|
I was concerned at first about the Rolling Stone article, because it emphasized the Ohio vote suppression--and quoted Christopher Dodd early on (one of the villains of the electronic voting scam*)--and it seemed to downplay what I consider the far more insidious corruption of our entire election system with 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code in all the shiny new electronic voting systems, owned and controlled largely by two corporations, both with close ties to the Bush regime. This is a long term ENTIRELY HIDDEN vote-stealing capability, tested out nationwide for the first time in 2004. I believe that it was used to lay the groundwork for the theft in Ohio--that is, to lay the foundation of Bush's popular vote, and to tweak other close battleground states (needed for the Electoral Vote)--so that it all came down to Ohio, where the Bushites had an extremely corrupt Republican machine in place. The Ohio theft was highly visible, in many ways. It involved widespread violation of the Voting Rights Act, much of it in broad daylight. But the Republican machine worked hard to suppress the facts, and the national corporate news monopolies went along. (They also abetted the overall electronic vote stealing by doctoring their exit polls to match the results of Diebold's and ES&S's secretly tabulated "official count". They colluded in the stolen election. It's no surprise that they haven't covered it.)
Anyway, what I have gathered from the pre-Dean DNC (and to some extent the current DNC), from the Democratic Party in general, and even from courageous people like John Conyers and Barbara Boxer, and even some election reformers, is that it's okay to talk about the Ohio vote suppression but not about the engineering by Tom Delay, Bob Ney and the Anthrax Congress, of this vast new vote stealing system based on corporate control of the vote tabulation software inside the voting machines and central tabulators. It's been a taboo subject--mind-bogglingly so. And I've struggled with this. It just seems insane to me--that our party leadership would be silent about Bushite corporations gaining SECRET control over vote counting. Is it fear? Is it corruption? Is it collusion (including collusion on the war)? What? It's a complex picture, I think--not easy to sort out. Part of it is that many of the state/county election officials are now corrupt--they have bought into the culture of secrecy that Diebold/ES&S have fostered around elections; they like the heady power of esoteric, secret vote tabulation, and the lavish lobbying (millions spent on it) has done its work. They have been bought--many of them. And many Democratic office-holders are now beholden to these corrupt officials and to Diebold/ES&S and brethren, and are no longer beholden to us, the people, the voters. So even the best of them have to tread carefully.
There is also the problem that many of our elected officials--Dem and Repub--were (s)elected by Diebold and ES&S. Not just Bush. It's a Diebold Congress, too. So we have two branches of the government that are illegitimate, in my opinion. They gained office in highly non-transparent election conditions. And these have been appointing members of the third branch, the Supreme Court and the federal courts. Now, I tend to think that Democrats are more legitimately elected than Bushites--because Democrats tend to represent the interests and views of the majority of Americans. But how do we know? In these conditions of extreme non-transparency, how do we determine who was and who wasn't legitimately elected? It's virtually impossible. You can look to the somewhat better election conditions, say, in California and New York. But we had "trade secret," proprietary programming code--with very inadequate auditing (for this high-speed, secret vote tabulation environment)--even in California. (And there was an anomalous result in California--Kerry won the state by a 10% margin, Boxer by 20%--with all of the difference between them to be found only in the Republican counties. Figure that one out!) New York, as I understand it, has resisted Dieboldization--but I don't know if that's the whole state or just NYC. Anyway, there is an air illegitimacy and of toadyism to Bush around this Congress, and it's a very plain that the makeup of this Diebold Congress is entirely out of whack with the interests and opinions of most Americans. It almost a perfect flipover. If 60% to 70% of the American think one way, only 30% to 40% of Congress represents that interest, and Congress will vote the opposite way.
If the Democratic Party were to cry foul on the election system, what of the Democrats who went along with this system--never said boo about it*--and got (s)elected by it? It's an embarrassment, if nothing else. But their adamant, screaming silence about the matter makes you think of the something else. (Corruption? Fear? What?)
Anyway, so I was worried about RFK--that he was selling this peculiar Democratic Koolaid, that the whole problem was Ohio, and all the crimes that were committed there by the Republican thug machine, to deny blacks, the poor and other Democratic voters the right to vote. That--and voter roll purges--are certainly grave, and particularly ugly, crimes. But I don't think the Bushites stole it in Ohio, exactly. I think they stole it all over the country, and THEN hit Ohio. It was a combination punch. The remedy for Ohio was/is enforcement of the (late lamented?) Voting Rights Act. And that, too, adds more suspicions of widespread electronic fraud. Why would the Republicans feel so immune from the law, as to commit all the egregious shit they pulled in Ohio? It's as if they KNEW there would be no Congressional investigation to call them to task, and no law-abiding President to be troubled by their lawbreaking. They seemed to do it with a sense of perfect impunity. They could stomp all over poor black voters, kick them in the head for voting 80% Democratic, make them stand in 10-hour lines to vote, and all the rest--and who was there to stop them? Who would hold them accountable? They had NO FEAR of a Democratic majority in Congress, and NO FEAR of a Kerry administration (and Kerry Justice Department). And they had reason to fear--barring election fraud. The Dems blew the Repubs away in new voter registration in 2004, nearly 60/40. 20 million new people voted! That ALWAYS favors Democrats. There were many signs--yet they walked all over Democratic voters with jack boots on.
I then heard RFK on the radio, shortly after the Rolling Stone article was published, talking about a lawsuit against Diebold and other electronic voting corporations. It soon became clear that he was part of the lawsuit--he wasn't just reporting on it, or interviewing. And now, with this publication, it's very clear that he has grasped the WHOLE situation, not just the Ohio part.
It still concerns me that the "liberal establishment" is going to settle for optiscan machines with a paper ballot backup--that they may not insist on adequate auditing, and that they will ignore or compromise on the crucial matter of TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code. I think that's the one thing the Republicans will insist on removing from Holt's HR 550 (the ban on secret code)--or the compromise may be a ban on the secret code in the voting machines but NOT in the central tabulators. (The bill has a weakness there already.) But our elections will never ever be safe with ANY trade secret code in the system. And the corruption in the system is so widespread that we really need to take a BIG BROOM to it, and clean it out--throw out these machines, and throw out the people who purchased them. The culture of secrecy, and lavish lobbying, and "revolving door" employment must END. Groups like Common Cause want to "save" electronic voting. I can only suspect corporate influence. Democrats have OTHER ties to electronics in government which may be influencing their view of the matter as well. These are big money contracts.
I worry, worry, worry. It's hard to rejoice these days. There is so much WRONG that is being done. So much corruption. So much collusion. So much bullshit. But...praise where praise is due. RFK Jr. seems to be the ONLY major figure of what could be called the "liberal establishment" who has not only addressed this problem in its entirety but is addressing it in a strong way. And let's hope that Rolling Stone isn't playing corporate games (publishing these things now, in order to suppress the anti-Bush vote in November--via "it's all rigged" non-voting--and the issue will then be forgotten). (Rolling Stone remains independent--it's not owned by Time-Warner or anything--so we can hope that their motives are good, and they won't drop it later.)
RFK Jr. is actually to the Left of the "liberal establishment." He's been doing hard-nosed reporting on corporate wrong-doing on his radio show, Ring of Fire, from the beginning. That makes him a Leftist--that is, someone represents the interests of the vast middle in an activist way. The corporate news monopolies have so screwed with the "political spectrum" that the "red" part (corporations who believe in communism for rich people, and the corporate oil wars) takes up almost the entire spectrum. You have shades of red from radical fascists (blood red) to the mere greedy (pinko). The "blue" part of the spectrum is a tiny sliver way over at the (former) conservative end (believes in the Constitution, the rule of law and good government; wants to save New Deal programs like Social Security; weak, lily-livered liberal). That's how the Corporate Rulers try to portray American political choices and opinions, i.e., most Americans are Corporatists and Bushites.
The REAL spectrum, however--as reflected even in their own corporate opinion polls--is a vast "blue" middle, with the light blue part to the right being the new conservatives, the Democratic voters as described above (believes in the Constitution, etc.), the great blue middle being true conservatives on democratic traditions and the rule of law, and on the environment (CONSERVE it!), but also pro-union/workers, pro-small business, pro-social safety net, pro-community, pro-education, socially liberal/tolerant, somewhat anti-corporate (when they think about it), and antiwar or anti-Iraq war. Some part of this big blue middle still believes in big military spending, either because a lot of the few remaining jobs are military-related, or they think it makes us "safe." The new Left (dark blue) is everything that the vast middle blue is (with the exception of military spending--far Left wants reductions), only it's more activist and more structure-minded--with emphasis on regulating/busting corporate monopolies, restoring transparent elections (and restoring elections to the public venue), pro-UN/international peace and justice, anti-free trade (global free piracy), pro-fair trade, and strong environmentalist (urgent action needed to save the planet). Blue takes up about 60% to 70% of the spectrum. The "red" Bushites/fascists are 20%. Old-fashioned Republicans, 10% (going along with the junta for the ride). About 10% are gray--they swing back and forth. (Note: in the big blue middle, there are some Repubs who voted for Kerry--believe in the Constitution, hate Bush's deficit, don't like his war either).
On this REAL spectrum, RFK Jr. is dark blue--Leftist (majority)/activist.
(Boy, you really have to get detailed to describe anybody's politics these days. "Conservative" has come to mean its opposite, for instance. There is nothing "conservative" about the Bush junta. "Red" used to mean communist (far left). Now it means Big Brother programs for the rich. And I left out one group--Corporate or War Democrats. But that tends to be a small group--just the leadership (about half of it). There are few rank and file Democrats who would be as pro-corporate and/or pro-war as some of our (s)elected leaders. That should worry the leadership, don't you think?)
----------
*(All but two Dem US Senators voted FOR this Bushite piece of crap corporate voting scam--the so-called "Help America Vote Act." The two exceptions are a surprise--Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer voted against it. Christopher ('Bilderberg') Dodd engineered it in the Senate. His co-conspirators were the biggest crooks in the Anthrax Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney. All but 63 House members voted for it. The nay votes were mostly Dems, but included--another surprise--Sensenbrenner.)
|