True Blue Door
True Blue Door's JournalThe Demonym Game: A flock of geese, a school of fish, a ______ of Republicans.
I had a lot of fun playing this game a few years ago elsewhere, so I thought it might be fun here too in light of recent events. What is a properly descriptive term for a group of Republicans? Give as many answers as you want.
Vote: What was the worst act of GOP Treason ever?
Here is the short list of Republican acts of treason over modern history:
The Business Plot (1933)
A group of wealthy industrialists attempted to hire a WW1 general to lead a fascist revolution to overthrow the Roosevelt administration. It would initially be a bloodless coup, although given how such things typically evolve in history, it's unlikely it would have stayed bloodless. Fortunately the general was not on board with the idea and reported the plot, although the Roosevelt administration, wishing to avoid potentially creating divisions in the American people at a dangerous time, chose not to prosecute it.
Watergate (1972-1974)
The Nixon administration formed a secret squad within the White House to conduct illegal covert operations to steal information, suppress leaks, and spy on political opponents. Serious discussions were underway to evolve the organization into a secret police force that would assassinate the President's enemies by the time the scandal broke.
October Surprise (1980)
Members of the Ronald Reagan presidential campaign and Republican Party were in contact with representatives of the Iranian revolutionary state that was then holding hundreds of American diplomats hostage in Tehran. They sought to ensure that the hostages would not be released while President Carter could benefit politically from it, so they (the Reaganistas) struck a deal with avowed enemies of the United States to benefit themselves politically.
Iran-Contra (1984-1987)
The Reagan administration had been financing fascist terrorist groups in Central America, but the US Congress took a dim view of this and banned any further support. Reagan ignored the ban and continued funding them illegally. This did not rise to the level of treason (merely impeachable crime), but the method of generating the illegal funding did: Selling weapons to Iran, an avowed enemy of the United States.
The 2000 coup (2000)
A number of interlocking conspiracies led to the final, fraudulent result of the 2000 US presidential election, but the two key factors were the criminal defrauding of the Florida vote through mass-disenfranchisement and other illegal behavior by the Republican Florida Secretary of State. The final act, however, was the lawless and arbitrary ruling of five members of the US Supreme Court, ordering the state of Florida to stop counting votes, and using as justification such bizarre Orwellian reasoning as that thorough examination might yield a different result and thus call Bush's victory into question. It was the most naked example in US history of electoral interference, and overturned the actual result of the election through raw exercise of power.
The US Constitution remained in a state of suspension for the next 6-8 years as a result of the ensuing dictatorship, leaving only state governments and a few standalone federal bureaucracies in effective operation. The next two acts of Treason followed directly from this one.
Torture (2001-2008)
Following 9/11, for years on end thousands of terrorism suspects - including innocent people whose names merely resembled suspects, or who were denounced by paid informants in third-world countries - were held in secret prisons and tortured to confess and give the names of other "terrorists." Anyone they named in order to stop the torture was also likely to be tortured if captured. Several prisoners are documented by the Red Cross to have been tortured to death, but their remains are classified and tape recordings of their torture were burned by the CIA to avoid justice. Crimes for which German and Japanese military officers were hanged after WW2 were finally gleefully admitted by Republican officials once they felt confident of never being brought to justice, though only after years of lying denials.
Iraq War (2003-2011)
Iraq had not attacked the United States, did not have the military capability to attack the United States, had no plans to attack the United States, was not in any way involved with terrorists, and there was no evidence whatsoever to the contrary on any point. Nonetheless, the Bush regime fabricated intelligence to claim so, retaliated against US intelligence officials who contradicted their lies, bullied and threatened Congressional leaders who opposed them, sabotaged UN weapons inspections efforts, ignored a United Nations refusal to authorize action in Iraq, and ordered the aggressive invasion and conquest of Iraq at the expense of 5,000 US lives, 40,000 or so Iraqi civilians through direct US military action, and ultimately a million Iraqi civilians from the ensuing chaos and deprivation.
Aside from the human toll, it also cost the United States taxpayer over a trillion dollars, much of which was stolen through no-bid contractors associated with Dick Cheney who delivered inferior or nonexistent goods or services for the money. The current situation with ISIS is a direct result of the Iraq War, as is nearly 10% of the US national debt. Surplus equipment from the Iraq War was then given to local police departments, contributing to the militarization of police forces in the United States. Thousands were tortured as a direct result of this war. Once again, German and Japanese military officers after WW2 were executed for crimes identical to this.
Vote suppression (2000 onward)
The GOP has gradually perfected the "science" of rigging elections by preventing likely Democratic voters from exercising their rights, usually by targeting racial minorities for selective and extraordinary demands to prove their identities, leading a state of intimidation and deterrence against voting. In many cases Republicans achieve office solely because they illegally stopped a sufficient number of opposing voters from participating, effectively sabotaging American democracy and ruling by force and fraud. The number of Americans prevented from voting by Republicans tends to grow with each passing year.
Vote for which one of these you consider the worst Republican Treason, or add your own in comments.
Update: I forgot about Nixon in 1968 (before he was President) sabotaging Vietnam peace talks to give himself the leg up in the election. Thanks to KingCharlemagne for bringing that up in a comment. Vast numbers of American and Vietnamese lives were lost in the war in the years following, which may otherwise have been saved. If you want to vote for that as the worst GOP Treason, vote "Other".
It looks increasingly like Rick Scott's win is illegitimate. If so, what do we do?
DU user Hissyspit brought a very important Bill Moyers article to our attention illustrating some of the races where it looks like - or is close to looking like - vote suppression may have produced an illegitimate result. The most significant is the Florida Governor race, where it appears the margin of victory for Rick Scott is easily within the range of apparently disenfranchised voters.
If that proves to be the case, we need to emphasize what that means: It's not some mere technicality that taints the political mandate of a victor - it would mean that come inauguration day, Scott would be an unelected local tyrant whose acts carry no legal authority, but who is acting outside the law with the complicity of other officials. Meanwhile, it would also mean that his opponent, Charlie Crist, is the legitimate Governor-elect.
If, as time goes on, we find that Scott's official election was indeed illegitimate, what can we - and more importantly, Floridians - do with that information? One of the things that struck me about the aftermath of the 2000 Presidential election was the obsequious willingness of Democrats - and not just officials, but Democrats in general - to just accept a lawless Supreme Court verdict and surrender both the truth, justice, and democracy in service to some mirage of social harmony. Al Gore's surrender was particularly disgraceful, and the fact that most Democrats apparently wanted it was the most disgraceful thing of all, so a decade and a half later we all should reasonably demand more of ourselves and our party than that.
The government of a state, particularly one as large as Florida, is no less important than that of the whole nation, and in fact has more direct impact on people's lives. If it proves out that Rick Scott defrauded the election through his vote suppression schemes, then Florida Democrats need to (a)say so loudly and publicly, (b)demand their officials say so and act accordingly, (c)support whatever court cases need to ensue, and (d)when The Five fascist revolutionaries on the US Supreme Court declare Scott the winner regardless of what evidence is presented to them, they need to have a plan beyond that for civil disobedience and state-level political Cold War. Charlie Crist will probably not be much help, but it should be sought and demanded anyway.
Now, what do I mean by point (d)? Simply, Democrats in the Florida legislature would refuse to recognize Scott's authority, as would Democrats on every political level of the nation, and as would Democrats in the Florida Executive branch. Those on the state and local level would find as many ways as possible to publicly demonstrate this refusal of recognition and cause highly organized and disruptive spectacles. They would issue one demand, and it would be an absolute one: Rick Scott resigns and a special election be held with all legitimate voters allowed to vote. If that sounds radical, it isn't - we just live in such a politically enfeebled era that basic American citizenship sounds extreme.
If Scott is found illegitimate and this doesn't happen, then there is no Florida Democratic Party and the rank and file members of whatever it is that calls itself that would need to create one immediately within the fake one and take the mentioned steps. The same could be said for any other state where the same thing happens. But, of course, I reiterate that it is not yet proven that Scott's alleged victory is illegitimate - just highly likely.
I'm actually very relieved that - notwithstanding major concerns about the North Carolina Senate seat - that it doesn't appear (preliminarily) that the Senate flip is illegitimate. Resisting an illegitimate legislature is a much more nebulous strategic question than resisting an illegitimate Executive leader. Opposing an unelected Governor is far simpler in terms of political strategy and tactics.
Two lessons that Democrats constantly forget about American democracy.
1. Americans usually vote for candidates, not issues.
This fact is partly why the left isn't as represented as it could be - it prefers to emphasize issue conversations and de-emphasize the personal qualities of candidates, undermining some natural advantages that could otherwise be decisive.
It's also why moderate Democrats unnecessarily run away from strongly progressive positions: Not because they don't share them, but because they falsely believe it will impact their electability. It doesn't. It doesn't increase the electability of left-wing progressives, and it doesn't decrease the electability of moderates to be associated with progressive issues. Rather, issues derive credibility from their association with strong candidates, not the other way around. When we win, it is not necessarily an endorsement of our issues; when we lose, it is not necessarily a repudiation of our issues. This is basically just a restatement of the Overton Window principle.
2. Never concede or appear to concede enemy propaganda.
If a liar always lied, they wouldn't be dangerous. What makes them destructive is their selective use of truth as a weapon of deceit. The Republican narrative of an unpopular President torpedoing Democratic election chances contained a kernel of fact - that the President's approval ratings are in the minority - to produce a web of heinous fiction. And rather than slice through that web, which would have served both them and the President and the Party, many Democrats simply accepted it and sabotaged themselves by reinforcing an appearance of weakness and discord. They took no responsibility for improving the circumstances and public perception thereof, but simply reacted like prey animals.
---
When these two lessons are remembered, we win big. When they are forgotten, we lose big. And when some do and some don't, we end up with mixed results.
Please stop posting the following idiotic bullshit:
1. Claiming that American culture is conservative.
2. Broad smears about American voters.
3. Media-driven narratives about America as a whole choosing the GOP.
4. Whining about the Democratic Party or its leaders.
We have watched the Republican Party prepare this result for a long time through utterly lawless, criminal, and to some extent treasonous means, including nakedly unconstitutional vote suppression tactics, the elimination of campaign finance laws through fascist revolutionary judicial fiat, and other methods that go far beyond their otherwise legitimate fuckery (e.g., campaign lying). We know for a fact they engaged in crime to produce this result - we just don't know if they would have won anyway.
So we still do not know whether these criminal tactics were decisive. In other words, we don't know yet whether the result bears any meaningful resemblance to what actually happened at the polls. So don't waste anyone's time whining about what this election means, or who is to blame for it, unless you have something factual to contribute to serve as a basis, because you can't know the significance of events whose details you don't even know.
Every election that Republicans win or steal, the same script plays out. The same idiotic bullshit listed above gets said, so predictably that the process might as well be automated. Well stop it. Stop acting like robots. Stop being prompted by the media. Their scripts are written in advance - years in advance, frankly - but yours don't have to be. You are conscious human beings, so act like it.
Start asking important questions and putting together information to answer them. When you have your answers, then start talking about what to do with them. Here are the questions I have:
1. How many voters do we know firmly to have been illegally excluded nationwide?
2. How many local, state, and federal seats were decided on the basis of voter exclusions?
3. Was this decisive in determining the Senate?
4. Was it decisive in determining state legislatures?
5. Governorships?
6. Were other problems that have been identified decisive in any of these races?
7. Is the Party actively investigating these problems, and the effects of vote suppression?
8. Will the Party declare races decided due to vote suppression fraudulent?
9. If it is found that the Senate majority was determined by vote suppression, is the Party prepared to declare GOP attempts to assume control of the Senate fraudulent and resist any illegal actions they attempt to take?
Until we have at least some answers to these questions, there is nothing else to say in a broad way about the election. Individual races can be commented upon competently, but anything broader in the absence of specific facts is just either speculation or media propaganda parroting unworthy of a strong citizen.
Is the GOP Senate result legitimate?
Taking into account the number of voters prevented from voting in affected states due to Jim Crow 2, is the GOP Senate majority legitimate? Please do not speculate - specific information only.
Does anyone here vote on judicial elections?
I want to be as involved as I can, but every time a ballot comes with judicial candidates - at least in my experience - there is absolutely no basis for a citizen to make a decision on them. There are no candidate statements from them, no campaign websites, nothing - just a list of names that might as well be random strings of letters for all they mean anything.
My best guess - or rationalization - is that it's a release valve in case a judge is so outrageous and infamous that someone wants them thrown off an elected bench by waging a campaign against them. But I've never in my entire life run into a situation like that in my voting experience.
So does anyone here vote in judicial elections? What basis do you use, since there's no listed political affiliations, no candidate statements, and no apparent campaigns whatsoever? Or is it different where you live?
We should know by now which races are rigged. Do we?
By now we should already have a firm accounting of voters who have been denied the right to vote due to Jim Crow 2, and have a good statistical grasp of what districts their exclusion will be decisive in. So I'd like to know the following if anyone has this information:
1. How many do we know firmly to have been excluded nationwide?
2. How many more may be excluded on election day?
3. How many local, state, and federal seats is this likely to be decisive in?
4. Is this likely to be the decisive factor in determining control of the Senate?
5. Are there any states whose legislatures will fall - or fail to become Democratic - due to Jim Crow 2?
6. Governorships?
7. Is the Democratic Party prepared to call races where Jim Crow 2 is decisive fraudulent?
8. Is the Democratic Party prepared to call the loss of the Senate or statehouses fraudulent if due to Jim Crow 2?
9. Has the Democratic Party prepared effectual strategic and tactical mechanisms to resist the illegal political actions of such illegitimate office thieves, when The Five fascist revolutionaries on the Supreme Court inevitably find in favor of their accomplices?
10. Assuming the Democratic Party will do nothing, probably because Hillary Clinton (superb Republican that she is) will say not to, does anyone else have a plan?
Profile Information
Name: BrianGender: Male
Hometown: Southern California
Member since: Mon Oct 28, 2013, 05:48 PM
Number of posts: 2,969
