--- In [email protected], Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 8, 2006, at 7:01 AM, authfriend wrote: > > >> I'm pointing this out because so *many* liberals and > >> Democrats were *so* vocal after the sham of the 2004 > >> elections, talk talk talking about how they were going > >> to get to the bottom of the rigged elections in Ohio > >> and elsewhere, and how they were going to get rid of > >> these voting machines that seem to have been designed > >> to allow Americans to "exorcise their right to vote." > >> > >> Nothing happened. > > > > Wrong again. A great deal happened, including > > the conviction of four Republican officials for > > the New Hampshire phone scam. > > And apart from those officials going down, what seems to > have changed? They were at it again this time with the > robo calling nonsense. All the Repugs seemed to have > learned is that they can still get away with murder if > they change tactics.
The NH phone scam was more cut-and-dried in terms of pinning down the evidence. But you're right, the convictions in that case certainly haven't improved the Republicans' ethics. I'm not sure there's much hope of that, however, no matter what kind of consequences they reap. They just chose a tactic that was harder to prove this time around. My point to Barry was simply that the things that were doable since 2004 have been done; and now that Democrats will control the House and quite likely the Senate, all manner of things have become possible that weren't before. Barry expects things to be done with the wave of a magic wand, but it really doesn't work that way. > > And this election just past, of course, which > > returned control of the House and likely the > > Senate to Democratic hands, so the Democrats > > now have the *power* to pursue Republican > > election malfeasance and do whatever needs > > to be done about the voting machines. > > I guess one could see this victory as having happened > due to the Dems having done so much to rectify the past > disasters, but I just don't see any evidence of that. No, neither do I. I'm pretty sure the electorate realizes the Dems' hands were pretty much tied, and that the only way to get anything done was to break the Rethugs' chokehold on the government. > We're still using Diebod machines and there was > still widespread reporting of voter intimidation. > > > >> Same shit this time. > >> > >> Now there's a lot more talk about all the voting > >> irregularities and the unconscionable "dirty tricks" > >> used again in this election. > > > > And interestingly enough, so far there doesn't appear > > to have been any significant messing with voting > > machines, which may be because of the widespread > > outrage over what happened with the voting machines > > in 2000 and 2004, not to mention the extensive > > investigations into it, which are ongoing. Rove > > and Co. may have realized they didn't dare try > > messing with the machines again, so they resorted > > to massive attempts at voter suppression instead. > > Right, which don't appear to have worked--not this time, at least. > > > >> There will be more such > >> talk. Tough talk. Outraged talk. "We're never going > >> to allow this to happen again" talk. > > > > What you don't quite seem to get is the rather > > obvious fact that "talk" is where doing something > > *begins*. It's the necessary first step. It was > > "talk" about Republican corruption across the board > > that has resulted in their removal from power in > > the Congress, you see. > > OF course it's where action begins, but if it ends there, > then nothing of significance happens. Of course. But Barry, again, doesn't realize that there must be lots of talk *before* anything can get done. Campaigns, of course, are nothing *but* talk, but that talk made it possible to elect Democrats and shift the balance of power. There was very little that could be done before that happened. The true test, IMO, will be if the Dems open > some kind of national public debate on the whole issue, > which, so far at least, they have been almost as reluctant > to do as the Repugs. It isn't clear to me that a national debate is what's called for; the vast, vast majority of the public wants secure and honest voting. It isn't really an *issue* per se. And the solution appears pretty clear, at least with regard to the voting machines: legislation to mandate all the machines leave a paper trail. At least one bill, I believe, has been introduced to that effect; and the Democrats are now in a position to get it to the floor and push it through. What they need to do now is punish the Rethugs for the voter-suppression tactics. > Hence the perception that they have done as little as possible. > In some way (and I have no idea what that could be) they are > benefiting from the corruption as well. I'm sure that plays a role, but I don't think it's all that great. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
