are trying to vote in our own country.

By reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act, we are taking an important step, but, Mr. President, it is only a step. Nobody should pretend that reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act solves the problems of being able to vote in our own country. It doesn't. In recent elections, we have seen too many times how outcomes change when votes that have been cast are not counted or when voters themselves are prevented from voting or intimidated from even registering or when they register, as we found in a couple of States, their registration forms are put in the wastebasket instead of into the computers.

This has to end. Every eligible voter in the United States ought to be able to cast his or her ballot without fear, without intimidation, and with the knowledge that their voice will be heard. These are the foundations of our democracy, and we have to pay more attention to it.

For a lot of folks in the Congress, this is a very personal fight. Some of our colleagues in the House and Senate were here when this fight first took place or they took part in this fight out in the streets. Without the courage of someone such as Congressman JOHN LEWIS who almost lost his life marching across that bridge in Selma, whose actions are seared in our minds, who remembers what it was like to march to move a nation to a better place, who knows what it meant to put his life on the line for voting rights, this is personal.

For somebody like my colleague, Senator TED KENNEDY, the senior Senator from Massachusetts, who was here in the great fight on this Senate floor in 1965 when they broke the back of resistance, this is personal.

We wouldn't even have this landmark legislation today if it weren't for their efforts to try to make certain that it passed.

But despite the great strides we have taken since this bill was originally enacted, we have a lot of work to do.

Mr. President, I ask for an additional 5 minutes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, on this particular component of the bill, there is agreement. Republicans and Democrats can agree. I was really pleased that every attempt in the House of Representatives to weaken the Voting Rights Act was rejected.

We need to reauthorize these three critical components especially: The section 5 preclearance provisions that get the Justice Department to oversee an area that has a historical pattern of discrimination that they can't change how people vote without clearance. That seems reasonable.

There are bilingual assistance requirements. Why? Because people need it and it makes sense. They are American citizens, but they still may have difficulties in understanding the ballot, and we ought to provide that assistance so they have a fully informed vote. This is supposed to be an informed democracy, a democracy based on the real consent of the American people.

And finally, authorization for poll watching. Regrettably, we have seen in place after place in America why we need to have poll watching.

A simple question could be asked: Where would the citizens of Georgia be, particularly low-income and minority citizens, if they were required to produce a government-issued identification or pay $20 every 5 years in order to vote? That is what would have happened without section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Georgia would have successfully imposed what the judge in the case called ``a Jim Crow-era like poll tax.'' I don't think anybody here wants to go back and flirt with the possibility of returning to a time when States charged people money to exercise their right to vote. That is not our America.

This morning, President Bush addressed the 97th Annual Convention of the NAACP after a 5-year absence. I am pleased that the President, as we all are, ended his boycott of the NAACP and announced his intention to sign the Voting Rights Act into law.

But we need to complete the job. There are too many stories all across this country of people who say they registered duly, they reported to vote, and they were made to stand in one line or another line and get an excuse why, when they get to the end of the line, they can't vote. So they take out a provisional ballot, and then there are fights over provisional ballots.

There are ways for us to avoid that. Some States allow same-day registration. In some parts of America, you can just walk up the day of an election, register, and vote, as long as you can prove your residence.

We have this incredible patchwork of laws and rules, and in the process, it is even more confusing for Americans. We need to fully fund the Help America Vote Act so that we have the machines in place, so that people are informed, so that there is no one in America who waits an undue amount of time in order to be able to cast a vote.

We have to pass the Count Every Vote Act that Senator Clinton, Senator Boxer, and I have introduced which ensures exactly what the Senator from Oregon was talking about: that every voter in America has a verifiable paper trail for their vote. How can we have a system where you can touch a screen and even after you touch the name of one candidate on the screen, the other candidate's name comes up, and if you are not attentive to what you have done and you just go in, touch the screen, push ``select,'' you voted for someone else and didn't intend to? How can we have a system like that?

How can we have a system where the voting machines are proprietary to a private business so that the public sector has no way of verifying what the computer code is and whether or not it is accountable and fair? Just accounting for it.

Congress has to ensure that every vote cast in America is counted, that every precinct in America has a fair distribution of voting machines, that voter suppression and intimidation are un-American and must cease.

We had examples in the last election of people who were sent notices--obviously fake, but they were sent them and they confused them enough. They were told that if you have an outstanding parking ticket, you can't vote. They were told: Democrats vote on Wednesday and Republicans vote on Tuesday and various different things.

It is important for us to guarantee that in the United States of America, this right that was fought for so hard through so much of the difficult history of our country, we finally make real the full measure of that right.

I yield the floor. I thank the Chair and I thank my colleague for her forbearance.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, before Senator Kerry leaves the floor, I want to thank him. The issues he raised absolutely have to be a part of this debate. I will address them after he leaves. The reason I stood up and objected to the Ohio count is because I knew firsthand from the people of Ohio who came and talked with me through STEPHANIE TUBBS JONES that they were waiting in lines for 6, 7 hours. That is not the right to vote. I think Senator Kerry's remarks and the remarks of the Senator from Oregon are very important.

So let a message go out from this Senate floor today that we are not stopping our efforts to make sure people can vote with the very important passage of this very important legislation. I am very pleased to follow him in this debate.

Page: S7991
Page: S7992
Page: S7993

[NoodleyAppendage]

182. Get over it. No matter how much cheerleading you do, Kerry is not 2008

Now, go cry in a beer or to the moderators (as I suspect you have already).

J

[wisteria]

186. Oh? And you have insider knowledge not available to everyone

else?

[NoodleyAppendage]

189. Put your money where your convictions rest. Bet for Kerry?

Come on...if you're such a great fan of Kerry and have such faith in him. How about you and I wager say $50 as to whether he will get the 2008 Dem nomination or whether he will win the 2008 election?

I'm willing to stand by my convictions. How about you?

Otherwise, stuff it.

J

[ProSense]

199. I wager

2 facts against every single lame post!

[NoodleyAppendage]

200. Pah... how about wagering whether Kerry will be 2008 nominee?

Come on. Wager.

J

[ProSense]

201. How about me

confidently saying he has s really good shot. Gambling is for suckers! I deal in reality! How about you?

[ProSense]

192. Much rather beer than

whine. Get over yourself! Nothing you say can change the facts, which you seem to be upset by.

[Name removed]

183. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

198. Of course,

you were fighting right along side him in Vietnam and helping him go after BCCI. :sarcasm:

Posting nonsensical insults takes real courage!

[Name removed]

205. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

206. No, that's simply

your wishful thinking!

[blm]

216. And you know this because YOU have risked your life many more times than

Kerry has.

Because YOU prosecuted more MAFIA cases successfully.

Because YOU spent 6 yrs investigating IranContra and then BCCI, while most of DC aligned against your efforts.

Because YOU wrote the first legislation offered in the senate to protect gay citizens.

Because YOU advocated for gays to serve openly in the military.

Because YOU took on the corporate campaign money when YOU wrote the Clean Money, Clean Elections bill for public financing.

Because YOU risked the slings and arrows of a public campaign in YOUR effort to serve this nation.

[Name removed]

156. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jawja]

166. Good for John Kerry!

He is raising the awareness of election fraud before November so perhaps the "Above the Law" Republicans don't get away with it again quite so easily.

[Name removed]

172. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NoodleyAppendage]

176. I'm a lifelong Democrat and I'm entitled to my opinion about Kerry.

I know it is verboten to speak ill of our beloved Kerry, but damn it I'm entitled to my opinion and I do not like Kerry. His political bumbling was part of the reason for the 2004 loss and his pandering after-the-fact to the grassroots will not sway this Democrat to join his camp. If I have to vote for him in 2008, so be it. But, I will bet that it will never come to that.

J

[Seabiscuit]

180. I'm with you.

Kerry proved in 2003 and 2004 that he was one of the "spineless Beltway dems" Howard Dean spoke about in his own campaign. He shot himself in the foot with the Swiftboaters; he let us all down with his B.S. shifting positions on Iraq; he betrayed us by breaking his promise to contest the election when he conceded prematurely.

IOW, he wimped out across the board and stole the millions we gave him for his legal team to contest the election.

No amount of progressively correct speeches in 2005 and 2006 from Kerry can ever restore the trust he lost from this voter in 2004.

And I will do the same thing in 2008 I did in 2004 if he is our candidate: vote for him while holding my nose.

But I agree with you that there are enough of us out there that he'll never be our nominee in 2008.

[elehhhhna]

181. ditto.

[Name removed]

190. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

194. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NoodleyAppendage]

202. Echhhh... just move on. Don't waste my time w/ the Kerry crud.

Democrat. Proud of it. But, I'm not delusional and think that Kerry did a great job in 2004 or that he is the front-runner for 2008.

j

[ProSense]

203. Your posts are nothing

but tantrums: someone kicking and screaming because things aren't going your way. Senator Kerry is a force to be reckoned with. Deal with it!

[ProSense]

196. Funny, I don't believe

the candidate you support has a shot either! Who is that by the way?

[Seabiscuit]

221. Am I being addressed

by "Name Removed" or "Nonsense"?

Or by both? One and the same?

[ProSense]

227. Maybe I wasn't clear! Let me repeat that:

I don't believe the candidate you support has a shot either! Who is that by the way?

[Seabiscuit]

231. What's it to you?

And why the hostile tone?

And why the willful ignorance? If you don't know who "my candidate" is, how could you possibly claim that he/she "doesn't have a shot either"???

I gather I'm being addressed by "name removed", as you didn't answer my questions, and silence generally implies assent.

[ProSense]

233. It's easy,

if I believe my candidate has the best shot, it goes without saying that I believe the others do not!

Yes, I've had posts remove in this thread and others before.

Care to name your candidate?

[Seabiscuit]

241. Not at all surprising

that you've had your posts removed.

Look, DU can be a place where people can exchange ideas and share important information about what's going on in this political world.

Unfortunately, too often discussions like this become degraded into nasty exchanges because someone thinks they're morally superior to someone else or that their candidate/political idol is morally superior and the poster starts denigrating anyone who disagrees.

It's obvious you're a Kerry fan.

I'm not, never was, and never will be, albeit I am happy that Kerry has finally come around, beginning in 2005, to voicing many of the positions I've believed in for a long, long time.

Unfortunately for him, I remember 2003 and 2004 when he sung a very different tune.

I supported Dean in 2003. Once Kerry won the nomination in 2004 I swallowed my pride and supported him, with a lump in my throat.

I don't have a "candidate" for 2008. I'd love to see Al Gore run again, because I like him more than anyone out there.

I don't see many possibilities. It scares me.

Perhaps Clark. Perhaps Feingold. Perhaps a few others.

I don't know.

I'm not ready yet to commit.

I simply will NOT support Kerry for the primary in 2008. Period.
He's already betrayed us too many times on too many important issues. Period.

BTW, I'm old enough to know why those of us who are now called "progressives", whatever that means, opposed Hubert Humphrey in 1968. Undoubtedly, you are not.

[JimDandy]

207. Who DO you support for the 2008 Dem nomination?

That's more important for DUers to know (especially since you're a life-long Democrat) than who you DON'T support. Please state your reasons, too.

[NoodleyAppendage]

213. Gore, Clark, Feingold, Biden, Edwards...in that order.

Gore for obvious reasons.

Clark because he has the military bona fides and makes decisive statements. TVs well.

Feingold because he has been consistent and history has put him on the right side of the issues.

Biden because he projects a likablity and aire of authority that many would respond to.

Edwards, who if he had more foreign policy experience, would be higher on the list. Again, polls well in likability.

J

[blm]

217. Gore repeatedly warned Democrats about election fraud in 2001 and 2002.

.

[JimDandy]

237. Thanks for that. n/t

[Name removed]

208. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

210. Why do you keep calling people "Kerry operatives"?

Is that your way of saying your argument doesn't hold up against facts? Is that an admission that because someone can present the facts, they must be an operative?

That's lame don't you think?

[NoodleyAppendage]

215. Maybe it's the Kerry quote and link in your signature that's the tip off?

Duh...

J

[ProSense]

222. Huh? How on earth does

having a Kerry quote in my signature signal "Kerry operative"?

[confludemocrat]

226. Cause I like the sound of it for the accuracy it conveys about tiresome

Kerryites who never, ever concede a single point despite many valid critiques. You are operatives. and you know it. Like the person I originally responded to, if I thought had to, I could hold my nose and vote for him (as I did in 2004), but I hope I don't have to face such a circumstance.

[ProSense]

228. You can repeat it over and over as

such inaccuracies obviously make you feel better! Repetition doesn't change a lie into a fact. Here's another fact: the word "operative" doesn't change a fact into a lie. So that really is a lame comeback when faced with facts!

[confludemocrat]

230. Even if I was lame, which you call my incisive accuracy,

you're still a Kerry DU operative, relaying the talking points and using tactics similar to the other Kerry DU operatives. Anyway, I didn't use that term prior to your attributing its use to me, but I will now use it.

[ProSense]

232. You are still wrong!

"Anyway, I didn't use that term prior to your attributing its use to me.."


Really? In the real world post 208 (yours) comes before post 210 (mine).

[NoodleyAppendage]

214. I guess they think they can change the grassroots from the inside.

Personally, they come off as desperate and annoying with their pro-Kerry talking points and sycophantic drivel.

Welcome to the non-Kerry fan club. The secret is...there's more of us than them out there.

J

[ProSense]

223. You're have no answers so

you now must assume that because you don't, operatives are at work! Pathetic!


Share your thoughts here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2005985&mesg_id=2005985

[confludemocrat]

229. It's true, the-anybody-but-John-club IS the majority

and how do the Kerry quotes and flattering drawings or photos of the man in the signature do anything but signify their syncophancy and status as operatives? Plus the appending of goddess or princess to the name Kerry might also be a giveaway. And always, the tedious, lame accusation of delivering Repub talking points or being a freeper when one comments on JFKs opportunism and calculated, craven ways.

[ProSense]

234. Clearly not the case

since posts about Senator Kerry always attract the most attention, even from those few who proclaimed him irrelevant months ago. Why is that?

[NoodleyAppendage]

238. They attract the most responses because of the virulent pro-Kerry crowd.

You, Old Crusoe, and a few others are the ones who seek to perpetuate these threads. I'm done...no more free kicks in the thread list from me. But, feel free to retort, so your "hero" Kerry can get one more boost in the threads.

The bet offer still stands. Kerry = 2008 Nominee. Yes? I have $50 saying no.

J

[ProSense]

243. "who seek to perpetuate these threads." Is that what's bothering you:

that these threads exist? Wow!

[wisteria]

187. Senator Kerry deserves another shot at the Presidency. I hope he

decides to run in 08 or 12. It is good the election situation is finally coming to light.

[Bitwit1234]

209. Fair and Balanced

CNN on their website put the article up I saw the link but was reading my email. When I came back they took it off. How's that for fair and balanced. Bush is all over the front page tho.

[fshrink]

212. So now, we're asked to not "get over it."?

Which is it?

[RestoreGore]

218. What about 2000?

Didn't he tell us to stop crying in our tea cups about that?

[grizmaster]

219. About time, and welcome aboard Sen Kerry

Now let's start kicking some anti-American voter-hating repug ass.

[ProSense]

224. Anyone care to comment?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2005985&mesg_id=2005985

[NotGivingUp]

235. Why were you silent all these years, John? Too fucking late!! Way too

fucking late!!! God, that pisses me off! What kind of frigging game ya playin? Send your mail elsewhere...I ain't buyin.

[MH1]

240. He hasn't been silent at all. Read the posts above.

Kerry's been speaking out repeatedly on election reform and it's been posted on DU over and over.

Where've you been?

[NotGivingUp]

236. Go to hell, Kerry. It's too late to change anything at this point in time.

[wisteria]

245. What about future elections? Don't they matter to you? n/t

[orleans]

242. yeah, whatever n/t

[wisteria]

246. Way to go Senator Kerry. You have it right.

The media however, can't let it be known that you are correct, so they print a distorted piece that suggests something other than what your true motives are. They don't mention this is an issue you and the DNC have addressed long before now. They also didn't bother to even go back to some of their old reporting where there were many published incidences where Blackwell did all he could to interfere,mislead and deter certain groups of individuals from voting.