Election Fraud: “The Dragon at the Gate.”

[Guest guest]

A

Fri, 31 Mar 2006 06:59:17 -0500

Election Fraud: " The Dragon at the Gate. "

 

 

 

(PEOPLE MUST REALIZE THAT THE RICHEST 1% IN THE U.S.A. HAS TWO

POLITICAL PARTIES REPRESENTING THEM AND LOOKING OUT FOR THEIR

INTERESTS. THE OTHER 99% HAS NO ONE.)

 

 

 

 

OpEdNews.com

 

Original Article at

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_ernest_p_060330_the_democrats_3a_missi.h\

tm

 

 

 

March 30, 2006

 

The Democrats: Missing in Action

 

By Ernest Partridge

 

Watching the Democrats, one would think that they never gave up

believing in Santa Claus.

 

Like little kids in December, they seem to believe that just by being

nice, Santa will deliver the gifts: election victories and control of

the Congress.

 

The Republicans know better. They analyze, they scheme, they think

things through, they act aggressively and ruthlessly, and thus they win.

 

Unfortunately, the Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an

opportunity. And opportunities aplenty are coming their way which, for

the most part, they simply ignore. For example, when one of their

number, Senator Russ Feingold, speaks up with a loud and eloquent

voice, he is told to shut up. Demanding censure of the outlaw

President, he is told by his own party, is " not nice. "

 

One begins to wonder if the Democratic Party really wants to win in

November. If they keep on behaving as they have, and if conditions

remain essentially as they are now, they won't win. The Republicans

will have a lock on that election:

 

Provided conditions remain essentially as they are now.

 

Now the good news: it is virtually certain that conditions will not

remain essentially as they are now. Beneath the placid surface of our

body-politic, stresses are accumulating that could result in a seismic

political rupture. (I've listed these " stresses " in my " Perception is

Reality " and so will not repeat them here). More conspicuously: Bush,

Cheney and their war are becoming ever-more unpopular, public trust in

Bush's competence and his honesty is likewise eroding, the mainstream

media is beginning to desert Bush and his administration as the media

continues to lose its credibility with the public. Still more moderate

Republicans, libertarians and evangelical Christians are abandoning

Bushism. Following John Dean, Kevin Phillips, " Pete " Peterson and John

Eisenhower in 2004, now its Bruce Bartlett, Francis Fukuyama, Larry

Wilkerson, and Paul Pillar. Even Chris Matthews, who once compared

Bush to Henry V and Winston Churchill, has had it with Bush's and

Cheney's lies. To Don Imus, he said just last week:

 

" From the beginning everything about how they've got WMD's, they

are a threat to us, they are going to bomb us with a nuclear weapon,

this country is going to be an easy liberate, it's going to be a cake

walk. As Cheney said as recently as ten months ago the insurgents are

in their last throes. Everything that is said is not true... They

don't want the whole truth out and that's the fact. "

 

 

 

Whether or not the Democrats will wake up and seize the offensive in

the upcoming election campaign remains to be seen. But of this we can

be confident: the Democrats must venture forth and seize their

victory. Santa will not bring it to them just for being passively " nice. "

 

 

A descent into despotism.

 

Critics who use " the F-word " (Fascism) to describe the Bush regime are

denounced as " shrill " and " irresponsible. " Are they? Consider this:

when Bush signs bills from the Congress forbidding torture and

warrantless surveillance, he issues " signing statements " which states

that he is free to ignore these laws when, at his discretion, he

chooses to do so. And now this: " Last month ... President Bush signed

into law a bill that never passed the house. " In effect, this demotes

the Congress of the United States from a law-making to

an " advisory " body. Add to that the fact that Bush and his party are

" elected " with privately owned and operated, unverifiable " black box "

voting machines and compilers, conveniently provided by GOP partisans.

So it comes to this: rule by decree by a " leader " who has placed

himself above the law and beyond recall by the voters. If this does

not define a " dictatorship, " I don't know what does.

 

Meanwhile, the Congress, the courts, the media, the Democratic Party,

and public acquiesce in silence.

 

We've not fully descended to totalitarianism. Dissent, however muted,

is still tolerated. (But don't you dare protest within sight or

earshot of " Our Leader " ). Those of us who continue to criticize the

regime have not yet been charged with " thought-crime, " and sent to

" re-education camps. " Not yet.

 

So the task before us is not to protect our democracy; it's too late

for that. Our task is to restore our democracy, to re-institute the

government we once had, " deriving [its] just powers from the consent

of the governed. "

 

 

Election Fraud: " The Dragon at the Gate. "

 

If the Democrats are to capture at least one house of Congress in

November and if, as a result, the American people begin to take back

their own country, the party must first of all slay the dragon at the

gate: election fraud. For, as anyone who dares face and study the

evidence must appreciate, because GOP partisans build the unauditable

machines, write the secret software, and count 80% of the votes, " the

people's will " at elections is essentially irrelevant. The election

results are simply what the GOP wants them to be, as they were in

2000, 2002, and 2004, and as they will be again in 2006 – provided

conditions remain essentially as they are now.

 

Accordingly, the restored integrity of the ballot is the sine qua non

of the overthrow of the Republican autocracy in November.

 

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party, those " useful idiots, " steadfastly

refuse even to recognize that there is a problem with the voting

machines and vote compilations.

 

Nevertheless, the electronic voting scam is beginning to unravel,

thanks to the determined efforts of a few dedicated individuals, an

uncensored internet, and ad hoc citizen organizations along with all

too few maverick politicians (notably John Conyers and Russ Holt), and

despite the determined indifference of the Democratic Party and the

mainstream media.

 

More and more e-voting outrages, failures, and statistical

impossibilities are coming to light, and even breaking through in the

media (most recently in Florida, Texas, Ohio, Chicago, and

California, and the public is beginning to take notice. This awareness

accomplished some significant victories, notably in New Mexico and

Maryland, where " black box voting " has been abolished by state law. If

this trend continues, and if a few available albeit unused modes of

verification

 

are put in play, it is just possible that November's election with be

sufficiently (if not totally) honest to put an opposition party in

control of at least one, and possibly both, houses of Congress. Then a

balance of powers will be restored and the investigations, with

subpoena powers and threat of perjury and contempt of Congress in

play, may begin to probe the corruption and abuses of power of the

Bush regime.

 

So, once again, opportunity knocks at the door of the Democratic

Party. But if the Party persists, with the cooperation of the

corporate media, in ignoring this opportunity, then that Party is once

again likely to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

 

 

Three roads diverge...

 

How will all this play out? I wouldn't be so bold as to make a

prediction. But we might speculate about some alternative futures, so

that we might prepare ourselves accordingly.

 

 

Worst case – " The `Z' Scenario: " Final descent into totalitarianism.

In Costas Gravas' 1968 film, " Z " , a popular movement is on the verge

of overthrowing an autocratic regime. Then the leader of the

opposition is murdered, and the ruling junta immediately imposes

martial law and dictatorship. Could that happen here? As opposition to

the Bush regime grows, as evidence of corruption and election fraud

becomes widely known, this could lead to a crackdown on dissent, and a

roundup and imprisonment of dissenters. Another terrorist " Pearl

Harbor " could be the catalyst. Or possibly a new " pre-emptive " war

with Iran.

 

 

A step too far – Cf. Russia, August, 1991. Is there a limit to how

much abuse " the establishment " (the military, Wall Street, the media,

the CIA, the courts, the federal bureaucracy, even the Churches), the

Democratic Party, and the public at large will tolerate? Is there a

point when these institutions turn around, dig in their heels, and say

" no more! " ? These institutions, along with the public, have the means

to bring down the Bushevik regime. There are historical precedents:

 

When in Russia, the Communist Party attempted " the Z scenario, " the

people and the military would have none of it. The people resisted,

the Army refused to fire on the citizens, and the coup failed, and

that was the end of the seventy years of Communist rule and the Soviet

Union.

 

And when the extent of Richard Nixon's villainy was exposed by the

media, the courts required him to surrender his evidence, and at last

his Republican Party deserted him.

 

The CIA has been demeaned by the Bushista excuse that the Bush

Administration " misled by bad intelligence. " Furthermore, the

Administration exposed a CIA case officer, Valerie Plame Wilson, in an

act of political retaliation, at the cost of compromising a vitally

important counter-terrorism operation and possibly the lives of

several agents. A top-down revolt at Langley is highly unlikely, given

the fact that the top offices have been given to Bush loyalists. But

that is not necessary. " Further down, " intelligence strategically

leaked, and blackmail strategically applied, could have devastating

consequences for Bush, Inc.

 

As for Wall Street (the financial establishment), how much longer can

they fail to appreciate that by supporting Bushenomics, they are

scuttling the ship they are riding on – that they will not escape the

coming Bush economic catastrophe?

 

Then there's the military. What if Bush attempts to launch an attack

on Iran in a desperate attempt to salvage a GOP win in November, and

thus prevent those Democratic Congressional subpoenas and

investigations? Will the military, having been ordered to fight and

die in a meaningless and dishonorable war in Iraq, finally refuse?

 

I imagine the following scene in the Oval Office, as Bush orders the

strike:

 

" Mr. President, " says the General, " our boys will go if they can

follow you into Iran. So put on your flyboy suit, climb into the

cockpit, and do your wild-blue-yonder thing, just like that

President-Dude in `Independence Day.' "

 

" But you know I can't do that! I'll crash and burn! "

 

" The thought has crossed our mind. "

 

 

 

The " step too far " may have desirable consequences, most significantly

a restoration of our democracy. But it could be cruel and bloody, and

the " winners, " the CIA or the military, just might not share our

loyalty to democratic ideals. We could end up trading one autocracy

for another. Just consider what followed the Russian

counter-revolution of 1991.

 

 

Best case – A Velvet Revolution, November, 2006. This is the outcome

that we should work toward.

 

Due to constant pressure from law suits, the progressive internet,

citizen organizations, and the demands of ordinary citizens, the

Democratic Party finally wakes up and actively demands action on

voting fraud. The issue becomes too big for the mainstream media to

ignore. While e-voting is not banished all at once, it is barred from

enough key races that the Democrats take control of both houses of

Congress. The e-voting fraud is finally exposed and then, following

Congressional investigation, exposure and legislation, all

unverifiable voting methods are outlawed.

 

Public repudiation of the mainstream media becomes so widespread that

the media conglomerates face the choice: responsible journalism or

bankruptcy. Congressional investigation exposes the political

corruption of the mass media. In 2008, a Democratic administration

initiates anti-trust action against the media conglomerates which are

then broken up, and the FCC institutes and enforces regulations

against market concentration.

 

The new Congress cuts funding for military operations and for base

construction in Iraq. Chairman Henry Waxman of Government Reform

Committee convenes hearings on corruption in government contracts in

Iraq and military procurement. These are followed by criminal

indictments and convictions of numerous members of the Bush/Cheney

Administration.

 

The House of Representatives votes bills of Impeachment against both

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Conviction by the Senate fails when

the Republican Minority votes in a block. However, the political power

of the Bush Administration is effectively ended. In the 2008 election,

the Republicans in Congress pay a heavy price for their support of

Bush and Cheney.

 

In 2009, the new Democratic president repudiates the doctrine of

pre-emptive war and the precepts of " The Project of the New American

Century. " He then takes active steps to repair international

alliances, and to restore the reputation of the United States in the

World community.

 

 

And what about the Democratic Party? I began this essay with a

condemnation of the Party, and yet end with the hope that the same

Party will act aggressively to regain power, and responsibly as they

apply that power. How is it possible for the same Party to be impotent

and irresponsible now, and aggressive and responsible in the near future?

 

Answer: it must not be the same party.

 

Today, many life-long Democrats are justifiably disgusted with their

Party. I am one of them. The Party today is " Republican Lite, " staffed

with comfortable DC regulars, many of whom are accomplices (if only

through their passivity) to the corruption in Washington.

 

This disillusionment with the Party has led many progressives to leave

and join The Green Party, and other minor parties. One result was the

loss of Florida in 2000 and the " selection " of George W. Bush.

 

So this is my advice to the disaffected Democrats: Don't abandon the

Party, take it over. This is what the Religious Right did to the

Republicans. Had they instead formed a minor party, they would have

been insignificant, and the United States would now be a very

different, and much better, country. On the other hand, a major party

that is " taken over " by its grass roots, will have an organizational

structure, an institutional memory, and financial resources –

essential assets that are hopelessly out of reach of minor parties.

 

If you hate what the Democratic Party has become, I'm with you.

Together we can make it a party that we can be proud of and support

with enthusiasm. And also, a party that can win – as it must.

 

 

 

Authors Website: http://www.crisispapers.org

 

Authors Bio: Dr. Ernest Partridge is a consultant, writer and lecturer

in the field of Environmental Ethics and Public Policy. He publishes

the website, \ " The Online Gadfly\ " (www.igc.org/gadfly) and co-edits

the progressive website, \ " The Crisis Papers\ " (www.crisispapers.org).

His book in progress, " Conscience of a Progressive, " can be seen at

www.igc.org/gadfly/progressive/^toc.htm . Send comments to:

crisispapers.

 

Back to Article

The Democrats: Missing in Action

OpEdNews - USA