What the hell is with these Senators?

[Vektor]

I am racking my brain trying to figure out what in th hell is going on in the minds of these people. Reasons they might not be willing to contest the election:

1) No conclusive evidence of fraud.
WHAT? So what color is the sky in the world YOU live in? It doesn't take a mental giant to do a few points and clicks and find more evidence than one can shake a stick at. Are they really that clueless? Do some research, Senators! This is your job! This election STINKS with fraud and irregularities. Hello?

2) It's "political suicide."
Really? And losing all Democratic power in the House and Senate, and the White House as well is not? Allowing the Repugs get that much talked about 60-40 filibuster ratio is somehow going to HELP your career? You think they won't swipe it? It'd be REAL easy to steal. Dems don't stand up and protest after all! Illegally taking votes from a Democrat is like taking candy from a baby these days! How about alienating your constituents and forcing them to flee to third parties because you didn't stand up for them? Go ahead, keep letting the fraud go on. Sit down and don't say a word. Give up any grain of power you have remaining and give into the machine.

If that's not suicide, I don't know that is.

3) "The people have spoken. They want George Bush as President."

:puke:

Ya think so? Do YOU want Bush as President, Senator Kennedy? How about you, Senator Boxer? Nelson? Byrd? Kerry? ANY OF YOU?

Then what the hell makes you think anyone else does?

The people have not "spoken". Oh, they TRIED to speak. They tried like HELL. They turned out in droves in Ohio and stood in the freezing rain to try to speak, but they were turned away. Disenfranchised. Silenced.

Are you going to speak, Senators? We elected you to do so, so get cracking. If it's too much "hard work" to do so, then we'll relieve you of that hard work next election cycle.

With that, I go to tear out my hair and beat my cranium against a wall.

[autorank]

1. "Alex, I'll take WIMPS for $400"

[Vektor]

2. My god, it's awful, isn't it?

I did not elect these people for this!

[autorank]

11. Nor did then intend to do this when they ran.

They are afraid to take a leap of faith. Since no Democrat has *consistently* showed passion (except Byrd) for an extended period of time, they don't have a model of what a shit-kicker politician can do or how he/she behaves (unless they look across the aisle). Therefore, they are afraid to act with out a guarantee of success. This is my opinion anyway. Sometimes you just have to do your job...like that security guard in the Watergate years ago. He just did his job, phoned in the crime, and the rest is history. It's their job but they are fearful that by doing it, they'll lose their jobs. It's never going to be safe challenging the * machine. So what, live life, stand up for what you believe. People do it every single day all across this country, just do the right thing.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

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

[Amaryllis]

149. SEE THIS which addresses what is wrong with them:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss//duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x231848

[FreepFryer]

3. Whatever they intend to do

WE WILL NOT HEAR OF IT HERE FIRST.

Ignore all the yapping in here about how horrible our Senators are, at least until Jan. 6 afternoon.

It's madcap freepery in an overdrive campaign of disinfo. And it ain't working.

The Senators will act in such a way as to maximize Democratic strength.

And yes, them freeplets OUGHT to be afraid. As a result of the Bush era, the neocon days in power are done, by their own utter incompetence. They'll learn that as they're perp-walked out of office.

All that can keep them in power is a stolen election... oh, wait.

[Vektor]

6. I hope you're right, FF!

The only reason I'd be inclined to lose faith is because it happened in 2000. Not one damn Senator stood up.

That scares me.

[Jo March]

9. Then call them! Fax them information about the fraud

Don't let them say that they didn't know! Fax them information.

[FreepFryer]

12. Exactly.

Communicate your intentions and concerns in a respectful manner, as you would prefer others to communicate with you.

The freepers are TERRIFIED of this grassroots effort. The scope and impact of what we're doing has NEVER BEFORE been seen.

Trust. Believe. Defend.

Do the Right Thing and Reject the Right Wing.

[Jo March]

25. No defeat. NO surrender. nt

[Vektor]

31. I have been....

...contacting the appropriate people. Some of it seems to be getting through. We'll see.

[BamaBecky]

73. me too..............n/t

[bunny planet]

21. Thank you FreepFryer. They are certainly alot of them around for you to

fry today.

[googly]

131. Can't see how it helps even if some senators protest....

the repugs have majorities in both houses, all the chairmanships
of ALL committees, they have 5-4 SCOTUS, they have Blackwell,
they have majority in both houses in Ohio. I am not gonna hold
my breath waiting for shrub to be kicked out of the white house.
Let's face it, we are stuck with fascism for the next 4 years.

[Walt Starr]

4. There is no conclusive evidence for fraud

Nobody has yet presented a shred of evidence to support the fraud charges, only statistical manipulations, conjecture, supposition, and innuendo.

It would be political suicide to contest an election based upon no evidence.

Ergo, the people have spoken.

Got evidence? Present it, but it will still change nothing. Bush won. Bush will be declared the winner in the Senate in 3 days. Bush will be inaugurated on January 20th. Even if you do have evidence now, it's too late to change that, so I suggest you turn it over to the FBI.

December 13 was the drop dead date. Anything after that was false hope being spread willy nilly on DU and a few other blogs.

[mzmolly]

7. You are unfortunately correct. Our only hope is to prove fraud

down the road, and if we do ... ?

[Walt Starr]

10. If we do, all we will accomplish is tainting Bush's presidency

but that is unlikely because it is highly doubtful the media would touch it.

The REpublicans in Congress will NEVER NEVER EVER impeach Bush, let alone see him convicted in the Senate!

[mzmolly]

16. Perhaps. I guess it depends on the extent of any fraud?

and if a connection to the * campaign can be proven :(

[Walt Starr]

20. I don't think there will EVER be a proven connection to the Bush campaign

:shrug:

[FreepFryer]

34. Why doesn't that surprise me.

Would you prefer they keep it quiet, if there were?

[Walt Starr]

37. Probably becuase you've noticed I take the realistic view to this

rather than the fantasy view so often expressed around here.

The size of the conspiracy required to commit fraud in Ohio is so huge, it will be proven beyond a reasonable doubt if it did indeed happen.

In fact, the size required is so huge, it should have already been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. You cannot keep a secret that big for this long.

[FreepFryer]

41. when 'should' becomes 'is',

we'll appoint you guardian of causality.

In the meantime, I'd rather trust the work of civil rights leaders and vote fraud investigators.

Based on my own personal convictions and experiences in D.C., I am certain they would not create allegations of fraud in order to further their own agendas.

Are you certain of the reverse? Thought not.

[Walt Starr]

Name one of the conspirators

One, just one, that can be proven to have engaged in a whidespread conspiracy wihtin all of the offices of election officials thorughout Ohio, because some of them had to be Democrats.

Prove a single conspirator.

You can't. There was no conspiracy. Bush won. Kerry was a piss poor choice.

[FreepFryer]

44. Don't ask

A fellow citizen for such proof to validate your beliefs. It's not my place to convince you there was fraud any more than it is yours to convince DU there was none.

Find it yourself.

But first, try a nap - you're a little rusty.

[Walt Starr]

48. Ahhh, can't do it

because no fraud exists on the widescale tinfoilhat level being alleged!

[FreepFryer]

49. Your logic is as sharp as a baseball

dull, that is.

Asking a single poster for 'proof' of fraud is patently stupid. Not only is there a deluge of evidence and testimony to choose from, there's no validation yet on any of the evidence.

And, being a true Liberal, it would be wrong to claim proof until AFTER an official investigation.

You really should read some Plato.

[Walt Starr]

53. You're the one alleging it

I called you on it. You cannot prove it, so it remains an OPINION and a Senator cannot contest a presidential election based solely upon OPINION unless he desires to commit political suicide.

[FreepFryer]

55. Your descent into irrelevance

Needs no further help from me.

G'nite y'all!

[Walt Starr]

58. What's irrelevent is bothering Senators

trying to convince them to ruin their careers.

[FreepFryer]

64. HAHAHAHAHAHA! We have a winner!

Yep. Gotta be the stupidest thing I've heard today. Congrats.

Folks, please stop bothering your elected officials. It's not like that's the whole idea of Representative Democracy.

Walt, your agenda is showing.

[Walt Starr]

67. What agenda?

I've been on DU from the beginning. I've seen every last bullshit, "this is it, Bush is toast" bulshit thing tossed out there I KNOW when I am seeing false hope expressed.

Dude, it's false hope. There was no widespread fraud and alleging it when it didn't happen will only harm efforts to reform the electoral process!

[FreepFryer]

72. I have a hamburger with fries on the table more intellectually challenging

I'm getting nauseous from your avoidance.

It's been fun, and I look forward to your next post trying to kill hopefulness. Can you give me 30 minutes or so before I jump back into the pool?

[Walt Starr]

74. Fallacy of ad hominem

Accusing me of being a Freeper is the most laughable thing I've ever seen on DU.

[FreepFryer]

76. Didn't do that.

As you know.

God, your posts' penchant for valuelessness is stultifying.

[Walt Starr]

80. Actually, you have several times

Ad hoim inems are unbecoming. Forcing threads to descend into flamefests are even more unbecoming tactics.

[FreepFryer]

84. So stop. Read what I posted, stop your projections, and grow wiser.

Good luck.

[saracat]

125. Who would ruin them? The Repukes? They already hate them!

Who should they be afraid of? The DLC? What? If so ,we don't need them!

[Walt Starr]

135. Think at least 60% of the Dems

who do not buy into the "widespread conspiracy of election fraud" BULLSHIT!

[saracat]

136. Oh, Please. Like they would vote against them for standing up for

election integrity! The same argument that is used about the lefty's having to vote Dem as there is no where else to go applies here. Who else would they vote for? Sheesh, And your 60% is way off. I live in a red state and most Dems and Republicans believe the election was stolen. Some feel it can't be prov-en but they know it was rigged. And you don't think there was fraud? What were they"understandable mistakes'? My god, and you think we are naive! If you ask me, you need the tinfoil hat. But perhaps you feel a little bit of fraud is acceptable, so why rock the boat? You must be afraid the politico's will lose their nonexistent "political capital" and not be able to exercise the "nonexistent bipartisanship that worked so well for Max Cleland and Jean Carnahan! You seem awfully threatened by Duer's taking action. I don't know why you persist. Let us do what we believe is the right thing and you don't have to participate.

[IStriker]

126. You are not having any problem asking for a senator to challenge...

an election before there is an investigation or proof of fraud. Think about what you are asking one of these elected officials to do. If this doesn't seem strange when you stop and think about it, it's because you are incapable of logical thought.

[FreepFryer]

138. 'before' there is an investigation? NO...

'BECAUSE' there is an investigation. With massive volumes of evidence, testimony and disenfranchised voters.

[Eye_on_prize]

132. why do you waste our time and energy trying to shut people up who

are attempting to stay focused on doing all we can in a short period of time to influence how this comes down on Jan 6th? Whaz up with that?

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but I feel you've made your point - the same point -- over and over and over.

Geez. :mad:

[Walt Starr]

134. I'm your reality check

too many people flying off into fantasyland these days.

[shraby]

93. Blackwell, by closing poll books

and Triad for manipulating the machines with no supervision. Both actions are prima facia of fraud according to Ohio and Federal laws.

[Vektor]

98. That's what I meant...

Blackwell is knee-deep in it. Hiding information, and not making it available to the public is not acceptable. Our Senators should be LIVID.

[saracat]

124. Delete responded to wrong post!

[saracat]

127. Some poster have piss poor reasoning on this issue and let their own bias

dictate their position!

[IStriker]

128. Their agenda is showing

[IStriker]

123. Especially when it would have involved the consent of both parties...

or the outstanding stupidity of nearly every elected Democrat county official in Ohio. That's the biggest reason I find it impossible to buy into the wishful thinking accompanied by lots of allegations and not a scintilla of evidence.

[grays4u]

140. Love your posts

Are you an attorney as well, walt?

[Vektor]

47. Tainting is a good start!

:-)

[FreepFryer]

13. and another

naysay by Walt.

I can't help but look at your pattern and ask, just what's it doing for you? Does it please you to make incorrect statements in response to encouraging factual ones?

Or do you think you're doing the right thing by misspeaking?

[Walt Starr]

17. I'm trying to wake people the fuck up!

False hope is damaging, both to DU and to any hope for the future.

[FreepFryer]

26. It's not false hope.

But you're so certain it is that you would make it so for others.

I question the value of that approach, it has NEVER worked.

Why not wait 'til Jan 7. before you appoint yourself the 'disappointment' protector for the DU community.

In the meantime, try a bit of daydreaming, mixed with sending out 100 letters to Reps and Interest Groups expressing your views. You may feel like you can make a bit more difference.

[Walt Starr]

33. Dude, drop dead date under U.S. Code and political reality

was December thirteenth if you wanted to prove fraud and overturn the election.

After that date, believing that Kerry could still become president is FALSE HOPE because there is absolutely no way it will happen!

[FreepFryer]

35. Dude, wrong.

You're welcome to your interpretation - but you're just plain wrong.

Thanks for once again trying to convince someone (me) with inaccurate info tho - it's kinda cute.

[Walt Starr]

40. Oh, so let's say some Democratic Senator commits political suicide

and contests. How are you going to get a majority of the Senators to go along with that lone suicidal Senator? Let's even assume every last member of the Democratic Senate Delegation decides to go out in a blaze of suicidal glory and contest. Name the six Republican Senators who will also contest?

And after that, tell me the roughly 70 or 80 Republican Congresspersons you'll get to cross the line to vote against Bush after the entire Democratic Senatorial delegation commits political suicide along with six Republican Senators?

Political reality, dude. It ain't happening. Bush WILL be declared president on January 6 and inaugurated on January 20th.

[FreepFryer]

43. Again,

You simplify in order to distort.

Regardless, I am not interested in your attempts to teach me about a Constitutional process with which I am already well aware.

Regardless of the (un)likelihood, the goal is not to unseat Bush (but you know that by now). The goal is to inform and organize American and Democratic thought around this issue to prevent what was an obviously tainted election.

And it will work.

The goal is to create a new dynamism in the party.

And it will work.

And, the goal is to put the GOP on notice that their political days are numbered.

And it's already working.

[Walt Starr]

50. The goal is to ruin a Democratic Senator's career

because that is all that would be accomplished by such a foolish move.

[FreepFryer]

54. Yes, that's your goal. You've tried against about a dozen since yesterday.

Clinton, Feinstein, Leiberman, Dayton, etc.

Did I miss anyone else who you'll abandon as useless on Jan 6?

I'd hate to be inaccurate...

[Walt Starr]

56. WTF????

:wtf:

Please, formulate a coherent argument and present it.

[FreepFryer]

60. i did that about four posts back.

See? Rest.

[Walt Starr]

65. I have yet to see a coherent argument from you

:shrug:

Ah well, platitudes and suppostion is all I ever see on this subject from, as Kos puts it, the "fraudsters".

:eyes:

[FreepFryer]

68. Freeplike projections

Where one accuses another of what they themselves do (or don't do) as their means of avoiding responsibility.

I think we're hitting the bottom of your barrel of tricks, Walt. And it's getting unbecoming.

[Walt Starr]

71. Sorry, but personal attacks are what's unbecoming

Accusations of me being a Freeper demonstrates you lack of an argument. It's the fallacy of ad hominem.

[FreepFryer]

75. Not a single personal attack by me, at all. Read Plato.

I made an extensive argument, and merely described your endgame tactics as freeperesque. Your projection made it personal (that's another Freeper tactic I've seen).

Get better - read Plato.

[Walt Starr]

78. Accuasations of me being a Freeper are personal attacks

I've read Plato. I suggest you take a course in debate.

[FreepFryer]

82. Not what I did.

As you know. But again, your willingness to misstate is again deliciously evident.

Thanks!

[SicTransit]

99. Walt, give up -

your opponent's posts have no content except for ad hominems. Why waste your time?

[bones_7672]

52. Yep, that's why they INCREASED their lead in House & Senate. n/t

[Vektor]

59. Are you ok with that?

Because I think they pulled a fast one, and we'll be living under the oppressive thumb of the Bush monarchy forever. I, unfortunately think you may be right about them pulling this off, but I just want our Senators to defend principle and ask, "Why are people so willing to accept the results of an election riddled with irregularities when we were not willing to do that in the Ukraine?"

You know what I'm saying?

[Walt Starr]

62. 2004 USA does not rise to the level of Ukraine 2004

Apples to oranges, man.

[FreepFryer]

66. along with you becoming master of time and space

we appreciate all the help with those apples and oranges too.

...something's frying...

[Walt Starr]

70. What's frying is tinfoil attempts to allege widespread fraud conspiracy

when none happened!

[FreepFryer]

79. yawn

your meager, illconceived protestations have become most tiresome.

[Walt Starr]

83. FreepFryer, this is becoming a flamefest

completely onesided. I suggest you give it a rest or worse occurences could happen.

[FreepFryer]

85. 'suggest you give it a rest'

I have been asking you to stop for a while now.

I'm glad to stop, and not nearly so petty as to maneuver for the 'last word', which I hope you are as well.

We'll see!

[Walt Starr]

87. Then stop already

I'll teach you a lesson about DU. You can ignore me. Click the ignore button and you never ever have to read another post of mine as you will never even see them.

Seeing as how I've been here damn near four years and you have maybe four days, I figured you could use a pointer.

[FreepFryer]

88. Didn't you just ask to stop the flamefest?

Followed by an attack?

Doesn't seem like 'respectful old-timer' behavior.

I'll honor my previous post and stop this tit-for-tat FOR you.

[Walt Starr]

89. I'm only giving you pointers about how you can use DU features

Seeing as how you have such a problem with my posts.

[FreepFryer]

91. Thank you so very much

<snark>
I had no idea a sophisticated technology like 'ignore' was possible. Do we have emoticons too?
</snark>

[Walt Starr]

92. You're welcome

Your protestations were so vociferous I was certain you were unaware of the feature.

[FreepFryer]

94. Yes, I was aware of the feature.

Look forward to your next, last word. Planning another insult?

[Walt Starr]

95. What insult?

Like insinuating I'm a Freeper or someting?

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

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

[Walt Starr]

129. Actually, they must be rather intriguing!

You keep answering them!

[Vektor]

81. How so?

My only comparison is that in the Ukraine, there was doubt of legitimacy, as there is here, and they were all over it in the Ukraine.

Why not the USA?

Why do you feel they are so different? Not an attack, just a question.

[Vektor]

45. Walt -

I am not saying that Kerry will become president if a Senator stands up.

(As an aside, I think 6 weeks is not nearly enough time to investigate a pimple on someone's ass, much less a case of this magnitude. The December 13 cut-off is BULL SHIT.)

At any rate, what I AM saying is that there is ample evidence to suggest widespread irregularities. Anyone who claims that everything went fine on Nov. 2 should try telling that to the person in Ohio who stood in line for 10 hours in the pouring rain and never got to vote. That alone shows we need to address this issue. There are a multitude of complaints and testimonials on file from people who had and witnessed all sorts of problems on Election Day, mostly in the crucial swing states. All of these irregularities favored Bush.

I just cannot see the merit in allowing all of these irregularities to go unchallenged. It's a betrayal to the voters who stood in line.

[Vektor]

38. EXACTLY!

No case is ever a slam dunk from the get go. I would MUCH rather ask questions and raise objections than sit idly by and do nothing when there may be a problem. If the election smells fishy, people need to speak up. There's no denial involved. To suggest so is absurd. If we don't trust that our elections are being conducted fairly, we need to pursue that. There's nothing else to it. To leave well enough alone and stick our heads in the sand is suicide for all progressives everywhere.

[BamaBecky]

77. Just curious, any luck? I'm not having much luck at it. n/t

[mzmolly]

23. Mr. Starr has been a long time member of DU and isn't afraid to go

against the "grain" of the echo chamber here at DU.

Walt was a Dean supporter because he believes in speaking truth to power. He's entitled to an opinion that differs from yours.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[FreepFryer]

32. The last refuge of a scoundrel

Of Course Walt is welcome to his opinion. He's even welcome to try to convince others.

I would never have claimed otherwise - to do so would be, well, disenfranchisement.

And Liberals DO NOT ACCEPT DISENFRANCHISEMENT.

THAT IS WHY WE ARE ASKING FOR A CHALLENGE.

See? Getting any clearer? Can you say 'civil liberties'?

Knew you could.

[mzmolly]

120. Can you say happens every election?

Can you say people registering for the Democrats supposedly registered homeless people and provided them with crack? What's that called?

Would it be enough to challenge an election were Kerry the winner?

[cali]

18. Well said, Walt.

I've never seen anything like the denial being expressed here. I'd love to see clear and convincing evidence that fraud was the cause of JK's loss. If there's a conspiracy that widespread, there must be witnesses- a lot of them. I can't believe that we can't dig up one credible witness. I don't doubt incidences of fraud, and voter suppression. I deplore voting without a paper trail. We do need election reform. But, as you said, Dec. 13 was the drop dead date. A couple of Senators refusing to certify will accomplish nothing.

[Vektor]

28. I've never seen anything like the level

of APATHY here.

"Evidence" does not fall into your lap. You have to LOOK for it. If something smells rotten it needs to be investigated. If anyone is going to claim that there was nothing even remotely wrong with the election proceedings, they haven't paid attention.

Jesus.

Should we have told Laci Peterson's mom "well, sorry, we have no HARD evidence, so smoking gun, no body, no murder weapon - get over it, Can't prove anything, give it up." Should we say this in any case of illegal activity?

What I am saying, is that this election REEKS. There was corruption all over the place, and not too many doubt that. Therefore to assure the protection of our Democracy, it needs to be looked into. Someone needs to stand up and say, "this isn't right."

[BamaBecky]

90. Your right it REEKS, I just don't know if wwe have an integrity left in DC

[Vektor]

96. I'll cross my fingers...

..and hope for the best. I want to be able to have faith in our elections process.

[SicTransit]

116. Vector, if you really want to have a Congressional investigation

of the 2004 election, or any kind of discussion or action on electoral reform in Congress, you better hope that there is no Senator who stands up on Jan 6th to challenge the election without hard proof of fraud.

Because once that happens, no Republican in Congress will be willing to cooperate with any Democrats on this issue. Not one. Since in order to launch a Congressional investigation or do anything about electoral reform you need at least a few Republicans to go along, neither of these things will be possible. So - for a couple of hours of grandstanding you're willing to give up on the issues that you claim you care about.

[Vektor]

145. I'm certainly not ready to give up...

...on the issues I care about. We'll have to see what happens. I'm not sure any Republican is EVER going to be ready to agree to any kind of election reform. Obviously, the current "system" works for them!

[pacalo]

137. If something reeks (good word, Vektor) for miles & miles,

it most definitely needs to be investigated.

And we do have witnesses; among them, those who sacrificed hours of their workdays to stand in line to vote, those who were harassed by Repug poll watchers, those who went to the same polling precincts at which they had voted for years but were given provisional ballots (which are easily dismissed), those press people & independent observers who were turned away from the Warren County elections commission building due to a "Homeland Security alert", etc. In addition, there are "scores of sworn affidavits and the on-going work of teams of attorneys, statisticians and other experts (which) have revealed far more points of contention and suspicion", as pointed out in a Free Press article.

I feel the same way you do, Vektor: If the media can motivate this country into a frenzy by devoting around-the-clock coverage of a murder trial that was based on circumstantial evidence, our congresspeople can surely respect our votes with no less scrutiny than a bank audit. Fact is, there were many legitimate complaints in this election that tells us this election REEKS of fraud.

[Vektor]

147. Thanks...

I can't help it. I know there are many out there who would tell me there's nothing I can do about it...but I just cannot stand the thought of letting this sort of thing slide unchecked. Those voters who were disenfranchised deserved better. Those of us who were eligible to vote deserved to have our votes properly counted. All of us should be able to trust our elections. It peeves me that we cannot.

[KittyWampus]

42. I've Never Seen The Level Of DENIAL. A Complete Unwillingness To

look at ALL the evidence.

To constantly bleet the same misinformation about there being no evidence of fraud or that the conspiracy would have to be SOOOO big... says something about these posters.

Some, I think, are Dean supporters who prefer to say KERRY lost... and subconciously think BUT DEAN WOULD HAVE WON.

[Vektor]

61. This has crossed my mind too. n/t

[pacalo]

141. I like Howard Dean, but there's no way he would have won

against election fraud, either. In fact, the way Dean retreated from his enthusiastic bantor (which I liked) after the corporate media dutifully raked him through the coals for the Repugs showed weakness. And that was just during the Democratic primaries. By November 2nd, he may have been a basket case. If Dean had continued being himself & not bowed to the criticism, I might be feeling differently about him.

We had the best candidate in John Kerry. For anyone to say otherwise, it's sour apples. Election fraud beats any candidate.

[Vektor]

19. So why are they still filing motions?

Everything that has been submitted to the courts, the whole mountain of it is "guesswork?" Nothing is even remotely conclusive? Was it only conjecture that Dem leaning precincts had far fewer machines than needed, and Repubs has extra? That alone is a problem. That alone demonstrates disenfranchisement. How can a Senator allow this? There are a million other issues, and none of them look good for the Republicans who manufactured this. If it's all speculation, then why bother? What are the Greens doing? I'm sure there is more than enough material to warrant an objection, to demand further investigation.

All cases start out like this...you HAVE to investigate fully BEFORE you have all your evidence. That's how you get the evidence. Our Senators should demand that we go balls out and look into this matter! There are more than a few people objecting to the legitimacy of a Bush "win".

[whalerider55]

22. walt, I am ever deferential to you, but...

on this one we might differ.

i believe that there is enough indication, through testimony, affidavits and other sources that there was an effort, in key states to undermine the ability of people to vote (indictments in Nevada for shredding dem registrations by those republican operatives who were transferred to Ohio, e.g.) that a public statement is critical. I believe the dienfranchisement effort was probably sketched out at a high level, immediately after 2000, but that is conjecture and not worth the time to investigate. I do believe that the effort was highly decentralized, and entirely predictable and therefore avoidable by the dems.

it would be symbolic, and leave us in no worse shape than we are now as a movement of party.

it would be a message that among other things, dems stand for enfranchisement; and unlike other things it is something the dems will fight for.

maybe bush won, maybe he didn't. we don't really know. and we should. but i have bneen much more concerned with downticket races and whether they were affected by voter disenfranchisement\ intimidation, suppression (surely you can accept the produced evidence of these behaviours)and possible fraud.

if you don't have a majority in the legislature, you get BBV. If you don't have a Sec'y of state who is a dem, you get harrised and blackwelled.

i think standing up for enfranchisement on the floor of the Congress is appropriate.

whalerider55

[JoAnnSimon]

63. Well said whalerider55

I lived through Watergate, and I remember the poo-pooing of the initial charge, but as evidence gradually grew, through the hard work of those who refused to be rolled, the whole story gradually came out; then came the tidal wave of evidence resulting in Nixon's resignation in disgrace.

I see those of us who continue to seek evidence of fraud as the truth-seekers--citizens who refuse to be rolled. We're not accepting half-answers. We know that something was terribly wrong in the conduct of the 2004 election, and we won't stop until all the facts are on the table. That voter turn out should be so large; that people were willing to stand in long lines, under harsh conditions in order to vote, just doesn't compute with casting a vote for the incumbent.

I think the original Exit polls were correct. Consider that in uncontested states with little to no electronic voting machines, the Exit Polls were within a percentage point or two of the final vote Tally. Only in battleground states, which used a high percentage of electronic voting machines, were there large discrepancies between Exit Polls and the final vote Tally--and all those discrepancies favored Bush.

[Jo March]

24. Walt, you have posted many, many times on DU

and I respect you because you have been here for way longer than me. (I think.) :)

I do think that we can send the Senators what we have and let them decide. What is the worst they can do? Tell us no? We are prepared for that, believe it or not.

To do nothing, to stand and watch it all unfold without action is not the answer. * will be inaugurated but so what?? So what if he is? We have still got to fight and fight hard against this regime and what it has done.

If you don't believe that there was election fraud, then fine. If you don't believe that there was mass disenfranchisement of blacks and minority voters, then you need to study what is out there proving that there was. Disenfranchisement is wrong. It's a crime and that should have everyone on this board, tinfoil hat or otherwise, screaming at the top of their lungs to their Senators.

The Senators need to be presented with what we have so they can make the decision as to what to do. If they don't contest, we have done our best and we will continue to fight. If they do contest, we may not get anywhere but it's an in. It will help us to go forward with our fight against unfair elections.

I just read your posts and they make they me sad. Sad because I feel that you are fighting against us and I know that is not the case.

Again, I respect you but I don't agree that this is all pointless. * is going to be in the WH on Jan. 20th. That is pretty much a given but we still have to fight.

Does that make sense?

I am going to go home now. Have a good evening.

[wiggs]

39. Prima facie evidence of fraud...

... has not been disputed, as far as I know. Warren County lockdown and refusal to allow viewing of poll books elsewhere automatically results an assumption of fraud according to Ohio law. You can't count ballots in secret and you can't withold public records without tainting the election.

There are plenty more reasons to view election integrity as unclear and compromised...and that's all that should need to be shown in order to get investigations going.

[Vektor]

51. Right-o Wiggs!... Walt...

This is what I mean. The fact that there are so many instances of things being done that were not above board. I just want to see our leaders put forth the time and effort to address a growing mountain of concerns that I think warrant a second look.

[Walt Starr]

130. It's not enough for a prima facie case

Sorry, but that's the fact. Localized events do not a conspiracy make!

[Vektor]

144. What is required?

What are the elements that need to be present?

[fasttense]

86. Get over it B*sh rigged the election

Hmmm, only in America are exit polls, disappearing votes (only some appear again) and 95 to over 100% voter turnout NOT considered evidence of election fraud. Oh yeah and we'll just ignore the Jim Crow voter suppression and tens of thousands of complaints filed from every state.

You should also take a look at history. Count how many times our President was not sworn in on January. Hmmm what about that imaginary drop dead date. Oh yeah that only comes into action when we got us a B*sh running for president. Oops, I forgot.

[grays4u]

139. Walt is right

[sepia_steel]

148. There are an AWFUL lot of fishy smells in this thread. :)

[corbett]

142. Tell That To David Lytel

Examine his evidence at www.redefeatbush.com and you'll have a different perspective.

[KnowerOfLogic]

143. There's no conclusive evidence it *wasn't* stolen, since all the critical

information is 'top secret.' That alone is reason to contest the result.

[sepia_steel]

146. GOD i live the ignore function.

:hi:

[DoYouEverWonder]

5. These Senators need to inform the folks that answer their phones

to tell people that the Senator has not made a decision yet. That would really help a lot.

[FreepFryer]

15. I'll ask them,

If you promise to stop calling all our Dem politicians 'lost causes', etc., because you cannot keep your composure on a phone call.

Deal?

[DoYouEverWonder]

29. That would be nice, thank you

BTW: I lost my composure AFTER I hung up and I did not say that our DEM politicans are 'lost causes', unless they refuse to stand up on Thursday.

Look back at my posts, if you wish, I have been a staunch supporter of Kerry and his actions since the election.

edit: well actually since he won the primary.

[FreepFryer]

36. I'm sorry,

but how do you lose your composure on a phone call after you've hung up?

A vindictive 'redial'?

You know what I meant, and I hope it made some sense.

[DoYouEverWonder]

46. It was the hanging up

that got me po'd. The girl on the other end had no idea how po'd she got me.

I vented by coming here and posting about it.

Since people don't know me personally, they don't know that I rarely ever show anger. And it is ever rarer that I get in someone else's face in an angry way. Mainly because it is very, very difficult to get me angry. I just don't take life and other people that seriously to let them get to me in that way. As a matter of fact, I usually end up get people angry at me, because I refuse to give them the satisfaction of letting them get me angry. I have a lot of self-control and have studied martial arts. I could be seething on the inside and you would think I loved you.

[Vektor]

112. That's a good idea....

...and in reality, there may be some that are still mulling it over.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. Why would it be political suicide?

I don't get it. The Dem senators are up against the wall anyhow; if the MePublicans eliminate the filibuster they won't have any power at all -- they might as well not waste their time by showing up for votes. So why on earth would they ignore their constituents -- us -- who WANT them to grow a pair for a change and contest this election? They will totally lose the progressive vote to the Greens or whoever if they don't listen to us.

And why do they need proof of fraud beyond a reasonable doubt in order to reject the vote? I thought the whole point of contesting the election was to establish what really happened?

As far as I'm concerned, if at least one of those jokers doesn't have the cojones to stand up for us, I will officially deem myself to be unrepresented and I'll have to go dump a bunch of tea in the Mississippi River on April 15. And not vote for a Democrat again.

[Vektor]

111. My sentiments exactly...

Refusing to speak out will have serious repercussions, too.

[mdb]

14. Why wouldn't it be suicide for any Dem who doesn't stand?

What is Kerry doing in Iraq? Some people here may not like this but, I know for me if Jan 6th comes and goes and nothing happens, Kerry can kiss my vote goodbye for anything in 2008. I won't vote for something like this to happen again in 2008.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

27. Exactly. A Senator who contested the election would be a hero

to an awful lot of angry liberals (which, BTW, still make up about half of the voters). He or she would be looked upon as the rare Dem with an actual spine. No doubt that person would get a ration of crap from the MSM talking heads (and would be pilloried by Pox News), but what else is new? They do that anyhow. Seems to me that gutsy person would not only NOT be committing political suicide, but would instantly gain the inside track for the '08 primaries.

I'd like to think that if Dean or Clark were in the Senate, they'd do it -- maybe because they haven't been gelded by hanging around D.C. for too long. How about one of the old ones with nothing to lose? Byrd? Kennedy? Somebody...?

[Vektor]

105. A lot of people...

...feel the same way. I hope the Senators know this.

[TrustingDog]

30. 4) Don't want to be responsible for a civil war. n/t

[liam97]

57. The real problem

is that we allow them to forget that they are there because of us.

[Vektor]

103. Do you think...

It could happen?

[TrustingDog]

114. I do.

I can't think of any other issue right now that could. You've had plenty of wars that made people take to the streets, plenty of reasons to question the administrations throughout the decades and through fists up to the sky.

This is The Big One.

[Vektor]

117. Hmmm....

I certainly seems to be getting ugly doesn't it? I'm a little nervous about the current division of this country.

[BamaBecky]

69. They are on the corporate dole, and may be "compromised" and

possibly blackmailed. Washington is corrupt from stem to sterm. There would have to be a massive movement to embarrass them enough to "stand up" against fraud. They should have sense enough to realize that they could be voted out "next" with election fraud if they anger the wrong people in Washington...come to think of it...is that what they are afraid of???????????:scared: :argh:

[Vektor]

102. You have a point...

I imagine some of them are probably feeling pretty threatened.

[Imagevision]

100. I can't imagine only "ONE" Senator doing the challendgeing

[Vektor]

109. I sincerely hope..

...you are right..there HAS to be at least a few that have been following this and are as pissed as we are.

[Vektor]

101. Walt Starr and Freep Fryer!

Eeeeegads. Now I feel like an ass. I just wanted to let off a little steam about how frustrating this whole election situation is. I didn't mean to incite a riot. I had hoped to open up a dialog, but I feel bad that people are getting so upset.

What have I done?

[FreepFryer]

104. Relax, this is nothing.

Good to bring issues up.

Bad to try to influence them from doing so.

You done good.

[Vektor]

107. Well , ok.

:-)

[joeunderdog]

115. What have you done?

You've made perfect sense.

Too many pissing contests around here and not enough people dealing with the cold, hard truth.

If these dems don't speak up now, there aint gonna be no next time.

[many a good man]

106. Its about RePukes going nuclear NOW, or six months from now

Ethics rules? Filibuster? Who needs 'em!

[Vektor]

108. The mere thought...

...makes my skin crawl.

[FreepFryer]

110. Judo says

use your enemy's strength against him.

That is what the DNC is and will do.

If we believe in ourselves, and value each other, we will prevail against the mindless greed-inspired policies of the current Administration.

[Vektor]

113. That would be wonderful!

I am growing a little weary of the mindlessness and greed, after all!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

118. What you are confusing is Evidence of Fraud/Malfunction and

Modis Operandi. We know there was machine fraud (or at a minimum grand malfunction). This is evidenced by the mathematical impropability of the results (all favoring Chimp), as well as voter accounts of pressing Kerry and getting Bush, bumping Bush,etc.

What we DON'T know, is HOW they did it. There are some good theories, and if not too random, I am convinced the pattern will be figured out here on DU. Otherwise we need a whistleblower.

But remember Scott Peterson. He is on death row because they knew a crime was committed (just like us). They never found out HOW or WHY and he got convicted.

But putting the machine fraud/malfunction aside. There are tons of GREAT reasons to contest Ohio, for sure. There's PROOF POSITIVE of systematic disenfranchisement. Take a look at some of those videos of Ohio precincts. It will make you cry!

Maybe everyone in this country is looking for a hero. Someone to look up to. Someone who speaks from their heart and soul for the little guy.

[Vektor]

122. Absolutely...

I have watched the videos, and you're right, they are very upsetting. I'd like to address all of the things you mentioned. Some is indeed circumstantial, but Blackwell's behavior is illegal in a lot of ways -he has stonewalled the recount efforts and violated the law. I'd like to see our Dem senators stand up and demand that those who have behaved unscrupulously be held accountable. The disenfranchising we've all spoke about is an insult to our democracy.

Grrr.

I hope it's not to much to ask that our elected representatives speak out. If not, the Repugs will continue to run wild all over the place, with no accountability at all.

[McCamy Taylor]

119. Keep the Freepers guessing.

Gives them no time to saturate MSM with right wing spin.

Gives them no time to arrange 9-11 Part 2, Operation Martial Law in DC on January 6.

Gives them no time to blast select Democratic Senators with hate mail/point lasers at the pilots of select Democratic Senators airplanes.

Gives them no time to feed GOP Senators rebuttal testimony designed to use up all the debate time.



Plus if you guys are worried, imagine how absolutely agonized the Freepers must be. These guys are probably tearing their hair out. If there was a way to post messages about Senators who are (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) going to contest that everyone at DU would know were pranks but the Freepers would think were real, I would say go for it. Give them all ulcers. Man, I wish I had Prilosec stock!



So remember, every false hope here, is a false alarm there!

[googly]

133. Calm down everybody...we will know in THREE short days

what is gonna happen. Just stop getting on each other's
nerves. Let us preserve all this energy when we will really
need it, THE NEXT ELECTION.