"It would be political suicide for a Dem Senator to contest the election."

[mzmolly]

~ Ed Shultz today.

He stated that without unequivocal evidence of fraud any Dem who contests the election will be voted out and the info used against them. The person will be ostracized and ineffective for the duration of his/her term.

I agree with Ed, and that's why I feel that Byrd or a retiring Senator is our only hope for contesting the election. :(

[New Earth]

1. OR

unequivocal evidence of fraud.

[mzmolly]

3. I dun't ged it?

;)

[NVMojo]

25. I don't get this either. Are they trying to tell us to give up?

[mzmolly]

93. I think they're trying to say the evidence isn't there "yet" and it's

not worth holding our breath for a Senator when it may not happen.

:shrug:

[IStriker]

115. IF the evidence was there, Kerry's lawyers would be...

screaming bloody murder instead of saying they have not seen any evidence of fraud. Nobody that isn't a complete flake, a retiring flake, or in a district filled with enough flakes to re-elect them, is going to take a stand on this without undeniable proof in hand. There is not a state (not even Mass., let alone WV that has twice voted for *) that has enough flakes to guarantee re-election of ANY senator who does not have indisputable proof of fraud. There is NO SAFE STATE. If the proof isn't there, no senator will be there.

[stlsaxman]

213. Yes they are- Ed Schultz is a Rove opporative.

just like the DLC... keeping us stupid, powerless and without hope.

[lonestarnot]

215. AGREED!

[KoKo]

241. Ed Schultz listeners gave $30,000 to WA recount. Here's snip & link!

The MoveOn Political Action Committee, connected to the liberal activist group MoveOn.org, donated $250,000. Liberal talk-radio host Ed Schultz asked his listeners to telephone the Democrats and donate, raising about $30,000.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x94853

[KoKo]

240. He urged his listeners to support the recount in WA State....they gave

alot of money to the recount and he's listed in an article posted in DU Editorials from the Seattle newspaper as having done so.

I don't think he's a Rove plant...he's pointing out what many of us have thought. That it has to be Byrd or a Senator from a safe seat. If many of them stood up...or all of them, there would be safety in "numbers."

I think he was pointing out he hypocracy that the Republicans hang together under DeLay and Frist...but the Dems are always forced to "stand alone."

[electropop]

245. I've asked XM to dump Schultz

and replace him with somebody with a brain, such as Thom Hartman or Peter B Collins. Join me!

[Yupster]

162. If a senator contests, he will have to answer

the following question point blank.

"Do you think President Bush was honestly elected or not?"

He can answer two ways.

1. Yes, I believe there's enough evidence of fraud that Senator Kerry actually won the election. In this case all the other senators will be asked if they agree with that senator's opinion that Kerry was actually elected, and senators like Clinton and Reid will say no they don't, and quickly their quotes will be used to make this one senator look like a complete loon.

2. He can start to back-pedel and say that he's not sure. Then the MSM will take him down for attacking the democratic process without any reason to.

I don't see one senator taking such a stand without other senators covering his back.

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. It will be political suicide if they don't

Because with BushCo in control of everything there will never be another fair and free election.

It's time for people to quite worrying about their personal butts and stand up and do the right thing.

[mzmolly]

5. Even if a Senator contests the election it doesn't mean that anything will

be done unfortunately.

[Peace Patriot]

53. Same could be said of Martin Luther King's crossing the Selma bridge.

"Even if a Senator contests the election it doesn't mean that anything will be done unfortunately." --mzmolly

Same could be said of Gandhi's salt march.

Same could be said of Nelson Mandela's release from prison. So what? Is that going to solve all the problems in the world?

Your line that nothing ever does anything, so why do it?, is getting very stale, mzmolly.

[mzmolly]

94. Yea, but the media and rightous indignation were on our side in such

cases.

In this case, we'll likely be called loons.

I do hope someone stands up, but as you know the position that fraud occured is quite unpopular right now.

We don't have to set a deadline like January 6th to pursue the issue of fraud, but I do hope someone will stand up. I'm just not holding my breath.

[goclark]

226. I'm African American and I don't recall the media

being on our side during the Civil Rights Traumas.

Yes, they showed Bull Connor and the hoses and the dogs but there was a whole lot of sorrow, pain, lynchings,boycotts, bus rides in the back, that they never talked about on my television. My parents and their friends talked about a lot more than I saw on my little TV or read in the White Newspaper.

When I was a child all the students in the Black schools in our city had the chance to meet Marion Anderson if their poem to her was selected as the best. My poem was chosen, I was so excited. My mother dressed me all up, we were taken into the stage door of the big Whites Only Auditorium.

I thought I was going to be able to sit down in front and watch Marian Anderson sing! No, I could not sit down and watch. After the thrill of reading my poem to Miss Anderson, I was "allowed" to stand in the wings and watch the performance for two hours. I will never forget that bitter sweet experience.

Your post jogged my memory, I don't recall reading in the White Newspaper that a little Black girl and her mother were not allowed to sit down to watch one of the greatest artists of all time.

[shraby]

7. One thing is pretty sure,

if they don't contest, they will get booted in the next election. Between disgruntled Dems not voting and Repugs cheating, I'd be surprised to see any Dems in congress in 2006.

[liam97]

28. sometimes

public officials must stand up for what is right. and we must hold them accountable for that

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[yojon]

73. and suicide if they dont..

Given that the outcome will be the same, you could make an arguement for them to do the right thing.

[KerryReallyWon]

42. Agree, we fight the good fight, it is time for them to stand up for us...

[Freddie Stubbs]

44. Tell that to Ken Salazar

He managed to win.

[man4allcats]

63. I agree!

What is this crap anyway? And all these people are worried about their damned images?! Where the hell's the guts? If the GIs that saw combat against Hitler in WWII had taken this attitude, we'd all be speaking German now. These people were voted into office as legislators. If the laws they make aren't worth standing up for, even at the risk of censure, then why the hell are we paying them? I think they owe us, this country and the principles upon it was founded - even if it does mean political suicide. To my way of thinking, that risk goes with the territory. How much does a U.S. Senator make during one term? Probably more than most of us make in 20 years at a regular job. And don't their benefits follow them after they leave office? I'd love to have a gig like that for six years! C'mon Right Honorable Muckety Mucks! It's time to pay the piper! Get off your dead asses and do the job we pay you to do. There's a democracy in the balance. What's that you say? You're worried about your legacy? Worry about what history will say of those who could have acted but didn't when America fell to fascism!

[Left coast liberal]

112. Right on! And, THAT's what Ed should be saying! N/T

[anamandujano]

125. Hitler owed a lot of his "accomplishments" to the upperclass,

doctors, lawyers, all sorts of people in power who were content to keep their mouths shut and look the other way while he ran amuck.

We can only pray that history properly portrays the cowards that are supposed to be speaking for us.

[flyarm]

173. actually...

the jewish rabbis' supported hitler to begin with!!

[pauldp]

64. Here, here. Who's gonna be a patriot or a complicit criminal? n/t

[EVDebs]

80. Time for Harry Reid to stop taking dancing lessons... and

be a pugilistic master of the ring ! I think he said he knows how to fight...I think he knows what to fight for...I think he can go 15 rounds with this crowd of neocon vermin any day (and he won't need a cut-man).

[SammyWinstonJack]

140. Aren't they gunning for the Democratic Senator from Fla.?

I thought I heard that the repukes were going to make sure he was "voted" out in '06? So the Senate Dems take a stand NOW or never. They should all stand together, safety in #s and all that jazz.

[flyarm]

177. ohh they will be!!

senator nelson...and he knows it!!

[DoYouEverWonder]

191. I called his office the other day

I told his aid that I knew Nelson had balls cause he rode a rocket into space and that took a lot of balls. But he needed to prove he still had balls and to do the right thing and stand with Conyers to contest this election. He told me he was sending my comments to DC.

[electropop]

246. Exactly.

It is irrelevant what kind of smear the righties might lay on, because they are already plotting to grab every single seat in both houses, by election fraud. It comes to a choice between standing up and possibly facing a re-election fight, or not standing up and having the seat stolen. Any Dem who doesn't stand up is endangering his/her own career.

[senseandsensibility]

4. Depressing indeed,

but then Shultz is not exactly a radical in this area. Kind of off the topic, but was he live today? The reason I ask is because he is supposed to be in San Francisco for a big "Liberal's Only" New Year's Eve Party at a swank hotel tonight. I live in the area, but couldn't afford the admission. x(

[Zynx]

6. BS

Plenty of states where anyone with a (D) after their name will win no matter what.

[mzmolly]

10. A D might win, but not necessarilly the D that contests the election.

:shrug:

[iconoclastNYC]

248. Puhlleeeeze.

How can you run against someone by saying: "They stood up for democracy"

This is so stupid, the liberal base will work extra hard for someone who dares stand up to republican thuggery. We will not forget.

[mattclearing]

8. Who cares?

Is there anything more important than getting elected again?

[gkhouston]

9. given the shift in the wind since Nov. 2

the Reps are doing their damnedest to make *all* the Dems ineffective and ostracized. I don't think they have as much to lose as Ed imagines, especially if they act collectively.

You can't appease a wife-beater, and that's basically what we're dealing with here, IMO.

Gina

[Sandpiper]

11. Baloney

Speaking for my own state, George W. Bush isn't exactly what you'd call beloved.

In California Barbara Boxer got more votes for U.S. Senate than John Kerry got for President, and she ran an unabashedly liberal campaign, and she crushed Ahnuld's hand picked challenger.

I don't see what political fallout she'd suffer for taking on Bush.

[mzmolly]

13. It's not necessarilly about California, it's about how he/she will be

treated in the Senate.

[Truman01]

76. She wont get anything done in the Senate. NT

[Peace Patriot]

88. Truman01 and mzmolly:

Just what do you expect Boxer or any Democratic Senator will "get done" in this bullying, fascist BushCon Congress? Hm? Name the legislation.

[mzmolly]

97. I'd like for them to be taken seriously period.

:shrug:

I don't know about what legislation might be pending, but I do know 4 years is a long time to be shunned by the Washington inside.

As I said, I hope someone stands up, but a person like Byrd is our best hope in a situation like this.

[sepia_steel]

121. If Democrats aren't serious about standing up for OUR RIGHTS

I AM NOT STANDING UP FOR THEM. We voted them in for a reason: to do the right thing. Why even vote for anyone again if they won't do their fucking jobs? This is close to the dumbest shit I have ever reaD. They have a damn obligation to stand up to corruption.

FUCK! Is anyone else as pissed off by this tripe as I am???

[mzmolly]

131. I understand where your coming from. But suppose for a moment you

felt the election was legitimate. Suppose you were waiting for more information/proof. Do you contest an election that you believe to be the legitimate will of the people?

I fear it's not as cut and dry as were making it out to be.

[sepia_steel]

138. Yes, it is.

All they need is more info. and they'll knonw it, too. Why don't you send it to them instead of assuming they won't give a shit? Some people do care more about what's right.

[mzmolly]

147. Who feels they don't give a shit?

Not me. In fact I feel that many/most are taking in much information and will demand follow up. I just don't think were gonna have all the answers on January 6th.

Look how long the 911 inquiry took for example.

[lonestarnot]

156. Are you denying that the Ohio incidents amounted to vote suppression

election tampering, and what about the sabotaged recount?

[mzmolly]

161. Nope.

Not denying a thing. Unfortunately every election going back to the beginning has irregularities and even suppression. It's a matter of what it takes to contest an election.

[roenyc]

176. They need to stand up for black Americans everywhere

someone needs too. or i hope they riot their asses off. i will help them. this is not right. forget election fraud. what about people abuse and rape of the constitutional rights of human beings. JMO.

[mzmolly]

179. It's *poor* Americans actually.

But I get your point. As Mod Mom said, it's about equal protection under the law.

I don't know if that is within the constitutional language surrounding contesting an election, but it certainly makes a case for standardized voting procedures.

[Eye_on_prize]

135. you mean her esteemed colleagues would ostracize her? for having backbone

for speaking truth to power, for loving her country enough to put her political life on the line, for being honest in calling fraud for what it is when it happens? so what? I'd rather be branded a loonie and marginalized than miss this rare opportunity to stand up for democracy and let the chips fall. Jan 6th is Rubicon for Dems. Rock and a hard place to be sure, and rightly so; they've brought this on themselves with all their accommodationist Republican-lite crap. I agree, it's time for Senate Dems to pay the piper.

[shraby]

185. Do any of them get anything done

now? All of them are blocked from bring in bills to be debated (the paper ballot/voting machines). Unless the Republicans want it, it doesn't get discussed. The Dems are even locked out of key meetings on bills then the bill is shoved in their faces at the last minute for a vote.
Right now, they have absolutely nothing to lose, they've already lost it all.

[flyarm]

181. i say the same for corzine of n.j.

he is very rich..he is very respected in nj..will prob run and easily be elected governor...and he is pretty darned secure in nj...he is powerful without the senate...and he has the bucks to fight the repug machine!!

[KittyWampus]

12. Why? There Are Enough Irregularities & Crimes Before & Since Election

that DEMAND investigation.

This isn't about FRAUD...

[mzmolly]

14. An investigation is taking place regardless.

:hi:

[KittyWampus]

33. By Congressional Committe With Subpeona Power?

[mzmolly]

92. No by the GAO.

eom

[Vinca]

15. Fast forward 2 years from now.

What might be happening? It took 2 years to prove Watergate. Any senator who is wise enough to step forward and actually represent his constituents might, at some point in the future, be viewed a hero. Are any that brave? I doubt it. I really do. Our elected officials, with few exceptions (Rep. Conyers most notably), are part of a "good ole boy's club" and from their perspective, it's best not to ruffle any feathers.

[mzmolly]

16. I fully agree. But, if in two years fraud is actually disproven, he/she

is considered a cook.

[Vinca]

23. Not in my opinion.

If it turns out there is no fraud (a real stretch), at least the person who stepped forward will know he or she has represented a large chunk of the people who voted him into office. To ignore those of us who refuse to remove our tin foil hats until we are assured the election was fair and square is just plain not right.

[mzmolly]

96. That's certainly one way of looking at it.

But there are other ways of viewing this situation too. :(

[IStriker]

117. It might not be right, but you find me somebody who has been...

in Congress or the Senate for more than one term who is willing to sacrifice their political future for a portion of the people who voted for them. I don't want stories; I want to see somebody who sacrificed themselves by standing up for what was right and then got booted out because not enough people agreed with what they stood for. They all talk a good game, but show me somebody who has done it. If you can name anybody, they will be few and far between.

[juajen]

126. How about Cynthia McKinney? Or Dennis Kucinich? Or

the late, Paul Wellstone? Or Sen. Byrd?

[IStriker]

143. What did they do? What are they doing now?

[flyarm]

183. cynthia mckinney

she stood up and was attempting to show this admin negligence before 9/11 and that they had intelligence warning them of an impending 9/11..they did succeed in shutting her down..but it was again another stolen election...but she has now prevailed..despite them...
she was corrageous in july 2002 by demanding answers of pre 9/11 and they shut her up temproarily...but i hope its cynthia who stands up and says..truth and honestly first and foremost!!
there is a lady with guts and integrity!!

she is my hero!!
fly

[IStriker]

224. I thought she just made an outrageous accusation with no proof to back...

her claims that * was aware of or involved in 9/11. I remember reading the Atlanta newspapers about what she did at the time and I don't remember the details, but she certainly did not come across as courageous, truthful or honest. Besides that her father was busy running around Atlanta making anti-Semitic remarks while she was taking money and gifts from Arab groups. I read that her formerly faithful Jewish constituents that had always supported her were totally offended and vowed to defeat her, not that somebody stole the election or shut her up. I must say you have strange heroines!

[flyarm]

233. ISTRIKER AN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION..

AS A 33 YR AMERICAN AIRLINES FLT ATTENDANT NY BASED..WHAT CYNTHIA DID WAS PUT TO WORDS WHAT WE IN THE AIRLINE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO SAY PUBLICALLY!! SHE WAS EXPOSING THE FRAUD OF THIS ADMINISTRATION AND THEIR INVOLVEMENT IN 9/11 ..SHE SAID WHAT WE ALL KNEW..SHE EXPOSED WHAT NO ONE ELSE HAD THE GUTS TO EXPOSE!!
I DONT PRETEND TO KNOW WHAT HER LOCAL POLITICS WERE, OR ARE..BUT IT TOOK ALOT OF GUTS TO SAY WHAT SHE DID AND DEMAND ANSWERS WE COULD NOT DEMAND!! THERE BY SHE WAS A THREAT TO THE * ADMIN AND THATS WHY THEY WENT AFTER HER SEAT ...WE ON THE INSIDE OF THE AIRLINE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT SHE WAS SAYING AND EXPOSING WHILE MOST NON AIRLINE PEOPLE WOULD NOT HAVE UNDERSTOOD AT THE TIME, AND BECAUSE OF GAG ORDERS AND HOMELAND SECURITY AND SAFETY TO OUR PASSENGERS WE COULD NOT COME OUT AND ASK AND DEMAND THE ANSWERS PUBLICALLY..BUT WHAT CYNTHIA DID , WAS TO THOSE OF US INSIDE THE AIRLINES BRAVE AND COURAGEOUS!
FLY

[Eye_on_prize]

137. Eugene McCarthy, Robert F. Kennedy, Wayne Morse, Robert Byrd

Mark Hatfield, Paul Wellstone...have all stood up and spoken truth to power in the Halls of Congress when it really mattered..

[IStriker]

144. When was this? What did they do? Give me an example.

[Eye_on_prize]

196. McCarthy and Rob't Kennedy stood up against Viet Nam war, declared

their strong opposition in Congress and also both ran for US President in primaries against Johnson. Wayne Morse (US Senator from Oregon during the 60s) and US Senator Mark Hatfield (a Republican) made similar lonely and very unpopular stands against that war, and it served both of them very well over time, as they are later revered by many people as they gradually woke up to the tragic folly of that war.

Byrd has done this on several occasions too, as i recall being struck by reading about him doing this, makes very moving and eloquent speeches too, but sorry I am sketchy on details (which issues, etc.).

[IStriker]

225. I think you're correct about McCarthy, Kennedy. Don't know...

about Morse or Hatfield, could be, I just don't remember enough about either one of them. Byrd was my Senator for years and years and I've watched him go from somebody I greatly admired to an embarrassment that I swear Rockefeller sends out there to say the stuff he doesn't have the balls to say himself. I think he may be senile as I have seen him recently where I would not be surprised to see him drool and other times, he seems fine. Don't put your faith in him. He is too erratic and unpredictable to figure what he might do anymore.

[goclark]

227. Eye_on_prize you are once again right on the money!

They laughed at Cassius Clay, called him a fool for changing his name and Ali is one of the most respected men in the world.

If you don't stand for justice you stand for nothing.

[Yupster]

164. Funny typo mzmolly

I underdsood what you meant, but that one got a chuckle.

Oh no, not considered a cook?
At least it's better than a baker.

[mzmolly]

168. ROTFLMAO.

Chalk it up to the Canadian beer I drank yesterday *burp*

;)

"Cook" oh my goodness! KOOK, KOOK, KOOK ... I can spell KOOK, really!

[lonestarnot]

157. My gut tells me that this is a coopt post.

[regularjoe]

17. Perhaps we should say "they would be politically murdered."

I'm not sure standing up for honest and fair elections should be considered suicide. Suicide is a do-it-yourself thing and it would be other people that would be doing the political devastation. Just an idea.

regularjoe

[mzmolly]

21. Good point.

:hi:

[keepthemhonest]

18. I keep seeing

everyone writing and asking which one senator (be it dem or republican) is going to contest the election and they will be ruining their political career. I just realised the other day though is, we should be looking at it the other way.All of the senators should be contesting the election and the ones who don't should be worried about their careers.Am I way out there anyone following me?

[mzmolly]

22. Again we need absolute proof though.

:hi:

[KittyWampus]

35. Absolute Proof? Do You Need Absolute Proof To Investigate A Crime?

one more time... this about Congress investigating. Conyers is NOT Congress and doesn't have subpeona power.

[Chipper Chat]

52. Seems like I remember before Watergate broke...

watching Ron Ziegler (Nixon's Scott McClellan) on CBS disputing the breakin allegations with "why is the Washington Post doing this? Why are Woodward and Bernstein trying to destroy this presidency? The Justice Department has done its own investigation of all this and there is absolutely nothing there. So let these 3rd rate reporters show us the proof or drop this. It's time for all of this to be put to rest so President Nixon can get on with the business of the country - which is peace and prosperity." (paraphrasing)
Does this sound strikingly familiar?

[mzmolly]

90. Of course not. But the January 6th deadline is not about an investigation

it's about contesting an election based on fraud.

The GAO IS investigating the fraud issue, and that's who Conyers petitioned initially.

[IStriker]

118. No, but you need "absolute proof" to challenge an election...

and survive.

[berniew1]

107. Where have you been; there's documentation of fraud in Ohio, Florida,N.M.

Free Press has documentation of widespread fraud in Ohio; and the Greens Recount has added proof in several counties which is now on their web site; and Richard Phillips has documentation at
http://northnet.org/minstrel/alpage.html
and there is documenation of widespread touchscreen vote machine fraud in Florida, New Mexico at http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

[Joe Chi Minh]

61. You're absolutely right.

From some of these posts you could be forgiven for wondering if the historic, endemic Southern culture of outright criminality, with a nod and a wink from the police, when they were not themselves the murderers (think lynch mobs right into the second half of the 20th century) has become the standard for the nation as a whole. Starting with the senior judiciary.

What is this notion that you have to find and *prove the guilt*(!) of the perpetrators, before the police and judicial system are willing to recognise that a vast sea of felonies crime has been committed? While the Accused have the prior right to withold/conceal any possible evidence and the plaintiffs no rights. Welcome America to a new inclusive version of Jim Crow.

[keepthemhonest]

152. Definately

don't need definate proof to start the investigation.People who understand math know that the exit polls say that it is almost impossible that Bush won that night.A Miracle. the rest are in denial.


I still say all senators should be contesting and those that don't stand up have something to lose by doing so.Perhaps they were voted in on such a glitch,like those here in Georgia.

[Joe Chi Minh]

218. And "almost impossible"

needs to be qualified, in that "almost" can convey a whole range of meanings, from "nearly impossible, but possible" to "virtually", "practically", even "effectively" impossible. For all practical intents and purposes plain "impossible".

Even empirical science has to settle for statistical probabilities, so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that precise terminology is required by the law. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't understand that "almost" is for practical purposes, redundant here. Identification by DNA would, strongly suspect, probably be much less certain than the odds against some of the movements of the vote-counts during the course of that evening.

[Peace Patriot]

95. keepthemhonest: You are absolutely right,

and mzmolly is wrong. The election was unverifiable, due to BushCons owning the secret source code for vote tabulation, with no paper trail, and blacks and other minorities were cruelly and illegally deprived of the vote. ALL Democrats should stand up against this!

mzmolly's contention that "we need absolute proof" is nonsense. There is overwhelming evidence that the election was stolen, including several "smoking guns" in Ohio, and the general "smoking gun" of the astronomical odds against all election numerical anomalies favoring Bush, all voting machine malfunctions defaulting to Bush, and all vote suppression incidents being committed against Kerry voters.

Many investigations begin with far less evidence than this.

[keepthemhonest]

154. Exactly

you cannot deny the voter suppression.It is awful how a black man could encourage voter suppression of his own race when his forefathers had been fighting to just be able to vote. I sent a letter to Blackwell expressing that point.For shame.


Happy New Year to almost everyone

[noamnety]

19. hardly political suicide

First, nobody is predicting any political suicide for any of the house dems contesting it.

Second, the folks that do contest are likely to get some serious donations for their next campaign from around the country. Personally, I'd contribute to any senator that contests.

Third, they aren't going to win the votes of the rightwing anyway if they are dems, and what dems are going to vote against them because they contested Bush? That doesn't make any logical sense to me at all.

[sepia_steel]

122. AND I'D CONTRIBUTE TOO!!

Thank you. This is their JOB.

[Yupster]

163. For House members it's very different

Districts are so gerrymandered that most incumbents have more to fear from a primary challenge from the fringe of their own party than from an opponent from the other party.

The gerrymandering pushes both parties to the extremes in the House as the members protect their right (for Republican members) and left (for Democratic members) flanks.

For example, the only way my congressman, Lamar Smith could lose his reelection bid is if he was considered not conservative enough.

The only way Maxine Waters could lose her reelection bid is if she was considered not liberal enough.

The gerrymandering pushes members to their extremes.

Edit so Conan the Grammarian doesn't catch me.

[Chimpanzee]

20. Their political futures will be over if they don't do something fast

[OhioBlue]

24. Well, considering the * admin can do anything

and spin their way out of it.... why can't a Dem Senator come up with a good argument - as my intention is to open the current problems in the voting system - especially Ohio for debate. this is the time to look at the true problems behind our elections. The unbelievable long line alone (in mostly Dem precincts) deserves at the very least a good debate. Not to mention the machines that couldn't count correctly. Voters who don't trust the system any longer need to have the faith that their elected officials are taking their concerns seriously and the process will either reveal the flaws that need to be corrected or address their concerns and restore some faith (throw a bone - offer that it will confirm the legitimacy of the election)

[SnoopDog]

26. Whats wrong with standing up for democracy?

If Conyers, the ranking member of the House Judiciary committee, says he is standing up - especially because he thinks something is wrong, I would think that senators would at least look into the matter - by standing up and contesting as well.

What the hell do the senators have to loose? They would be doing their job (god dammit). They are getting crapped on anyway by the ruling Repubs. How else will we ever have a voice?

[katinmn]

47. if they don't stand up, they will become ever more insignificant

We have a brave represenatative and others who have joined him. When are the senators going to show some spine?

[BrklynLiberal]

55. To repeat myself, every damn Dem Senator should stand up with Conyers

as a "Spartacus" move...Just to spite those Repugs! Show some spine and some unity!

[SnoopDog]

83. I agree... For example, what if a foreign operative...

made there way into the presidency. What happens if this grand scale plot has been in the works for 40 years. What if the base goal of the plot is to *over throw* the government of the USA by election fraud.

Would you not think that if a ranking member of the House stands up and says 'hey, wait a minute' that our senators would actually be first to stand up.... Unless they are part of the plot.

My opinion... these son-of-bitches are after our treasury and our USA. It is already happening... and they have already looted billions.

I'm pissed because they are taking my and your money and our country.

[goclark]

228. Yes! They MUST all stand or they are spineless wonders

They have all taken OUR hard earned money to sit in that seat.

If there is glue on their rear ends on January 6th, there will be glue on my credit card. It will be stuck in my wallet and will NOT come out for the Democratic Party.

[aquart]

27. Not one who loves his country more than his job? Not one?

Gotta say, is this why they killed Wellstone?

[mzmolly]

34. That's what my husband just said.

Regarding Wellstone :(

[katinmn]

50. Yup.

Unfortunately, we don't have "proof" of that either.

[nymd81]

29. I've been saying

that for a week!

[Malva Zebrina]

31. I suppose that is why Kerry has stayed away

and without him/Edwards, it was doomed to go nowhere.

I have said this from the beginning. I understand the passion to prove something, anything, but without the major players, it was doomed from the start.

Not one Senator will stand--it is a dead issue and that says something about the way politics is played in this country.

If people do not rise up and demand some change, the politicians will continue to cover their asses to keep their jobs.

It does not help, either, when loose canons and hysterical grandstanding takes place , such as the Bev Harris travelling circus.

I am afraid this will just wither away

There are more important things to consider, such as Jeb Bush representing the American people in the sunami tragedy.

They are running away down the track, and they will NOT pass the baton to anybody else who is a threat to beat them. They will go on and I see the only thing that might have any clout at all is the people who take to the streets.

and, I am pessimistic about that also.

We rant and rave. We know and abhor what is happening.

Where are the people in the streets? Too busy?

Maybe we may have to understand that the American mind set
has changed. We may have to admit we have a majority in the country who are selfish, uncaring, non compassionate, me first, I got mine and who cares about you, gimme my social security money to invest because it is MY money, people and kill the Muslims too.

That may be the truth.

I don't know how to change it if that is the situation.

I am inclined to think it will go on until some major disaster occurs and the people are humbled enough to understand humanity and compassion and taking care of the less fortunate is a worthy ideal.

[Peace Patriot]

98. Malva Zebrina, are you familiar with the Election Fraud evidence?

You say: "We may have to admit we have a majority in the country who are selfish, uncaring, non compassionate, me first, I got mine and who cares about you, gimme my social security money to invest because it is MY money, people and kill the Muslims too...."

The evidence is overwhelming that Kerry won this election. The majority repudiated Bush and his philosophy of greed and selfishness, and his lies, thievery and murderous war. There are numerous compendiums of the evidence, but I suggest TruthIsAll's "To believe Bush won, you have to believe..." series, Parts I,II and III, which sums it all up.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1316010

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1358806

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x197878


I don't agree with your statement, "There are more important things to consider, such as Jeb Bush representing the American people in the sunami tragedy."

Who cares about these little tin gods jetting around the world and grabbing headlines from tragedy--and putting up inadequate disaster relief money?

We have lost our right to vote. There is no other issue of importance, because, without the right to vote, we lack the most fundamental power of citizens to "consent" to our government and to influence its policy.

I repeat: We have lost our right to vote. The BushCons own the voting machinery which runs on secret source code that they hold as proprietary, and they also arranged no paper trail, so that our elections are unverifiable. We may perform the act of voting. It is utterly without force or meaning.

Until we recover our right to vote--by demanding verifiable elections--we do not have a democracy.

[Malva Zebrina]

104. Yes I am

and my point is that unless Kerry/Edwards gets involved, seriously, it will fizzle.

And they have not done much at all but a few insignificient letters.

It was crucial that they do so in an agressive way, imo,in order that there be something to raise the conciousness of voters.

They did not, and that is why I think it will fizzle.

All the rest of the players, although stalwart and determined, have little to run with without Kerry being involved.

That is my two cents and I am posting it because that is the way I see it in my reality mind.

I have watched here on DU an incredible amount of wishfull thinking and and incredible amount of magical thinking re Kerry, and re the fraud, and there is NO evidence so far that would legally give anyone a case to prove it and I simply cannot buy it, or jump on that bandwagon, unless Kerry gets seriously involved.

:shrug:

[katinmn]

114. This is not just about Kerry!

Forget about Kerry for a minute.

This is about having faith in the democratic process.

Everyone needs to ask themselves if they honestly believe we had a fair election and a transparent process.

Do you have confidence that the Far Right Repugs have not lied and cheated the American people to enter into an unjust war and made lining the pockets of their corporate buddies a higher priority than the well-being of all of its citizens?

Do you believe our government leaders have allowed corporations to orchestrate consolidation of the media to the point that there isn't anyone who will question anything about the present administration?

It is clear to me that our democracy is slipping away because we passively looked the other way and went about our business. But now it's personal. Hundreds of thousands of people had their votes thrown away.

January 6 IS a deadline day. It is also the day we will see how hard we have to fight.

[mzmolly]

133. I agree with every word you said except *January 6th* is do or die.

The battle is uphill, and it's only just begun. January 6th is not the end all. Even if we contest the election, it's unfortunately up the the corporate controlled media you mention to lend the issue credibility. :(

Kerry and others have vowed to fight for a transparent process that voters have confidence in. I hope that these questions are NOT an issue in elections to come because it's discouraging to say the least.

I agree fully that we have to focus on taking back the media, and on transparent uniform elections.

:hi:

[katinmn]

134. and the media isn't going to come around on their own

Nor are the Repugs and the corporate owners going to suddenly start doing the right thing without a helluva lot of pressure.

By saying and doing nothing, we are giving them our blessing to keep mucking up our country.

If the house and senate do not contest on January 6, they are approving mass corruption.

as far as this comment:
Kerry and others have vowed to fight for a transparent process that voters have confidence in. I hope that these questions are NOT an issue in elections to come because it's discouraging to say the least.

I can tell you with certainty that if these issues are not addressed there is no point in going through another charade.

[mzmolly]

146. Were not saying and or doing nothing. The GAO is investigating TODAY.

I will personally await the letter from Mr. Conyers and read it in full. Additionally I will hear what my Senators have to say on the matter and weight it carefully before tossing them into the "spineless" category. Also, regardless what happens on 1/6/05 I will encourage that our Democratic leaders pursue the truth in the matter of Ohio and beyond.

[bunny planet]

32. Lautenberg from NJ was already retired. He only came back to fill in for

Torricelli when he had to leave (scandal). He is only back in office until 2009.

To the rest of the Senators sitting on the fence. They will be committing political suicide anyway, if they allow fraud and bbv without paper trails to steal election after election, Democrats will never have power again. Its now or never as far as I can see, not an easy move for anyone but neither will it be easy to lose Democracy entirely down the road a piece. We are dangerously close to losing it now. When peak oil really hits.... I really don't know what to expect in terms of government. We really have to do something now.

[fearnobush]

67. Dems are over if they do not contest. GOP will just steal over and over

again. Here is my lautenberg post.

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=214624&mesg_id=214624>

[bunny planet]

75. Most def. I remember when Frank did this. I think he just might have the

octogenarian cajones to do this for us. I hope so. It would be great to have the Jr.Senator from Joisey be the one.

[IStriker]

119. If you are correct, why hasn't the GOP stolen everything already?

What are they waiting for? People that believe the presidential election was stolen think the Repukes stole a bunch of senate races. If that's true, why only steal a handful and not every single one of them?

[Smarmie Doofus]

36. My senators, Clinton and Schumer, are "ineffective" anyway....

so why not let one of them do it?

[roenyc]

187. never happen.

hillary is playing nice. she always does. and schumer i dont know what he does.

[Smarmie Doofus]

199. He's not a senator; just plays one on TV.

[Patsy Stone]

37. This is the spin...

Here it is, and it's coming from us. We must, to use the "phrase of the year," reframe it. "It would be wrong not to contest," is the message we must send out.

Now, while I am sure that a newbie like Obama would never stand alone (not because he doesn't want to, but because in his case it would be political suicide to stand alone), if all of them stood (Dems that is, and maybe some sane Repugs -- yeah, sure that's happening), then it would be bad not to join.

Older Senators (like Byrd) who have little to lose, may just stand. Jim Jeffords is an Independant and has little to lose one way or the other; the Dems will still work with him and the Repugs didn't anyway.

Conyers has all of next week to meet with the Senators and, if he can convince them that there is evidence of real fraud, they have a duty to contest. To this point, the fact that no one will talk to Conyers or release any data should be an issue to raise with them as well when he speaks or when we write.

I'm not saying it will happen, but if it does and some don't stand, that's more embarassing IMHO. I think they were embarassed by their portrayal in F9/11 and I'll bet they received more than a few emails asking them why they didn't. This may be different.

If it is true that Kennedy will not be the one, don't be so surprised. It's not that he doesn't want to, but you can't vote for your buddy to try and take over the Free World, it's a bad thing.

Also, if your Senator does not stand, and is a Dem, then you get the pleasure of finding other, more Liberal Senatorial candidates to support in 2006, and letting the sitting Senators know why you no longer support them.

p.s. I'm still not convinced that Ed Shultz isn't a Repug himself.

[glitch]

108. Well said - they should all stand. And moderate Republicans need to stand

with them - for they are just as close to extinction as the Democrats.

[Straight Shooter]

38. Democrats are staying the course: compromise, appeasement, capitulation,

submission, and finally, inevitably, annihilation.

I'll say this about Senator Wyden. He can grow up and act like a Senator instead of a pig at the trough, or he'll find me actively campaigning for his opponent when he's up for re-election again.

I have nothing but contempt for these cowardly Senators. They give democracy a bad name.

edit: spelling

[glitch]

110. Vichy Dems will be loathed throughout history. Along with the collaborator

media.

[Nothing Without Hope]

39. In other words, sit down in the back of the bus and say nothing

This sounds like a self-serving thing to say for senators of both parties who are afraid to stand up for what is right but requires courage. Rationalization for cowardice, plus a not-so-subtle boost to the threat level for noncompliance, as if there needed to be directions for either one.

Disgusting.

[liam97]

43. agree, if standing up for an investigation called

by a Congressman of Conyers' stature (not to mention Wgate experience), and widespread evidence of civil rights violations is suicide, then they need to die.

[Nothing Without Hope]

58. You have to ask, what's the PURPOSE of their political career?

If it's self-aggrandizement through sucking up to the empowered cartel, then they should be voted out or impeached if they act criminally.

If it's truly public service, then how can they NOT stand for what they know is justice and the future of democracy?

If they refuse to stand, their political career may survive, but not their hearts or integrity. How can they look their grandchildren in the eye?

There's "political suicide" and then there's losing your self-respect and the pride in your life's accomplishments. The first is a threat and a possibility; the second is definite. Guess they'll have to decide which is more serious.

[tridim]

40. So, it's more important to keep your job than to do what's right?

Good advice Ed. I like Ed, but that was one stupid comment. If I were in the Senate, I'd be the "one" for damn sure. I wouldn't even care if they threatened to kill me. - He says from the comfort of his computer desk.

[Chipper Chat]

41. Does that mean if Barack Obama signs on..

he will most certainly be defeated by Alan Keyes next time around?

[Junkdrawer]

51. I don't think Obama will be sworn in yet...

:shrug:

[Eye_on_prize]

142. someone on another string said new Senators being sworn in Jan 4th - n/t

[k8conant]

167. Yes he will...on Monday, January 3

:kick:

[BrklynLiberal]

45. They should pull a "Spartacus" and every damn one of them should stand up

with Conyers!

[The Judged]

205. Nobody has to stand up. They just need to sign the damn objection!

[nmoliver]

46. maybe not just POLITICAL suicide ...

maybe they are afraid of getting assassinated. The covert kind, you know, the kind that is assumed to be an accidental death, and never investigated further. The kind that hits not just the senator but his or her family as well. The Wellstone kind.

[Peace Patriot]

48. "...without unequivocal evidence of fraud..." ??

Ed has obviously not done his homework on this. The election was rigged going in. BushCon companies--major Bush donors, Bush "Pioneers"--own and control the source code that tabulates all our votes, as SECRET, proprietary information, and colluded with Tom Delay to insure no paper trail. Highly insecure, hackable computers. Open bank vault. Set up for fraud.

Combine with Exit Polls saying Kerry won, and impossible odds that all discrepancies favor Bush (Freeman, Baiman and other expert studies); touchscreens programmed to change Kerry votes to Bush votes, all day long; discrepancies between paper and electronic votes (always favoring Bush); discrepancies between top of the ticket vs. lower ticket (always favoring Bush); suppression of Dem voter registration (obviously favoring Bush); shortage of voting machines and precincts, resulting in up to 11 hour voting lines, in Dem areas only (always favoring Bush); tampering with computers during recount in Ohio (half the machines in Ohio vulnerable--John Kerry filed legal papers on this); Ohio Republican Secy of State refusing to disclose poll signature books, and blocking handcounts; 100,000 to 300,000 phantom votes for Bush in Miami, Dade and Palm Beach Counties in Florida (UC Berkeley study); 57,000 complaints of vote suppression and difficulty in voting reported to Congress (virtually all favoring Bush)...

The evidence is overwhelming.

But even without this mountain of evidence that the election was fixed, the mere fact that this election was completely unverifiable, and that BushCons had easy access through internal company modems, or by pre-programming or hacking of election machinery, should, in any true democracy, require a re-vote.

Why would it be "political suicide" to defend our right to vote in a verifiable election?

Why would it be "political suicide" to stand up against unconscionable and illegal Republican election official's assaults on the rights of black citizens, who took the main hit of vote suppression?

This is not "political suicide." This is political LIFE! LIFE!

[mzmolly]

211. While I agree, I think it's a matter of perception. How many people

in America, feel the election was stolen "at this point?"

I think the thing we forget is that WE are spending mucho time in a virtual echo chamber. Washington is the as well, but the echo chamber is filled with a different perspective.

Right now even I'm only entertaining the very likely possibility that the election was, in fact stolen. I belive that * is capable and his friends are capable and they probably did it.

But, what the Washington insiders believe is another story. I think of it this way ... The people in Washington know one another, and though they don't agree politically many are often friendly. It's like a work sitution where you like your boss, but he's a Republican.

You make an excellent point though. "This is political LIFE." hmmmmmmm, I agree, but I feel it's a matter of whether or not Democrats in the Senate even believe the election was stolen or not. If they do, I expect many to stand up, if they don't they won't contest it.

[RaulVB]

49. "Political suicide"???

Shultz obviously does not understand that the American political system died in the year 2000!

That Senator would be doing the greatest service to this country. Something to be proud of, indeed.

[Peace Patriot]

85. Senators. SenatorS!

All the Democratic Senators should stand up. All! And any Republicans who are true patriots.

And why NOT do this as your first political action in the Senate? Stand up for our right to vote in a verifiable election. Stand up against the BushCon bullies, liars, cheats, thieves and mass murderers.

Who voted for Obama? BushCon delusionists? Nope. Red-blooded Democrats, who would love to have SOMEBODY defend this country against the criminal cabal that has taken it over.

I have never seen such a cowardly, whining, naysaying, nihilistic, hopeless bunch of so-called Democratic commenters as those at DU today touting the "political suicide" line.

We are the party that created and passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And the fascists in the Republican Party have been trying to destroy us ever since with their "Southern Strategy" of appealing to white bigots.

And they've failed time and again--and have only succeeded in recent years by cheating--because bigotry is disgusting to most Americans.

We are the poor! We are the black! We are the brown! We are the gay! We are the defenders of women's rights! We are the students and intellectuals and artists! We are the scientists and the professionals who run this country--the teachers, and nurses, the writers, the techies, the medics and fire fighters! We are the maids and the garbage collectors! We are the small business people! We are the environmentalists and human rights advocates! We are the majority, and we will not allow anyone's right to vote to be taken away, including our own!

Obama knows this speech. Why SHOULDN'T he give it now? And why shouldn't every Democrat in the Senate stand up for the principles of the Voting Rights Act and an honest, verifiable election?

[RaulVB]

100. Yes, it is very easy.

Unfortunately, I think the party you just described has gone AWOL...

[berniew1]

54. Really silly; widespread fraud is fully documented; and dangerous not to

Free Press has lots of documentation of systematic voter suppression,
malfeasance, and fraud; with affidavits from voters, officials, experts; and Richard Phillips has lots more on Ohio and
analysts have documentation on New Mexico and I have documentation on Florida; all summarized at
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

[berniew1]

57. If Congress contests the elction and investigates, I think Kerry will win

Free Press has a huge amount of documentation of systematic suppression of minorities, malfeasance, sloppy process, dirty tricks, and widespread fraud that is well documented with lots of affidavits from voters, officials, and experts. And there is lots of documentation of widespread suppression of minorities and vote machine fraud in Florida and New Mexico.
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
The Greens are likely to win the court case in New Mexico, since the fraud is clearly documented and state law seems to be clearly on their side in the recount contest. This could add much to momentum of investigations in Ohio and Florida, which clearly had widespread fraud as well as suppression. If the electors are contested there will be much more coverage of the really rotten processes in at least 3 states and more more public awareness. This could start a momentum that would be hard to stop.

[pauldp]

69. Thanks for the synopsis! Bookmarked it. n/t

[mzmolly]

132. Send it on to the Senate.

:hi:

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

56. If you're not doing anything, you might as well be dead

Every democrat should have opposed the Iraq vote, cause it was the right thing to do.

What would that have done to the elections in Nov.

There will be no opposition party if we don't act now.

[understandinglife]

59. It'll be far worse than 'political suicide' for those who don't join...

....Conyers.

Peace and Happy New Year.

[SueZhope]

60. if the tables were turned

would they even be talking like this?

we all know the MSM would
be all over it from day one.
Senators would be lined up at the gates
to contest.

If at some point fraud was disproved then
they would spin it so that it was Clinton's fault
or some other distortion of reality.

[bleever]

62. The Senate is all about procedure as safeguard against abuse.

Now, none have asked yet, but if I were writing for a senator, I'd give him something like this:



"As Americans, we hold our right to vote sacred, and trust it will be treated as sacred, for it is the sacrament of our democracy.

"As a Senator, I hold my duty to protecting our democracy as a sacred trust, remembering that I am acting for the millions of good people I represent.

"In acknowledging that Ohio has not fulfilled its own legally prescribed processes to safeguard the accuracy and fairness of the selection of its electors, I would then be remiss in my duty if I did not join with the distinguished members of the other body in noting for the record that the rule of law was not followed with the full faith and careful consideration that is required of us.

"Here, in what is the ultimate venue of review for this election, I am mindful that sometimes, when it is the most difficult to speak the whole truth, it is also the most important."


:thumbsup:

[OhioBlue]

72. Exactly

They need to go one step further tho and take a page from the Repugs book - repeat it over and over from AAR to Paul Begala to op-eds to even recruiting some 527 ads. If the repugs have taught us nothing, let it be that if you repeat it enough, it MUST be true. The problems with the vote seem to be dismissed by almost everyone - that is why people that raise a question are being ostracized. Even MMoore isn't on freakin' board. The US population needs to know that at the VERY LEAST there are serious doubts about the legitimacy of the election. Frame it as a dedication to democracy and repeat, repeat, repeat. We know THEY will spin it in a negative way, so freakin' what. And.... the long lines are absolutely BS. The elections boards should have known what to expect - it was all over that this would be a very high turn out.

[Cha]

65. Oh give me the person who would

"commit political suicide" and stand up for what he believes in!

Fuck politics!

[mzmolly]

130. Ya know, I agree.

:hi:

[The Backlash Cometh]

66. Ed Shultz can kiss my off-white ass.

[Chipper Chat]

68. The tsunami disaster came along at the right time..

overpowering any other news or concerns of the day. FOX has it wall-to-wall (except for the troops saying "hi" to loved ones at home) and blurbs about Paris Hilton, etc:
Nope - this whole election-fraud issue will probably be buried & forgotten, and King George will continue to dump this country down the drains into Hell - while the Walmart-loving freeper-reddies-blind-to reality -gay-hating pseudochristians continue to squeal with delight.

[McCamy Taylor]

70. Might be "suicide assassination" a favorite Bush cabal tactic...

...but Senators from firmly red states have nothing to worry about their constituents despise W. I would prefer that several Senators plan to do it and that no one firmly announce their intentions to do it, because I really wouldnt put it past Rove and Co. to arrange some nasty accidents and blame terrorists.

[GettysbergII]

71. Political suicide?

I think if its just one lonely senator standing up it's the DNC he has to worry about more than the GOP. Take a look at Howard Dean as an example. The Sen. that stands alone against the Evil Empire will become an instant grassroots favorite that alot of us will support in every way we possibly can. And he'll be the only Dem along with the Reps. that support the challenge that I will support again.

If a number of Dems stand up with one angry voice demanding transparency before any electoral vote is ratified and keep repeating the same questions and their must be at least 100 questions (at the same time as accusing the media of being falling to do their job) they would expose a much bigger national scandal than Watergate.

Why did the exit polls differ so significantly from the actual results? Why hasn't the raw data to the incriminating exit polls been made public?

Why did Blackwell permit less voting machine per voter in African American districts? Why did the same bogus felony list biased against African Americans reappear in Florida? Why are minorities many times more likely that whites to be forced to cast provincial ballots. Etc. Etc. Why aren't there any felony charges being pressed on the identified parties engaged in such vote suppression.

Why did Bush sit on the EAC nominations (and then only chose nominees who favored no paper trails) for HAVA until late October of 2003 thus ensuring that there would be no federal standards or guidelines for the $3.8 billion in federal funding given to states to replace outdated election machines with the unsecure machines of partisan owned companies. How were these machines certified and can the companies that certified them prove they were secure?


Why did Blackwell allow Triad specialists to be alone to manipulate the triad machines before the Ohio recount but wouldn't allow the public to look at public voting records.

Theres just scores and scores of questions that the Dems could force to be answered if they stood up together and demanded in loud angry voices over and over again that they MUST be answered. And I believe before the dust settled the American people would be demanding a truly transparent election process and fairness guidelines for the media. The Republicans could eventually force a final vote to give Bush the electoral votes but Bush would spend the rest of his term in a bigger scandal than Clinton or Nixon had to face and eventually it would bring his administration down.

So what's stopping the DNP from acting? And if the DNP won't whats stopping us from starting a new party that will?

[FULL_METAL_HAT]

77. If the DNP fails we'll be playing "jaihouse rock" at our party :(

I frankly believe not acting is the equivalent of "democracy's suicide".

In other words the only party we'll be able to join will be the Tombstone Party :(

[sunnystarr]

128. Is it the old or the new senate who will deal with this on 1/06?

If it's the old, then why not Daschle?

[GettysbergII]

141. I'm pretty sure its the new senate

Obama will be sworn in on the 4th I believe. Whether that means the 'old' senators are ineligible to challenge I'm not entirely sure.

[AmerDem]

74. "political suicide" to have Integrity?

The second the masses start believing bull shit like this is the second we as a country loose all hope. They have an "OBLIGATION" to stand up and tell the American people of the massive fraud brought onto our election system. Sometimes you have to say, :wtf:

[mzmolly]

101. The problem is that not everyone believes there was "massive fraud"

I don't know if people here understand that?

The GAO is investigating but the results are not conclusive, yet.

[AmerDem]

106. back to the main argument

If the masses aren't aware of the massive voting fraud, it's time we start electing people who have the desire and fire to take back our country. We have all the power in the world (while we have it) to make anything happen. I see to many in our party playing the role of victim rather than using all of this to fuel an uprising.

[katinmn]

116. So? They can be educated

the only way to do that is through an OPEN and transparent process, something which has been lacking.

Why does confronting the fraud worry you so much?

edit: spelling

[mzmolly]

127. Why on earth would you think confronting fraud worries me?

I don't have Conyers in my avatar for "nuthin."

I'm all for confronting fraud, I just am not into lambasting our Senators for not drawing a conclusion on the matter as of yet. I'm also not hanging my hat on whether or not a Senator steps forward on the 6th. The investigation will/SHOULD continue regardless.

:hi:

[berniew1]

223. The widespread fraud is documented down to precinct and machine level

by the EIRS hotline reporting system that got thousands of reports of irregularities in each of the swing states like Florida and Ohio.

And the touchscreen Default to Bush pattern is well documented in several Florida counties by those reports, and the poll workers said it was going on all day, that they were aware of it.
The problem isn't lack of documentation, its lack of investigation and followup
http:/www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

[Tom Rinaldo]

78. Time to send our Senators JFK's book: "Profiles in Courage"

If soldiers can sacrifice their lives for our Democracy, a politician can risk his or her career. It's been done before. JFK writes about it.

[Patsy Stone]

79. Why are we talking about

what a talk show host thinks anyway? Did I miss something? Is it a done deal? Why are we spending time and energy trying to divine whether it will or won't happen because somebody said it wouldn't?

Not there's anything wrong with intelligent discourse or anything, but I'm just askin'.

[Annus Horribilis]

81. I Don't Buy That

If someone like Kennedy contested the election, does anyone really think he will lose his seat next election? Or even someone like Byrd?

[IStriker]

120. Yes.

[Yupster]

166. I think Byrd may lose anyway

if the Republicans can find someone willing to run.

He already looks pretty bad physically. Two years from now may be much worse. I think of Senator Roth.

[KnowerOfLogic]

82. I'm sick and tired of hearing about what is or isn't 'political suicide;'

LEADERSHIP positions are not for spineless wimps. I know this may be a crazy radical idea, but some of these senators might want to consider that their position of public trust and leadership calls them to purpose higher than ensuring their own re-election.

[mzmolly]

171. I agree. I think the issue really is that most Senators don't know if

there was fraud or not, at this point ...

[KnowerOfLogic]

192. Maybe; i don't know. it's sad if *we* have to lead *them,* though;

*they* should be investigating this stuff and telling *us* what needs to be done.

[mzmolly]

193. Conyers and others are leading. But I do understand your point.

They are called our "representatives" and *we* are those they are to "represent."

Unfortunately even in regard to the war WE knew before many of THEM that it was BS.

It is crazy, but I think they're so damned isolated in the world of Washington they lose touch.

[Carolab]

84. Yeah and Ed also said that BLOGGERS should be STOPPED!

I called in to his show a couple of weeks ago to complain about this completely irresponsible statement he made. He said that bloggers don't give their names and that they therefore have a hidden agenda to "smear politicians". I explained to him that bloggers are getting unfiltered news and that hidden agendas are ONE thing but NEWS is another. I also told him that plenty of blogs have authors that are very credible and that they most certainly are identified by name. I also told him that many bloggers who don't give our full names do so out of fear of recrimination from the government (and right wingnuts).

I wonder what Ed's "hidden agenda" is.

[mzmolly]

91. I don't think he has a hidden agenda. I just think he's coming from a

different viewpoint.

[LittleClarkie]

165. Ed Schultz is entitled to his opinion

I do think that bloggers can be a double edged sword. We get more unfiltered news, but then again this is the internet. Anonymity is a problem because of the lack of accountability. People just have to be careful of where they get their news, is all.

And I didn't appreciate people like Safire during the election talking about certain conservative bloggers and their news as if it were the gospel truth.

I imagine there are liberal bloggers that are just as irresponsible as these people were.

I do like Ed, but he's probably not liberal enough for some. He's a voice we will need though, a liberal voice coming out of the heartland.

Not everyone believes the same. I don't see what it would hurt to give the guy some slack for not being on the same page as you.

[lonestarnot]

216. Sounds like Limbaugh...The doper dude...That was almost more than

I could take first off then when he whined around about "What do you want me to do about it...." blah blah, stopped listening.

[KoKo]

242. He urged his listeners to support WA State Recount! $30,000 was donated

See my post above on this thread about this. I realize you are disappointed if you called him and he blew you off. I would be, too. But, if his listeners gave to WA State recount and Gregoire won...then I hardly believe he's a Rove plant...

[Carolab]

86. And what is their JOB if not to speak out on our behalf, exactly?

It's their DAMN JOB to do this.

[nashville_brook]

111. damn straight AND how come repubs can pretty much do anything

from shutting down the government to waging bogus wars and NOT get voted out. it's time we start playing by a new rule book.

and who cares what ed schultz thinks? who the hell is ed schultz to dismiss all the suppressed voters... ?

a radio personality? a radio personality is now the standard-bearer of democracy. give me a break.

[Raksha]

207. And another thing...

I haven't seen anyone bring this up yet, but if no Democratic Senator stands up, it isn't only their base who will despise them. The BushCons will despise them every bit as much, if not MORE! Instead of merely believing the loyal opposition is a bunch of spineless wimps, they would then KNOW it beyond any shadow of a doubt. The message that kind of a betrayal would send to the Democratic base is bad enough, but the message it would send to the Repukes is almost too terrifying to think about.

[mdb]

87. Voted out by who? The very same system they should be contesting? n/t

[electric-eye]

89. People would rally to a Dem with guts enough to stand be counted

Fuch this "oh just be quiet and docile and maybe they'll let you play" bullshit.

Damn, I'd love to see Dean in the Senate. Or DK.

[Kashka-Kat]

99. well we have unequivocable proof that recount not conducted lawfully!

3% samples not random in 86 out of 88 counties , witnesses refused access to poll books, hand recounts not done when required, etc. etc.

The recount procedure is a mechanism by which fraud could've been detected and proven, but the process was obstructed and not completed in a lawful manner. That should mean something to these senators, no?

"Prove that fraud was committed"

Well I say, prove to me that it wasn't!

[IndyOp]

102. Help! Congressional Briefing on Vote Fraud in Ohio - FAX to Senators!

There is STRONG evidence --
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x217897>

Send a copy to Ed Shultz too!

:bounce:

[mzmolly]

150. Thanks IndyOp

:hi:

[zapped 1]

103. not true

When voters find out what we and Conyers already know, theu will LOSE respect for the senators who didn't stand up for their rights.

Besides, Ed Shultz and his wife shoot deer.

[steve2470]

105. I think the Senators and Reps should at least ask for a full

investigation without using the word "fraud". Let's say, theoretically, that no fraud is ever proven. Then at least the people who stand up can say they only wanted an accounting.

[insane_cratic_gal]

109. Any Blue State Won't do this!

Senator Shouldn't have to worry about being voted out for contesting the election. They are safe with their base voters.

Boxer
Kennedy
Kerry himself (but there is the whole partisan issue there)

Are good examples

They should only worry about being thrown out on their ass if they don't do it. On principle alone, they have to have the balls now to prove they are the Representative for the people. That Democracy matters more then appearances.

[saracat]

113. Conyers said today that he is sure he will have several Senators!

[mzmolly]

129. I sure hope he's right!

:hi:

[IndyPriest]

139. OK, msmolly: time to put up --

25 bucks says Conyers is telling the truth. SEVERAL senators will stand to contest on Jan. 6. They either do not fear political suicide, or think it ain't political suicide. So, if you lose, I'll give the $25 to a needy family I know. If I lose, you can do with it what you want.

Ready?

[mzmolly]

148. I totally agree Conyers is telling the truth. I don't dispute that there

are serious questions surrounding this election.

As I said previously, why on earth do you think I wear the man's avatar?

I'm not placing bets because I am not a fortune teller. And, I actually hope like hell your right! :hi:

[lthuedk]

123. Fuck a spineless party.

[katinmn]

124. The Greens may see a tremendous influx of active members soon

[righteous1]

153. Don't you think that's been their plan all along? BTW I agree

with you, been having some thoughts along the same line

[katinmn]

159. yup. David Cobb is going to be in Minnesota next week

If it's open to the public, I'll be there.

I'm not going to accept silence from our Dem leaders anymore.

I sure hope they show some backbone on Jan. 6. If they do, there's still some hope in reforming the party through PDA.

[mzmolly]

172. The so called "spineless" are THE reason fraud is being investigated.

Conyers and other Dems on the House Judiciary started a formal inquiry of the 04 election on November 5th, 2004.

* The "spinless" independent parties merely followed.

[roseBudd]

136. Senator Byrd is the only WTF senator who has the cajones

An round the clock Byrd vigil is in order.

[mzmolly]

149. I tend to agree.

I am really hoping he'll be standing up once again.

[buddysmellgood]

145. To not contest is to watch democracy die. We need courage in the senate.

[nickdw]

151. too little too late, or the reverse?

"It would be political suicide."

No it would not. Unequivocal by political terminology is sketchy.

It would be political trauma for a republican Senator(s) to contest the election, not like that's going to happen.

It would be political cutting-edge for a democratic Senator or Representatives to contest the election, whoever does it would be close to getting plural representation but it probably won't happen soon enough.

Conyers has the truth on his side. Expect a whirlwind in 2005!

9-11 victims, rest in peace.

N

[lonestarnot]

155. Listened to Ed Shultz regularly for a period. He continually avoided

election fraud issues. Not so sure about that Jones Radio Network. Quit listening regularly.

[stlsaxman]

222. I don't think Schultz is truly liberal-

it seems to me he took the job because he really wanted to be Rush but with so many clones he wouldn't get a show if he came from The Right. just my opinion...

[mod mom]

158. Maybe we need to stress the CIVIL RIGHTS abuses

I always thought equal protection under the law should have been the path we followed.

[mzmolly]

174. EXCELLENT POINT!

duh! I never considered it from quite that same angle.

[roenyc]

178. just posted this up there but not as nice!

must be done for the Black/minority american.

[mzmolly]

180. For the poor American of any color actually.

I grew up in largely minority areas so I am careful to state the facts as they pertain to all KWIM?

:hi:

How does this sound? "We had a voting system that catered to the elite in this election, and we need to contest the election on the grounds of equal protection under the law."

Republicans like to use the word "elite" alot, I say throw it right back at them.

[roenyc]

186. same here.

i grew up in the ghetto. guess thats why we can relate to all people.

sounds good. catered to the haves, not the have nots. lol.

[mzmolly]

182. I wonder what the constitution lays out in regard to contesting an

election? Though, most of the laws pertaining to such an act were probably written when 'WHITE MEN' were the only ones allowed to vote?

[bleever]

188. There was a thread about this weeks ago; the constitution provides that

any state that disenfranchises eligible voters will have its number of electors reduced. 14th Amendment, I think.

[NicRic]

160. What happen to doing whats right ,let the chips fall...

where the may. If so many of our elected Dems would have not worried so much about the polls and worried more about getting the truth out ,perhpas we would be inagurating Kerry this month instead of the current idiot we are now stuck with for another 4 years !

[flyarm]

169. what difference will it make??

with the gerrymandering the reugs are doing nationwide.. every dems seat is on a slippery slope anyway!! and if you think choice point or clear channel or the thugs on msm aren't going to open the flood gates on everything the dems do in congress or the senate..then i don't know what world you have been in or shultz either??

If a dem senator doesn't stand up now..there will be no standing up later..they are like the cowboys with the wagons pulled around tight and the indians are assending with fire and might...either the cowboys stand up now..or they will be overcome no matter what they do later!!
It now or never...there is no later...
rove and delay have even begun their redistricting in calif plans...they have already prevailed in colorado, fla , texas..don't think pa isn't on there game plan, and michigan, and wisconsin...
they got away with it already..they have begun in calif...

there is no next time for dems in congress or the senate...

[librechik]

170. Lautenberg, Hollings, Edwards, maybe even Campbell...

target your letters and phone calls, folks!

[mzmolly]

175. And Byrd.

:hi:

[marcologico]

184. I really think it could change by Thursday

We've got Conyers' report coming out, Kerry's legal motions filed, big demonstrations planned and hopefully thousands of letters and calls pouring into senator's offices, so they might surprise us!

[mzmolly]

189. I like the way you think!

:hi:

[marcologico]

201. hey thanks!

:toast:

[DemonFighterLives]

190. Ed Schulz loves his job

If you've heard his new commercials, he's already resigned to the fact that we have 4 more years of B*sh. He likes his job and without B*shco in office, his talking head position would be in jeopardy. I like a good share of what he does, but there are times when he makes me cringe. Like this time.
It is time to throw caution to the wind. Anyone who stands up to the cabal will go down in the history books as a hero.
Great thread and thanks to those who are presenting the proof.
If the dems. can get their sh*t together, by standing as one, the repercussions will be nil. Even if there are repecussions, they would mostly be positive in that dems will be enamored with them.

[mzmolly]

194. Ya know I agree with your later point:

If the dems. can get their sh*t together, by standing as one, the repercussions will be nill. Even if there are repecussions, they would mostly be positive in that dems will be enamored with them.

IF they stand as ONE, Ed's point and my agreement with it will be nill.

[DemonFighterLives]

195. Thanks mzmolly

I noticed that I spelled nil wrong. Duh! Sorry for the bad influence. :D

[Niche]

197. It will be suicide to them IF THEY DON'T!

family, friends and other Dems I know are leaving the party if they don't stand up. That's a promise.

[mzmolly]

198. And Dobson is threatening to take out Dems if they "don't fall in line"

too.

Pity, because the Dems started the investigation into fraud on 11/5/2004. I hope your friends and family will consider all the facts first.

:hi:

[Amaryllis]

202. I'm hearing this a lot. I keep wondering if they get this, that we aren't

willing to support a party or officials who continue to let our elections get stolen without a fight. Many, many people are saying this...I wrote it to my senator. Are others writing this to theirs? We see the Greens and Libs standing up and fighting...

[SicTransit]

206. I am always curious when I see someone say this

- that you will not support Democratic party if the senators or the party in general do not/does not object to the electoral votes on Jan 6th.

What I am curious about is - what do you intend to do? In 2006 and 2008, do you intend to vote for the Greens/Libertarians, even though you know that this is a way to remove any chance of winning from the Democratic party and to ensure not just a Republican majority, but most probably a supermajority? Or do you just mean that you will vote for progressive candidates in the Democratic primaries (didn't you do that before too) instead of for established ones?

[Amaryllis]

229. I am not sure what I am going to do. I just know that unless they

aggressively take on election fraud there is no point in giving them time and money only to have another election stolen. If they get really aggressvive about fighting fraud, then I will continue to support them. I had been calling and emailing info about e-voting and tabulating issues to anyone I could for months prior to the election. The DNC seems oblivious. I knew this one was going to be stolen again. I still worked my heart out for Kerry, just hoping that maybe we'd win by enough of a margin to compensate for hacking and voter suppression. Didn't realize that it didn't matter how much margin we had, they'd just make sure to have that much more.

The theft of this election was completely predictable. The problems with both suppression and e-voting were all over the election reform websites; incident after indident in FL and OH in the months preceeding the election. I and many others were pretty sure this one would be stolen, and we for sure knew they were trying their best. I registered a young black man who had been in Fl in 2000. He told me they had the roads blocked so people couldn't get to their polling place. Jeb did that again this year. Why weren't the Dems all over Jeb this year? He did everything he did in 2000 again this year.

What I don't know is if our leadership really is clueless about what has been going on, or if they don't care, or??? I don't have a logical explanation. Meanwhile, those of us who worked our hearts out for Kerry are now working just as hard on election fraud and where is our leadership? Talking about reinventing the Dems and what should be our message and where did we go wrong and what do we need to do differently the next time. DUH! you need to stand up and get really aggressive about the fraud issue. And this goes for MoveOn and ACT as well.

If you have another perspective, I'd like to hear it, please.

[SicTransit]

230. My perspective is that Democrats

concentrating on the "election fraud" (which I am not convinced was nearly enough to have cost the election) is going to severely damage the Democratic party. One side of this destructiveness is demonstrated by your post above - that is, if the DNC does not take these fraud theories seriously. The other side is if they do, they will become the laughing stock of the MSM and the "sore loser" label will be attached to Democratic party for decades to come. So it is damned if you do damned if you don't.

[Amaryllis]

234. And that is where we have a major difference of opinion. Those of

us who have been following this issue, some of us since 2000, are astounded that anyone who looks at the evidence can believe it wasn't enough to affect the outcome. All it takes is 11 votes siphoned off each precinct in OH to change the outcome.

see this
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20040816&s=dugger
How They Could Steal The Election This Time
Essentially predicted what would happen.

And when you say if the DNC takes these issues seriously it is going to seriously damage them, we say if they don't take them seriously, they WILL NEVER WIN ANOTHER ELECTION. NEVER.

Have you read the material Conyers is coming up with? Have you watched the video of the hearings on C-span? Have you read any of the statistical analysis on these forums? Have you read any of the accounts of the recount volunteers on the Cobb website? How many of these incidents does it take to change the outcome? How many voting machine malfunctions in Bush's favor does it take?

[SicTransit]

238. Yes, read it all. It is all conjectures and innuendoes, with

no hard proof whatsoever, and you know it.

Let's say "voting machine malfunctions". You are implying that the machines were deliberately programmed to miscount the votes.

So:

1. People claim that the machines were programmed to miscount votes in Bush's favor.

2. In the recount, precincts that constituted 3% of the votes in each county were hand-counted and machine-counted at the same time.

3. If the machine was programmed to miscount votes, the discrepancy would show up in that case.

4. The counter-argument of the "bad machines" theorists is that the machines were programmed to correctly count the 3% precincts but not the rest of the county.

5. In order for (4) above to be correct, you have to have the people who picked the precincts that constututed the 3% to be "in" on the scam and pick exactly the precincts which the machines are programmed to count correctly.

6. There are usually at least 2 or more people per county, a Republican and a Democrat who decide which precincts go into the 3%.

7. According to (6) and (5) above, in order for the whole scheme to work you need a couple of hundred people across Ohio, both R and D, to be in on the fraud scheme.

You can see where this falls apart. It is hard to imagine (7) happening, is it?

The statistical analysis done on these forums is by amateurs, who do not take into account any of the considerations of the professionals. I mean come on, the guy who *invented* exit polls (Mitofsky) tells you that the raw data cannot be used to prove fraud, why do you take the word of people who know nothing about polling over his?

[stlsaxman]

221. Afraid not- just watched the panel discussion on c-span called

"The Future Of The Democratic Party" and all these guys in the DLC haven't a clue. It's very depressing to watch. No, those guys don't "get it".

[thebigdonkey]

200. I disagree

As we have learned from * it works well to play to your base. I think someone like Ted Kennedy could get away with it. I also think Byrd has nothing to lose as someone said earlyer.

[Shalom]

203. What's Wrong With Political Suicide For Justice and America ? nt

[The Judged]

204. Better to be voted out than Diebolded or Tabulated out! Ensure the vote!

[saracat]

208. Sorry Molly. Ed Shultz is a bit of an ass.

He leanns republican and I wouldn't trust anything he says. Who would they be ostracized by ? The repukes? They are already! So what is the point?

[TruthIsAll]

209. He is full of crap. It would be suicide NOT to contest.

He is trying to demoralize the base and spin at the same time.

I have a feeling we will all be pleasantly surprised come Jan 6.

[forintegrity]

210. I'm voting out anyone who DOESN'T contest!

And so should you!

The way I look at it...any one who contests it is nothing but a HERO for DEMOCRACY!!!

It's their responsibility to contest this!

[mzmolly]

212. I am certain any Dem who believes the election was stolen will contest

it.

Question becomes, who in the Senate believes (TODAY) that the election was stolen?

Welcome to DU! :toast:

[mzmolly]

214. SEE WILL PITTS TAKE ON THIS HERE:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=221213&mesg_id=221616&page=

I think he lays it out in plain english.

Also note the Conyers strategy. :hi:

[Boswells_Johnson]

217. By refusing to stand up, they're illustrating what is wrong with the

system.

A person can be in politics for either the right reasons, or the wrong reasons. I've never adhered to the notion that one should ever compromise when doing "the right thing".

[mzmolly]

219. "The Right Thing" is very subjective.

That my friend is the problem.

:hi:

Welcome!

[Smirking_Chimp]

220. Thats what separates men from boys.

If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

[bush_is_wacko]

231. If a Senators CAREER is more important than our CONSTITUTION,

I won't vote for him/her anyway and neither should anyone else! I get the feeling a lot of people just want to go back to "business as usual" after Jan. 6th. Guess what? The can of worms has already been opened, covered with saran wrap, and is rotting in the back of the refrigerator. WHY CAN'T AMERICA SMELL IT? Election reform and the restoration of our Constitution is not going to die unless they/we let it die! We have the power to make their lives miserable if they do so. Our Democratic Senators need to grow some balls! Standing up for this country and fighting the battles that have not been fought for the past several election cycles could be ASTOUNDINGLY beneficial to their careers as well! Re-creating a Democracy is no small feat, and those with the courage to do it will be rewarded by those of us with the brains to realize how much is REALLY at stake! Quite frankly, I'd be willing to work my ass off to get a Senator with some guts re-elected to the house or if he/she so chooses elected to the highest office of the land. This country will unite behind someone with that kind of strength!

[AmericanErrorist]

232. I would not mind if the Dems went down at this point.

Someone should challenge this election, which would leave to one of two scenarios

1) The Democratic party down completely so as to start a new 2nd party (perhaps the best chance to take back the country)
2) Or that challange could find public support thus re-energizing the party around electoral reform.

Unfortunatly the Dems hate scenario number one so much that they aren't going to consider scenario number 2. I'm fine with either.

P.S. I think the Republicans probably fudged a few percenage points in the national total by insisting on fraudulent voting machines.

[GetTheRightVote]

235. Hello All Duers, Just a few comments

If they do not stand up for us, and yes, that is what we are asking them to do, do not ever forget it:

1. Have we really just elected a bunch of cry babies whose only concern is their careers and not to serve the American Citizen. If so why are we electing them ??

2. If they do not stand up to the obvious election fraud, I do believe it is obvious, then why would we vote for them again ??

3. If they are not willing to do what we regular folk would do for our neighbors, why would we vote for them again ??

4. If this is not the time for them to stand up for us, when is that time going to be ?? and tell me again why I or you should vote for them again??

5. This is not about them, it is about us, the American Citizen whom they serve because we elect them to do so, it is our tax dollars they live on. So why would we elect them again ??

These are only a few comments, but please attempt to make me understand why I or you should ever vote for any of them, from which ever state they hail, ever again in our life times ?? If I do a bad job at work do I not get fired, so let us hold them to the same standard to which we are held. If they fail to do their job and stand up for us, they all should be fired. We are told never to forget 9/11, which we will not, but I say let us not forget 11/2/2000. The day that democracy and our leaders failed us.

I love this following saying, "Fool me once fool on you, fool me twice fool on me". Are you going to be that fool ?? I hope not.

[AmericanErrorist]

236. Because It's the only game in town, that's why.

I'd love to see a rise of another party as a force in American politics, but that cannot happen unless the Dems are marginalized. The only expedient plans of action right now consists of supporting the Democrats and play the machines count the votes right or aiding in abetting in their ultimate destruction and taking your chances with a third party.

Electoral reform won't do that much good until we have candidate reform.

[The Judged]

237. Political suicide for a DLC Senator, not for a DNC Senator!

The DLC Senators are the Re-uglican branch of the DNC.

They need to be removed from the peoples party ASAP.

They are the ones who cannot stand for the people and act on the peoples behalf, but who can stand and act for corporations!

They have everything to lose from corporations, whereas DNC Senators have everything to gain from people!

The Re-uglicans have stolen our political party from right under our noses!

Time for the correction to begin!

In my mind, this is just as important as election theft, because our political party has been hijacked by members of the Re-uglican Revolutionary Committee, and they now stand between us and our Democracy.

IMO

[mattclearing]

239. Who is Ed Schultz, and why should I care?

Not to be a pain, and the power of Google has helped me to find out who Ed Schultz is, but really, what he's saying is ridiculous. It accepts the premise that anyone wants to work with someone who refuses to uphold our franchise.

There is nothing dangerous about defending and upholding the right to vote.

[KoKo]

244. $30,000 given by his listeners for WA Recount is pretty good! At his

urging...

The MoveOn Political Action Committee, connected to the liberal activist group MoveOn.org, donated $250,000. Liberal talk-radio host Ed Schultz asked his listeners to telephone the Democrats and donate, raising about $30,000.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x94853

[mattclearing]

247. It's political suicide not to contest the Ohio election.

After all, if we accept fraudulent elections and a fraudulent election system without a fight, we can expect to continue to lose in fraudulent elections.

[Walt Starr]

243. He is absolutely correct

I'm sorry to all who put hopes into this, but the fact is that this would be political suicide.