The Stolen Election of 2004 by Michael Parenti
The 2004 presidential contest between Democratic
challenger Senator John
Kerry and the Republican incumbent, President Bush
Jr., amounted to
another stolen election. This has been well documented
by such
investigators as Rep. John Conyers, Mark Crispin
Miller, Bob Fitrakis,
Harvey Wasserman, Bev Harris, and others. Here is an
overview of what
they have reported, along with observations of my own.
Some 105 million citizens voted in 2000, but in 2004
the turnout climbed
to at least 122 million. Pre-election surveys
indicated that among the
record 16.8 million new voters Kerry was a heavy
favorite, a fact that
went largely unreported by the press. In addition,
there were about two
million progressives who had voted for Ralph Nader in
2000 who switched
to Kerry in 2004.
Yet the official 2004 tallies showed Bush with 62
million votes, about
11.6 million more than he got in 2000. Meanwhile Kerry
showed only eight
million more votes than Gore received in 2000. To have
achieved his
remarkable 2004 tally, Bush would needed to have kept
all his 50.4
million from 2000, plus a majority of the new voters,
plus a large share
of the very liberal Nader defectors.
Nothing in the campaign and in the opinion polls
suggest such a mass
crossover. The numbers simply do not add up.
In key states like Ohio, the Democrats achieved
immense success at
registering new voters, outdoing the Republicans by as
much as five to
one. Moreover the Democratic party was unusually
united around its
candidate—or certainly against the incumbent
president. In contrast,
prominent elements within the GOP displayed open
disaffection, publicly
voicing serious misgivings about the Bush
administration’s huge budget
deficits, reckless foreign policy, theocratic
tendencies, and threats to
individual liberties.
Sixty newspapers that had endorsed Bush in 2000
refused to do so in
2004; forty of them endorsed Kerry.
All through election day 2004, exit polls showed Kerry
ahead by 53 to 47
percent, giving him a nationwide edge of about 1.5
million votes, and a
solid victory in the electoral college. Yet strangely
enough, the
official tally gave Bush the election. Here are some
examples of how the
GOP “victory” was secured.
---In some places large numbers of Democratic
registration forms
disappeared, along with absentee ballots and
provisional ballots.
Sometimes absentee ballots were mailed out to voters
just before
election day, too late to be returned on time, or they
were never mailed
at all.
---Overseas ballots normally reliably distributed by
the State
Department were for some reason distributed by the
Pentagon in 2004.
Nearly half of the six million American voters living
abroad---a
noticeable number of whom formed anti-Bush
organizations---never
received their ballots or got them too late to vote.
Military personnel,
usually more inclined toward supporting the president,
encountered no
such problems with their overseas ballots.
---Voter Outreach of America, a company funded by the
Republican
National Committee, collected thousands of voter
registration forms in
Nevada, promising to turn them in to public officials,
but then
systematically destroyed the ones belonging to
Democrats.
--- Tens of thousands of Democratic voters were
stricken from the rolls
in several states because of “felonies” never
committed, or committed by
someone else, or for no given reason. Registration
books in Democratic
precincts were frequently out-of-date or incomplete.
---Democratic precincts---enjoying record
turnouts---were deprived of
sufficient numbers of polling stations and voting
machines, and many of
the machines they had kept breaking down. After
waiting long hours many
people went home without voting. Pro-Bush precincts
almost always had
enough voting machines, all working well to make
voting quick and
convenient.
---A similar pattern was observed with student
populations in several
states: students at conservative Christian colleges
had little or no
wait at the polls, while students from liberal arts
colleges were forced
to line up for as long as ten hours, causing many to
give up.
---In Lucas County, Ohio, one polling place never
opened; the voting
machines were locked in an office and no one could
find the key. In
Hamilton County many absentee voters could not cast a
Democratic vote
for president because John Kerry’s name had been
“accidentally” removed
when Ralph Nader was taken off the ballot.
---A polling station in a conservative evangelical
church in Miami
County, Ohio, recorded an impossibly high turnout of
98 percent, while a
polling place in Democratic inner-city Cleveland
recorded an impossibly
low turnout of 7 percent.
---Latino, Native American, and African American
voters in New Mexico
who favored Kerry by two to one were five times more
likely to have
their ballots spoiled and discarded in districts
supervised by
Republican election officials. Many were given
provisional ballots that
subsequently were never counted. In these same
Democratic areas Bush
“won” an astonishing 68 to 31 percent upset victory.
One Republican
judge in New Mexico discarded hundreds of provisional
ballots cast for
Kerry, accepting only those that were for Bush.
---Cadres of rightwing activists, many of them
religious
fundamentalists, were financed by the Republican
Party. Deployed to key
Democratic precincts, they handed out flyers warning
that voters who had
unpaid parking tickets, an arrest record, or owed
child support would be
arrested at the polls---all untrue. They went door to
door offering to
“deliver” absentee ballots to the proper office, and
announcing that
Republicans were to vote on Tuesday (election day) and
Democrats on
Wednesday.
---Democratic poll watchers in Ohio, Arizona, and
other states, who
tried to monitor election night vote counting, were
menaced and shut out
by squads of GOP toughs. In Warren County, Ohio,
immediately after the
polls closed Republican officials announced a
“terrorist attack” alert,
and ordered the press to leave. They then moved all
ballots to a
warehouse where the counting was conducted in secret,
producing an
amazingly high tally for Bush, some 14,000 more votes
than he had
received in 2000. It wasn’t the terrorists who
attacked Warren County.
---Bush did remarkably well with phantom populations.
The number of his
votes in Perry and Cuyahoga counties in Ohio, exceeded
the number of
registered voters, creating turnout rates as high as
124 percent. In
Miami County nearly 19,000 additional votes eerily
appeared in Bush’s
column after all precincts had reported. In a small
conservative
suburban precinct of Columbus, where only 638 people
were registered,
the touchscreen machines tallied 4,258 votes for Bush.
---In almost half of New Mexico’s counties, more votes
were reported
than were recorded as being cast, and the tallies were
consistently in
Bush’s favor. These ghostly results were dismissed by
New Mexico’s
Republican Secretary of State as an “administrative
lapse.”
Exit polls showed Kerry solidly ahead of Bush in both
the popular vote
and the electoral college. Exit polls are an
exceptionally accurate
measure of elections. In the last three elections in
Germany, for
example, exit polls were never off by more than
three-tenths of one
percent.
Unlike ordinary opinion polls, the exit sample is
drawn from people who
have actually just voted. It rules out those who say
they will vote but
never make it to the polls, those who cannot be
sampled because they
have no telephone or otherwise cannot be reached at
home, those who are
undecided or who change their minds about whom to
support, and those who
are turned away at the polls for one reason or
another.
Exit polls have come to be considered so reliable that
international
organizations use them to validate election results in
countries around
the world.
Republicans argued that in 2004 the exit polls were
inaccurate because
they were taken only in the morning when Kerry voters
came out in
greater numbers. (Apparently Bush voters sleep late.)
In fact, the
polling was done at random intervals all through the
day, and the
evening results were as much favoring Kerry as the
early results.
It was also argued that pollsters focused more on
women (who favored
Kerry) than men, or maybe large numbers of grumpy
Republicans were less
inclined than cheery Democrats to talk to pollsters.
No evidence was put
forth to substantiate these fanciful speculations.
Most revealing, the discrepancies between exit polls
and official
tallies were never random but worked to Bush’s
advantage in ten of
eleven swing states that were too close to call,
sometimes by as much as
9.5 percent as in New Hampshire, an unheard of margin
of error for an
exit poll. In Nevada, Ohio, New Mexico, and Iowa exit
polls registered
solid victories for Kerry, yet the official tally in
each case went to
Bush, a mystifying outcome.
In states that were not hotly contested the exit polls
proved quite
accurate. Thus exit polls in Utah predicted a Bush
victory of 70.8 to
26.4 percent; the actual result was 71.1 to 26.4
percent. In Missouri,
where the exit polls predicted a Bush victory of 54 to
46 percent, the
final result was 53 to 46 percent.
One explanation for the strange anomalies in vote
tallies was found in
the widespread use of touchscreen electronic voting
machines. These
machines produced results that consistently favored
Bush over Kerry,
often in chillingly consistent contradiction to exit
polls.
In 2003 more than 900 computer professionals had
signed a petition
urging that all touchscreen systems include a
verifiable audit trail.
Touchscreen voting machines can be easily programmed
to go dead on
election day or throw votes to the wrong candidate or
make votes
disappear while leaving the impression that everything
is working fine.
A tiny number of operatives can easily access the
entire computer
network through one machine and thereby change votes
at will. The
touchscreen machines use trade secret code, and are
tested, reviewed,
and certified in complete secrecy. Verified counts are
impossible
because the machines leave no reliable paper trail.
Since the introduction of touchscreen voting,
mysterious congressional
election results have been increasing. In 2000 and
2002, Senate and
House contests and state legislative races in North
Carolina, Nebraska,
Alabama, Minnesota, Colorado, and elsewhere produced
dramatic and
puzzling upsets, always at the expense of Democrats
who were ahead in
the polls.
In some counties in Texas, Virginia, and Ohio, voters
who pressed the
Democrat’s name found that the Republican candidate
was chosen. In
Cormal County, Texas, three GOP candidates won by
exactly 18,181 votes
apiece, a near statistical impossibility.
All of Georgia’s voters used Diebold touchscreen
machines in 2002, and
Georgia’s incumbent Democratic governor and incumbent
Democratic
senator, who were both well ahead in the polls just
before the election,
lost in amazing double-digit voting shifts.
This may be the most telling datum of all: In New
Mexico in 2004 Kerry
lost all precincts equipped with touchscreen machines,
irrespective of
income levels, ethnicity, and past voting patterns.
The only thing that
consistently correlated with his defeat in those
precincts was the
presence of the touchscreen machine itself.
In Florida Bush registered inexplicably sharp jumps in
his vote
(compared to 2000) in counties that used touchscreen
machines.
Companies like Diebold, Sequoia, and ES&S that market
the touchscreen
machines are owned by militant supporters of the
Republican party. These
companies have consistently refused to implement a
paper-trail to dispel
suspicions and give instant validation to the results
of electronic
voting. They prefer to keep things secret, claiming
proprietary rights,
a claim that has been backed in court.
Election officials are not allowed to evaluate the
secret software.
Apparently corporate trade secrets are more important
than voting
rights. In effect, corporations have privatized the
electoral system,
leaving it easily susceptible to fixed outcomes. Given
this situation,
it is not likely that the GOP will lose control of
Congress come
November 2006. The two-party monopoly threatens to
become an even worse
one-party tyranny.
___________________
Michael Parenti's recent books include The
Assassination of Julius
Caesar (New Press), Superpatriotism (City Lights), and
The Culture
Struggle (Seven Stories Press). For more information
visit:
www.michaelparenti.org.
---------------------------------
Sneak preview the all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different.
Just radically better.
--0-1170487396-1152628575=:51827
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<html><body>
The Stolen Election of 2004 by Michael Parenti<BR><BR>The 2004
presidential contest between Democratic <BR>challenger Senator John
<BR>Kerry and the Republican incumbent, President Bush <BR>Jr.,
amounted to <BR>another stolen election. This has been well
documented <BR>by such <BR>investigators as Rep. John Conyers, Mark
Crispin <BR>Miller, Bob Fitrakis, <BR>Harvey Wasserman, Bev Harris,
and others. Here is an <BR>overview of what <BR>they have reported,
along with observations of my own.<BR><BR>Some 105 million citizens
voted in 2000, but in 2004 <BR>the turnout climbed <BR>to at least
122 million. Pre-election surveys <BR>indicated that among the
<BR>record 16.8 million new voters Kerry was a heavy <BR>favorite,
a fact that <BR>went largely unreported by the press. In addition,
<BR>there were about two <BR>million progressives who had voted for
Ralph Nader in <BR>2000 who switched <BR>to Kerry in
2004.<BR><BR>Yet the official 2004 tallies showed Bush with 62
<BR>million
votes, about <BR>11.6 million more than he got in 2000. Meanwhile
Kerry <BR>showed only eight <BR>million more votes than Gore
received in 2000. To have <BR>achieved his <BR>remarkable 2004
tally, Bush would needed to have kept <BR>all his 50.4 <BR>million
from 2000, plus a majority of the new voters, <BR>plus a large
share <BR>of the very liberal Nader defectors.<BR><BR>Nothing in
the campaign and in the opinion polls <BR>suggest such a mass
<BR>crossover. The numbers simply do not add up.<BR><BR>In key
states like Ohio, the Democrats achieved <BR>immense success at
<BR>registering new voters, outdoing the Republicans by as <BR>much
as five to <BR>one. Moreover the Democratic party was unusually
<BR>united around its <BR>candidate—or certainly against the
incumbent <BR>president. In contrast, <BR>prominent elements within
the GOP displayed open <BR>disaffection, publicly <BR>voicing
serious misgivings about the Bush <BR>administration’s huge budget
<BR>deficits, reckless
foreign policy, theocratic <BR>tendencies, and threats to
<BR>individual liberties.<BR><BR>Sixty newspapers that had endorsed
Bush in 2000 <BR>refused to do so in <BR>2004; forty of them
endorsed Kerry.<BR><BR>All through election day 2004, exit polls
showed Kerry <BR>ahead by 53 to 47 <BR>percent, giving him a
nationwide edge of about 1.5 <BR>million votes, and a <BR>solid
victory in the electoral college. Yet strangely <BR>enough, the
<BR>official tally gave Bush the election. Here are some
<BR>examples of how the <BR>GOP “victory” was secured.<BR><BR>---In
some places large numbers of Democratic <BR>registration forms
<BR>disappeared, along with absentee ballots and <BR>provisional
ballots. <BR>Sometimes absentee ballots were mailed out to voters
<BR>just before <BR>election day, too late to be returned on time,
or they <BR>were never mailed <BR>at all.<BR><BR>---Overseas
ballots normally reliably distributed by <BR>the State
<BR>Department were for some reason
distributed by the <BR>Pentagon in 2004. <BR>Nearly half of the
six million American voters living <BR>abroad---a <BR>noticeable
number of whom formed anti-Bush <BR>organizations---never
<BR>received their ballots or got them too late to vote.
<BR>Military personnel, <BR>usually more inclined toward supporting
the president, <BR>encountered no <BR>such problems with their
overseas ballots.<BR><BR>---Voter Outreach of America, a company
funded by the <BR>Republican <BR>National Committee, collected
thousands of voter <BR>registration forms in <BR>Nevada, promising
to turn them in to public officials, <BR>but then
<BR>systematically destroyed the ones belonging to
<BR>Democrats.<BR><BR>--- Tens of thousands of Democratic voters
were <BR>stricken from the rolls <BR>in several states because of
“felonies” never <BR>committed, or committed by <BR>someone else,
or for no given reason. Registration <BR>books in Democratic
<BR>precincts were frequently out-of-date or
incomplete.<BR><BR>---Democratic precincts---enjoying record
<BR>turnouts---were deprived of <BR>sufficient numbers of polling
stations and voting <BR>machines, and many of <BR>the machines they
had kept breaking down. After <BR>waiting long hours many
<BR>people went home without voting. Pro-Bush precincts <BR>almost
always had <BR>enough voting machines, all working well to make
<BR>voting quick and <BR>convenient.<BR><BR>---A similar pattern
was observed with student <BR>populations in several <BR>states:
students at conservative Christian colleges <BR>had little or no
<BR>wait at the polls, while students from liberal arts
<BR>colleges were forced <BR>to line up for as long as ten hours,
causing many to <BR>give up.<BR><BR>---In Lucas County, Ohio, one
polling place never <BR>opened; the voting <BR>machines were locked
in an office and no one could <BR>find the key. In <BR>Hamilton
County many absentee voters could not cast a <BR>Democratic vote
<BR>for president
because John Kerry’s name had been <BR>“accidentally” removed
<BR>when Ralph Nader was taken off the ballot.<BR><BR>---A polling
station in a conservative evangelical <BR>church in Miami
<BR>County, Ohio, recorded an impossibly high turnout of <BR>98
percent, while a <BR>polling place in Democratic inner-city
Cleveland <BR>recorded an impossibly <BR>low turnout of 7
percent.<BR><BR>---Latino, Native American, and African American
<BR>voters in New Mexico <BR>who favored Kerry by two to one were
five times more <BR>likely to have <BR>their ballots spoiled and
discarded in districts <BR>supervised by <BR>Republican election
officials. Many were given <BR>provisional ballots that
<BR>subsequently were never counted. In these same <BR>Democratic
areas Bush <BR>“won” an astonishing 68 to 31 percent upset victory.
<BR>One Republican <BR>judge in New Mexico discarded hundreds of
provisional <BR>ballots cast for <BR>Kerry, accepting only those
that were for Bush.<BR><BR>---Cadres
of rightwing activists, many of them <BR>religious
<BR>fundamentalists, were financed by the Republican <BR>Party.
Deployed to key <BR>Democratic precincts, they handed out flyers
warning <BR>that voters who had <BR>unpaid parking tickets, an
arrest record, or owed <BR>child support would be <BR>arrested at
the polls---all untrue. They went door to <BR>door offering to
<BR>“deliver” absentee ballots to the proper office, and
<BR>announcing that <BR>Republicans were to vote on Tuesday
(election day) and <BR>Democrats on <BR>Wednesday.<BR><BR>---
Democratic poll watchers in Ohio, Arizona, and <BR>other states,
who <BR>tried to monitor election night vote counting, were
<BR>menaced and shut out <BR>by squads of GOP toughs. In Warren
County, Ohio, <BR>immediately after the <BR>polls closed Republican
officials announced a <BR>“terrorist attack” alert, <BR>and ordered
the press to leave. They then moved all <BR>ballots to a
<BR>warehouse where the counting was conducted in
secret, <BR>producing an <BR>amazingly high tally for Bush, some
14,000 more votes <BR>than he had <BR>received in 2000. It wasn’t
the terrorists who <BR>attacked Warren County.<BR><BR>---Bush did
remarkably well with phantom populations. <BR>The number of his
<BR>votes in Perry and Cuyahoga counties in Ohio, exceeded <BR>the
number of <BR>registered voters, creating turnout rates as high as
<BR>124 percent. In <BR>Miami County nearly 19,000 additional votes
eerily <BR>appeared in Bush’s <BR>column after all precincts had
reported. In a small <BR>conservative <BR>suburban precinct of
Columbus, where only 638 people <BR>were registered, <BR>the
touchscreen machines tallied 4,258 votes for Bush.<BR><BR>---In
almost half of New Mexico’s counties, more votes <BR>were reported
<BR>than were recorded as being cast, and the tallies were
<BR>consistently in <BR>Bush’s favor. These ghostly results were
dismissed by <BR>New Mexico’s <BR>Republican Secretary of State as an
“administrative <BR>lapse.”<BR><BR>Exit polls showed Kerry solidly
ahead of Bush in both <BR>the popular vote <BR>and the electoral
college. Exit polls are an <BR>exceptionally accurate <BR>measure
of elections. In the last three elections in <BR>Germany, for
<BR>example, exit polls were never off by more than <BR>three-
tenths of one <BR>percent.<BR><BR>Unlike ordinary opinion polls,
the exit sample is <BR>drawn from people who <BR>have actually just
voted. It rules out those who say <BR>they will vote but <BR>never
make it to the polls, those who cannot be <BR>sampled because they
<BR>have no telephone or otherwise cannot be reached at <BR>home,
those who are <BR>undecided or who change their minds about whom to
<BR>support, and those who <BR>are turned away at the polls for one
reason or <BR>another.<BR><BR>Exit polls have come to be considered
so reliable that <BR>international <BR>organizations use them to
validate election results in <BR>countries around <BR>the
world.<BR><BR>Republicans argued that in 2004 the exit polls were
<BR>inaccurate because <BR>they were taken only in the morning when
Kerry voters <BR>came out in <BR>greater numbers. (Apparently Bush
voters sleep late.) <BR>In fact, the <BR>polling was done at random
intervals all through the <BR>day, and the <BR>evening results were
as much favoring Kerry as the <BR>early results.<BR><BR>It was also
argued that pollsters focused more on <BR>women (who favored
<BR>Kerry) than men, or maybe large numbers of grumpy
<BR>Republicans were less <BR>inclined than cheery Democrats to
talk to pollsters. <BR>No evidence was put <BR>forth to
substantiate these fanciful speculations.<BR><BR>Most revealing,
the discrepancies between exit polls <BR>and official <BR>tallies
were never random but worked to Bush’s <BR>advantage in ten of
<BR>eleven swing states that were too close to call, <BR>sometimes
by as much as <BR>9.5 percent as in New Hampshire, an unheard of
margin <BR>of error
for an <BR>exit poll. In Nevada, Ohio, New Mexico, and Iowa exit
<BR>polls registered <BR>solid victories for Kerry, yet the
official tally in <BR>each case went to <BR>Bush, a mystifying
outcome.<BR><BR>In states that were not hotly contested the exit
polls <BR>proved quite <BR>accurate. Thus exit polls in Utah
predicted a Bush <BR>victory of 70.8 to <BR>26.4 percent; the
actual result was 71.1 to 26.4 <BR>percent. In Missouri, <BR>where
the exit polls predicted a Bush victory of 54 to <BR>46 percent,
the <BR>final result was 53 to 46 percent.<BR><BR>One explanation
for the strange anomalies in vote <BR>tallies was found in <BR>the
widespread use of touchscreen electronic voting <BR>machines. These
<BR>machines produced results that consistently favored <BR>Bush
over Kerry, <BR>often in chillingly consistent contradiction to
exit <BR>polls.<BR><BR>In 2003 more than 900 computer professionals
had <BR>signed a petition <BR>urging that all touchscreen systems
include a
<BR>verifiable audit trail. <BR>Touchscreen voting machines can be
easily programmed <BR>to go dead on <BR>election day or throw votes
to the wrong candidate or <BR>make votes <BR>disappear while
leaving the impression that everything <BR>is working
fine.<BR><BR>A tiny number of operatives can easily access the
<BR>entire computer <BR>network through one machine and thereby
change votes <BR>at will. The <BR>touchscreen machines use trade
secret code, and are <BR>tested, reviewed, <BR>and certified in
complete secrecy. Verified counts are <BR>impossible <BR>because
the machines leave no reliable paper trail.<BR><BR>Since the
introduction of touchscreen voting, <BR>mysterious congressional
<BR>election results have been increasing. In 2000 and <BR>2002,
Senate and <BR>House contests and state legislative races in North
<BR>Carolina, Nebraska, <BR>Alabama, Minnesota, Colorado, and
elsewhere produced <BR>dramatic and <BR>puzzling upsets, always at
the expense of Democrats
<BR>who were ahead in <BR>the polls.<BR><BR>In some counties in
Texas, Virginia, and Ohio, voters <BR>who pressed the
<BR>Democrat’s name found that the Republican candidate <BR>was
chosen. In <BR>Cormal County, Texas, three GOP candidates won by
<BR>exactly 18,181 votes <BR>apiece, a near statistical
impossibility.<BR><BR>All of Georgia’s voters used Diebold
touchscreen <BR>machines in 2002, and <BR>Georgia’s incumbent
Democratic governor and incumbent <BR>Democratic <BR>senator, who
were both well ahead in the polls just <BR>before the election,
<BR>lost in amazing double-digit voting shifts.<BR><BR>This may be
the most telling datum of all: In New <BR>Mexico in 2004 Kerry
<BR>lost all precincts equipped with touchscreen machines,
<BR>irrespective of <BR>income levels, ethnicity, and past voting
patterns. <BR>The only thing that <BR>consistently correlated with
his defeat in those <BR>precincts was the <BR>presence of the
touchscreen machine itself.<BR><BR>In Florida
Bush registered inexplicably sharp jumps in <BR>his vote <BR>
(compared to 2000) in counties that used touchscreen
<BR>machines.<BR><BR>Companies like Diebold, Sequoia, and ES&S
that market <BR>the touchscreen <BR>machines are owned by militant
supporters of the <BR>Republican party. These <BR>companies have
consistently refused to implement a <BR>paper-trail to dispel
<BR>suspicions and give instant validation to the results <BR>of
electronic <BR>voting. They prefer to keep things secret, claiming
<BR>proprietary rights, <BR>a claim that has been backed in
court.<BR><BR>Election officials are not allowed to evaluate the
<BR>secret software. <BR>Apparently corporate trade secrets are
more important <BR>than voting <BR>rights. In effect, corporations
have privatized the <BR>electoral system, <BR>leaving it easily
susceptible to fixed outcomes. Given <BR>this situation, <BR>it is
not likely that the GOP will lose control of <BR>Congress come
<BR>November 2006. The
two-party monopoly threatens to <BR>become an even worse <BR>one-
party tyranny.<BR>___________________<BR>Michael Parenti's recent
books include The <BR>Assassination of Julius <BR>Caesar (New
Press), Superpatriotism (City Lights), and <BR>The Culture
<BR>Struggle (Seven Stories Press). For more information <BR>visit:
<BR>www.michaelparenti.org.<BR><BR><p> 
<hr size=1>Sneak preview the <a href="http://
us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=40762/*http://www.yahoo.com/preview";> all-new
Yahoo.com</a>. It's not radically different. Just radically better.
<span width="1" style="color: white;"/>__._,_.___</span>
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<br><br>
<tt>
New Pacifica Working Group<BR>
<a href="http://www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica";>http://
www.egroups.com/group/NewPacifica</a><BR>
'Save Our Stations!'</tt>
<br><br>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<img src="http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?
s=97476590&grpId=2404432&grpspId=1600063985&msgId=71829&am
p;stime=1152628718" width="1" height="1"> <br>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<br><br>
<div style="width:500px; text-align:right; margin-bottom:1px;
color:#909090;">
<tt>SPONSORED LINKS</tt>
</div>
<table bgcolor=#e0ecee cellspacing="13" cellpadding="0" width=500px>
<tr valign=top>
<td style="width:25%;">
<tt><a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/
_ylc=X3oDMTJjNmp2dWppBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBF9wAzEEZ3JwSWQDMjQwNDQzMgRncnBzc
ElkAzE2MDAwNjM5ODUEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNTI2Mjg3MTg-;_ylg=1/
SIG=18ojvjb7p/**http%3a//groups.yahoo.com/gads%3ft=ms%26k=Issues%
26w1=Issues%26w2=Causes%2bof%2bjoint%2bpain%26w3=Cause%2bof%2blow%
2bback%2bpain%26w4=Cause%2brheumatoid%2barthritis%26w5=Causes%2bof%
2bvaricose%2bveins%26w6=Cause%2bof%2bdiabetes%26c=6%26s=151%26g=0%
26.sig=wzshE3PoGmOQpFUq9RBwYg">Issues</a></tt>
</td>
<td style="width:25%;">
<tt><a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/
_ylc=X3oDMTJjdG9ianFjBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBF9wAzIEZ3JwSWQDMjQwNDQzMgRncnBzc
ElkAzE2MDAwNjM5ODUEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNTI2Mjg3MTg-;_ylg=1/
SIG=19c7m5h54/**http%3a//groups.yahoo.com/gads%3ft=ms%26k=Causes%
2bof%2bjoint%2bpain%26w1=Issues%26w2=Causes%2bof%2bjoint%2bpain%
26w3=Cause%2bof%2blow%2bback%2bpain%26w4=Cause%2brheumatoid%
2barthritis%26w5=Causes%2bof%2bvaricose%2bveins%26w6=Cause%2bof%
2bdiabetes%26c=6%26s=151%26g=0%
26.sig=HZKj_C34V323bqOwRNEVyA">Causes of joint pain</a></tt>
</td>
<td style="width:25%;">
<tt><a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/
_ylc=X3oDMTJjdmc4cXVqBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBF9wAzMEZ3JwSWQDMjQwNDQzMgRncnBzc
ElkAzE2MDAwNjM5ODUEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNTI2Mjg3MTg-;_ylg=1/
SIG=19gm2sjnr/**http%3a//groups.yahoo.com/gads%3ft=ms%26k=Cause%2bof
%2blow%2bback%2bpain%26w1=Issues%26w2=Causes%2bof%2bjoint%2bpain%
26w3=Cause%2bof%2blow%2bback%2bpain%26w4=Cause%2brheumatoid%
2barthritis%26w5=Causes%2bof%2bvaricose%2bveins%26w6=Cause%2bof%
2bdiabetes%26c=6%26s=151%26g=0%26.sig=pMdb4_TkjHH5ZXe8EGC3zw">Cause
of low back pain</a></tt>
</td>
</tr>
<tr valign=top>
<td style="width:25%;">
<tt><a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/
_ylc=X3oDMTJjZGc2c2JvBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBF9wAzQEZ3JwSWQDMjQwNDQzMgRncnBzc
ElkAzE2MDAwNjM5ODUEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNTI2Mjg3MTg-;_ylg=1/
SIG=19gmdtulp/**http%3a//groups.yahoo.com/gads%3ft=ms%26k=Cause%
2brheumatoid%2barthritis%26w1=Issues%26w2=Causes%2bof%2bjoint%2bpain
%26w3=Cause%2bof%2blow%2bback%2bpain%26w4=Cause%2brheumatoid%
2barthritis%26w5=Causes%2bof%2bvaricose%2bveins%26w6=Cause%2bof%
2bdiabetes%26c=6%26s=151%26g=0%26.sig=61nV4exvk3nZDo13Qg3QWA">Cause
rheumatoid arthritis</a></tt>
</td>
<td style="width:25%;">
<tt><a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/
_ylc=X3oDMTJjbXY0N2RhBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBF9wAzUEZ3JwSWQDMjQwNDQzMgRncnBzc
ElkAzE2MDAwNjM5ODUEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNTI2Mjg3MTg-;_ylg=1/
SIG=19g2kiqs8/**http%3a//groups.yahoo.com/gads%3ft=ms%26k=Causes%
2bof%2bvaricose%2bveins%26w1=Issues%26w2=Causes%2bof%2bjoint%2bpain%
26w3=Cause%2bof%2blow%2bback%2bpain%26w4=Cause%2brheumatoid%
2barthritis%26w5=Causes%2bof%2bvaricose%2bveins%26w6=Cause%2bof%
2bdiabetes%26c=6%26s=151%26g=0%
26.sig=D_bfsh2XQj5JhxTm_iuzIw">Causes of varicose veins</a></tt>
</td>
<td style="width:25%;">
<tt><a href="http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/
_ylc=X3oDMTJjMGEzb2g5BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBF9wAzYEZ3JwSWQDMjQwNDQzMgRncnBzc
ElkAzE2MDAwNjM5ODUEc2VjA3NsbW9kBHN0aW1lAzExNTI2Mjg3MTg-;_ylg=1/
SIG=197k64d0b/**http%3a//groups.yahoo.com/gads%3ft=ms%26k=Cause%2bof
%2bdiabetes%26w1=Issues%26w2=Causes%2bof%2bjoint%2bpain%26w3=Cause%
2bof%2blow%2bback%2bpain%26w4=Cause%2brheumatoid%2barthritis%
26w5=Causes%2bof%2bvaricose%2bveins%26w6=Cause%2bof%2bdiabetes%
26c=6%26s=151%26g=0%26.sig=V96EEGjFJNvfE-3_38e34A">Cause of
diabetes</a></tt>
</td>
</tr>
</tr>
</table>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
<!-- |**|begin egp html banner|**| -->
<br>
<div style="text-align:center; color:#909090; width:500px;">
<hr style="border-bottom:1px; width:500px; text-align:left;">
<tt>YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS</tt>
</div>
<br>
<ul>
<tt><li type=square> Visit your group "<a href="http://
groups.yahoo.com/group/NewPacifica">NewPacifica</a>" on the
web.<br> </tt>
<tt><li type=square> To unsubscribe from this group, send an
email to:<br> <a href="mailto:NewPacifica-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">NewPacifica-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a><br> </tt>
<tt><li type=square> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
the <a href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>Yahoo! Terms of
Service</a>.</tt>
</ul>
<br>
<div style="text-align:center; color:#909090; width:500px;">
<hr style="border-bottom:1px; width:500px; text-align:left;">
</div>
</br>
<!-- |**|end egp html banner|**| -->
<span style="color: white;"/>__,_._,___</span>
</body></html>
--0-1170487396-1152628575=:51827--
