 |
 Latest |
 Greatest |
 Lobby |
 Journals |
 Search |
 Options |
 Help |
 Login |
 Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs! |
GuvWurld's Journal
http://www.times-standard.com/othervoices/...
Your vote faces challenges like never before As It Stands by Dave Stancliff/For the Times-Standard Article Launched: 10/26/2008 01:29:59 AM PDT If we want our votes to count in elections we need to get rid of the computers, go back to paper ballots, and encourage state election officials to vigorously monitor voter registration. (snip) Your vote is under attack from many directions. Officials across America are outsourcing our very democracy to the private companies that make the e-voting machines. (snip) As It Stands, if we don't want this presidential election to be “stolen,” as some feel the 2004 election was, then we need more accountability throughout the process. We also need to toss the e-vote machines in the trash and start printing ballots immediately! Dave Stancliff is a columnist for the Times-Standard. Comments can be sent to richstan1@suddenlink.net or davesblogcentral.com Originally blogged at We Do Not Consent
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/10... How To Disarm Weapons of Mass Deception By Dave Berman 10/24/08 The phrase "weapons of mass deception" is a well recognized play on "weapons of mass destruction," and is well understood to refer to the corporate media. As a fascist state, it is really the corporate/military/government/media juggernaut that bombards and assaults freedoms and liberties, dumbing-down, propagandizing, manipulating, and feeding us The Big Lie. We have to protect ourselves, not only from our government's lawlessness, but also from weapons of mass deception. Kill your television, yes, a good place to start. Now we are going further... Yesterday I appeared as a guest on the Peter B. Collins syndicated talk radio show (part 1, part 2). We talked about an open letter, published yesterday at We Do Not Consent, New Zealand's Scoop, as well as other progressive news sites (known list of x-posts below). PBC added his name to Mark Crispin Miller, David Swanson, Lynn Landes, Rob Kall, and more than 15 other media truth-tellers so far who have begun to disarm the weapons of mass deception. George Orwell: "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." My rally cry has long been "Peaceful revolution is necessary, NOW!" Put the two together and we have media telling the truth to their colleagues and industry, questioning how federal election results can be reported as fact when they can not be independently verified or even proven, and come from only one conflicted source, the very government whose grip on power is at stake. The power of weapons of mass deception emanates at full strength unless we challenge the phony narrative and distracting drama portrayed as the important stories of the day. But the challenge alone is not enough. To disarm weapons of mass deception we must also supplant its fabricated reality with what is really going on. The letter itself is only a first step. The list of signers, while meaningful, is static even as it grows longer. The impact of this truth-telling comes in telling it repeatedly and seeing those who encounter it begin to tell it yet again. The default response of the weapons will be to ignore. The truth-tellers challenge will be mostly won merely by engaging with the weapon, insisting on not being ignored. Members of the reading and thinking public can and hopefully will self-identify as truth-tellers, rather than externalizing that label onto the courageous early adopters of the letter. Confronting The Big Lie means calling out simple truths hiding in plain site. Consider it converting unconventional wisdom to conventional wisdom. That implies enormous reach and explicitly calls us all to action. How hard can it be to call a talk show host or e-mail an opinion writer and have them address this, from the open letter: There are three very simple basic facts about the way US federal elections are conducted now, and we think they lead to an inescapable conclusion that must be addressed.Weapons of mass deception are a powerful force working against We The People. This common phrase is so well known, yet rarely considered in a way I would call ruthlessly honest. Ruthless honesty requires that we match up the way we see something with the way we act about it. We already see the corporate media as a weapon of mass deception. Ruthless honesty calls for disarmament. Known cross-posts of the open letter as of now: http://www.opednews.com/articles/We-Do-Not... http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/370... http://usacoup.scoop.co.nz/?p=835 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0810/S003... http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu... > http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu... Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) also has a blurb about the letter here. Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/10... This is being widely cross-posted. Readers are requested to send the letter to the media and encourage media contacts to sign on and discuss the topic in their work.
http://usacoup.scoop.co.nz/unprovable (re-directs to: http://usacoup.scoop.co.nz/?p=835 ) We Do Not Consent - Open Letter To The Media October 24, 2008Press Release A current list of this letter’s signers can be found (as of 10/23 @ Noon PT) at http://usacoup.scoop.co.nz/unprovable . If you would like to add your name, please use the form on that page or submit your name and affiliation via e-mail to: unprovable@scoop.co.nz . We Do Not Consent - Open Letter To The Media SEND THIS LETTER AS AN EMAIL TO YOUR MEDIA (Note: you will need to provide an email address) A Public Media Campaign Launched By Dave Berman Of We Do Not Consent Dear Media Colleagues, You are receiving this message because you are known to American progressives as a truth-teller. In this presidential campaign, despite the typical horse-race coverage, we also see the overall corporate media narrative influenced by daily debunking efforts from candidates’ rapid response teams, the blogosphere, and the reality-based coverage and reporting that you provide.We need to take this to the next level. There are three very simple basic facts about the way US federal elections are conducted now, and we think they lead to an inescapable conclusion that must be addressed. See if you agree: 1. We have secret corporate vote counting computers counting more than 95% of the votes cast in the United States; 2. The absence of paper ballots, and in some cases state’s law, prevents meaningful re-counts throughout much of the country; 3. These electronic voting machines frequently produce results impossible in a legitimate election, such as John Kerry’s negative 25 million votes in Youngstown, OH (Nov. 2004), or Palm Beach County’s 12,000 votes in excess of the number of voters (Aug. 2008). To us this suggests the conclusion that federal election results are unprovable, even though the media reports them as fact. Can you draw any other conclusion? It will surprise nobody this November when the outcome is a spoiled mess, riddled with controversy. In fact, we can already say the results–based on the conditions–are guaranteed to be inconclusive, unknowable and unprovable. We must challenge our industry to refuse to report as fact what can’t be proven and hasn’t been independently verified, particularly when the only source of the information is the government itself. The reality is that the media should be the greatest advocates of hand counting paper ballots because this method of counting allows media greatest access to observing and documenting the process, affording the reported results the greatest credibility. Transparent coverage of a transparent counting process would create a basis for confidence in the reported results where none currently exists. As we all know, there is a vibrant community of engaged citizens across the US who collectively self-identify as the “election integrity community.” They are asking us truth-tellers to challenge our industry, essentially reframing the debate. Many of them have appeared on our shows and in our columns over the past few years, and they are eager to be sources for us now. But they are also counting on us to take this message forward and we don’t see how we can be truth-tellers without doing that. Please join us in this concerted effort to use truth-telling yet again to change the corporate media narrative of this presidential campaign. Respectfully yours, Dave Berman, http://WeDoNotConsent.blogspot.com ; Voter Confidence Committee of Humboldt, CA Mark Crispin Miller, Author, www.markcrispinmiller.blogspot.com Alastair Thompson, Co-Editor/General Manager, http://www.Scoop.co.nz Michael Collins, "The Money Party," http://usacoup.scoop.co.nz/?tag=michael-co... ; http://electionfraudnews.com/MichaelCollin... Ernest Partridge, Co-Editor, The Crisis Papers http://www.crisispapers.org / Bernard Weiner, Co-Editor, The Crisis Papers http://www.crisispapers.org / Rob Kall, Executive Editor & Publisher, http://www.OpEdNews.com Joan Brunwasser, Election Integrity Editor, http://www.OpEdNews.com Rady Ananda, Senior Editor, http://www.OpEdNews.com Tom Courbat, Founder, SAVE R VOTE, www.savervote.com Dan Ashby, Co-Founder and Director, http://www.ElectionDefenseAlliance.org Linda Milazzo, OpedNews Senior Editor; HuffingtonPost blogger Lynn Landes, freelance journalist, http://www.thelandesreport.com Jan Baumgartner, Managing Editor, http://www.OpEdNews.com Cheryl Biren-Wright, Managing Editor, http://www.OpEdNews.com David Swanson, Co-Founder AfterDowningStreet.org Joanne Lukacher, Communications Director, Re-Media Election Transparency Coalition, www.re-mediaetc.org Andi Novick, Legal Counsel, Re-media Election Transparency Coalition, www.re-mediaetc.org Amanda Lang, OEN Managing Editor, http://www.opednews.com Valerie Lane, Chair, SAVElections Monterey County Peter B. Collins, syndicated talk show host, http://www.peterbcollins.com David L. Griscom, Ph.D., http://impactglassman.blogspot.com ; Co-Founder, AUDITAZ, http://auditaz.blogspot.com ; Member Coordinating Committee, Election Defense Alliance, http://www.electiondefensealliance.org / SEND THIS EMAIL TO THE MEDIA (Note: you will need to look up an email address) A current list of this letter’s signers can be found (as of 10/23 @ Noon PT) at http://usacoup.scoop.co.nz/unprovable . If you would like to add your name, please use the form on that page or submit your name and affiliation via e-mail to: unprovable@scoop.co.nz . Originally blogged at: We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/10... Peter B. Collins, Dave Berman to Discuss Unprovable Federal Election Results - 10/23 5pm PT By Dave Berman 10/22/08 Listen live through PeterBCollins.com Thursday at 5pm PT as I'll be on this great talk radio show to discuss whether the accuracy of federal election results can be proven. For a long time I have argued federal election results are inherently inconclusive, unknowable and unprovable - based entirely on the conditions under which "elections" are conducted. There is simply no basis for confidence in the reported results, that is, no reason to believe them. As I hinted last Friday, when I wrote about the Nation's John Nichols coming around to describing the 2000 and 2004 elections as "inconclusive," during tomorrow's interview we will begin to hear a louder chorus taking up this message and calling out the media. Why should we be expected to believe reported election results that media have not and can not independently verify, which can't even be proven, and which come from only one source - the very government whose grip on power is at stake? In fact, for as long as I've written the We Do Not Consent blog there have been others making this point. In the back of my book, We Do Not Consent, (free .pdf), there are testimonials that have permanently appeared in the sidebar of the blog as follows: "This is an important collection of essays with a strong unitary theme: if you can't prove that you were elected, we can't take you seriously as elected officials. Simple, logical, comprehensive. 'Management' (aka, the 'powers that be') needs to get the message. 'The machines' are not legitimizers, they're an artful dodge and a path to deception. We've had enough...and we most certainly DO NOT consent."Over the years, these points have been made in countless ways. Tomorrow we will unveil perhaps the most impactful expression yet. In the meantime, here's another that I submitted last week as a letter to the editor of the North Coast Journal. I'm posting it now because their new issue came out today without it. Dear Editor: Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/10... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...
Fearing a Drought of Aid Financial Crisis Shouldn't Lead U.S. to Curtail Foreign Assistance, Bush Says By Dan Eggen and Anthony Faiola Washington Post Staff Writers Wednesday, October 22, 2008; D01 President Bush, who has made international aid a cornerstone of his foreign policy, warned yesterday against cutting U.S. assistance to impoverished nations in the midst of the financial turmoil sweeping Wall Street and Main Street, arguing that doing so would undermine America's economy, national security and moral authority. "During times of economic crisis, some may be tempted to turn inward -- focusing on our problems here at home, while ignoring our interests around the world," Bush said at a White House summit on international development in Washington. "This would be a serious mistake. America is committed, and America must stay committed, to international development for reasons that remain true regardless of the ebb and flow of the markets." MORE... Is the expression "I don't know whether to laugh or cry" more or less apt than the expression "I don't know whether to shit or go blind"? Moral authority. Moral authority. Really? Originally blogged at:We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/10... John Nichols: 2000, 2004 Elections "Inconclusive"; Humboldt Dems to Show "Uncounted" This Sat By Dave Berman 10/17/08 Sorry for the split headline, but it is time to do some dot connecting. First, a note for Humboldt readers. The local Democratic Central Committee will be hosting a free screening of "Uncounted" beginning at 7pm this Saturday (10/18) at 129 5th Street, Eureka. The film is a "documentary that shows how the election fraud that changed the outcome of the 2004 election led to even greater fraud in 2006 - and now looms as an unbridled threat to the outcome of the 2008 election." I'll be there and anticipate a lively group discussion (read: confronting Dems' cognitive dissonance) following the film. If you've ever met me or read anything else I've written, you may already have a sense of what I'll be saying, especially now that others are saying the same thing. Say what? I was both pleased and bemused last week when John Nichols posted to The Nation website a piece called "No More Stolen Elections." Two key excerpts (emphasis added): "...{Bush campaign co-chair and Ohio} Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, made it possible for the Republican ticket to secure an election night "result" that was of dubious legitimacy, and circumstances taht {sic} made the ensuing recount an inconclusive exercise in frustration."Certainly I am pleased to see a major American journalist take the position I've held for years, that the Bush regime claim to power is illegitimate, and was made possible by election conditions that ensured inconclusive results (see: Voter Confidence Resolution, adopted by Arcata, CA City Council, 7/20/05). But Nichols has two major disconnects that I'd like to put back together here. First, he attributes the inconclusive results to the election conditions - which are largely the same in 2008. To look back and say the previous results were inconclusive requires a degree of honesty which could only be called ruthless honesty if it acknowledged that the same conditions will always and again produce inconclusive, unknowable, unprovable results. "Too little, too late" last time means take a different approach this time. The second disconnect is Nichols' call to action: What should smart activists be doing?If we already recognize that election conditions guarantee inconclusive results, waiting until after the "election" to protest is not what smart activists would do because it would again be "too little, too late." In fact, the same well-meaning progressive leaders behind "No More Stolen Elections" put forth a similar pledge that I wrote about just prior to the 2004 "election." "I remember the stolen presidential election of 2000 and I am willing to take action in 2004 if the election is stolen again. I support efforts to protect the right to vote leading up to and on Election Day, November 2nd. If that right is systematically violated, I pledge to join nationwide protests starting on November 3rd, either in my community, in the states where the fraud occurred, or in Washington DC."It has become cliché to cite the definition of insane as doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Does it make me a bad writer to use a cliché or a smarter activist to say let's do something different? The original link to the first "No Stolen Elections" pledge no longer works, but I found it archived here. That's a page on the site of the Liberty Tree Foundation, one of the sponsors of the new pledge. There is a lot of other great work happening there, but I can't consider either of these pledges as good examples. It is counterproductive to reinforce the frame: "if the election is stolen again." We all know already the "election" is a charade. We also all know more than enough to conclude with certainty that the "election" results will be inherently uncertain, inconclusive, and unprovable. Even though I've been making this point for more than four years, it has morphed and sharpened somewhat in the past several weeks. For reference, read here and here, and listen here (.mp3) as I spoke at a Constitution Day rally in Eureka last month, and here (.mp3) for a few minutes with Peter B. Collins and Brad Friedman. While my blog posts have not been frequent, I have been doing other writing that I'll soon make available. It will be another, bigger example of others saying what I'm saying we should say. If you get it, you need to pass it on to the media. Don't be shy about expressing disbelief or even disdain that media would expect us to accept their reporting of election results as fact when the results have not and can not be independently verified by media, can not even be proven, and come from only one source -- the government whose power is at stake. If we buy that, we really are insane by any definition. Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/10... Originally blogged at We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Slacker Uprising? Not in the Charlie Brown Nation By Dave Berman 9/27/08 Michael Moore released a new film this week called "Slacker Uprising." After watching the free download tonight I realized nobody would have paid to see this had it been released in theaters. "Slacker Uprising" chronicles Moore's 62 city "get out the vote" tour in the weeks leading up to the 2004 "election." He drew huge crowds, controversy, and media coverage in cities and towns of all sizes. His affable personality, quick wit and good humor were shown in abundance. And as Rady Ananda observed in her own review of the film, the events were depicted as anti-war and anti-Bush but no so much on selling positive attributes of John Kerry or the Democratic (sic) party. Frankly, this movie was painful to watch, but not in the way that it hurts see a mom talking about losing a son to war (which was a sad and moving moment in fine Moore movie making tradition). This was painful--for me--in the same way even conservative pundits describe cringing during Sarah Palin interviews. I doubt that everyone will respond to "Slacker Uprising" this way, though perhaps you can understand my reaction through the prism of the words I was writing at the time these rallies were happening: The GuvWurld Blog is Back, September 4, 2004In general, I like Moore and his films. But watching "Slacker Uprising" was like seeing the Charlie Brown Nation running up to kick the football that is always pulled away at the last moment. Will Charlie ever learn? Will we? Here we are four years later and my last two blog posts were "The Real Election Math," proving election results will again be unprovable this November; and "Hey Media! - Don't Report As Fact What Can't Even Be Proven (Federal Election Results)," in which linked to this speech (.mp3) I recently gave outlining a new campaign calling for the grassroots, progressive politicians, and progressive media to confront the corporate media in the simplest of terms. Despite Moore's gung-ho "get out the vote" attitude, or perhaps because of it, he is now a must on the media outreach list for this campaign. I stuck my toe in that water Friday afternoon with a call to the Peter B. Collins show during Brad Friedman's regular guest spot on election integrity. Listen to the excerpt in the GuvWurld News Archive, or catch the full hour in PBC's podcast archive. "Slacker Uprising" had no potential to come anywhere near Moore's box office financial successes, so I can see keeping it out of the theaters. What I'm struggling with is why anybody thought there was a good time to show this dated and painful reminder billed in the opening as "one filmmaker's failed attempt to turn things around." Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Originally blogged at We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Slacker Uprising? Not in the Charlie Brown Nation By Dave Berman 9/27/08 Michael Moore released a new film this week called "Slacker Uprising." After watching the free download tonight I realized nobody would have paid to see this had it been released in theaters. "Slacker Uprising" chronicles Moore's 62 city "get out the vote" tour in the weeks leading up to the 2004 "election." He drew huge crowds, controversy, and media coverage in cities and towns of all sizes. His affable personality, quick wit and good humor were shown in abundance. And as Rady Ananda observed in her own review of the film, the events were depicted as anti-war and anti-Bush but no so much on selling positive attributes of John Kerry or the Democratic (sic) party. Frankly, this movie was painful to watch, but not in the way that it hurts see a mom talking about losing a son to war (which was a sad and moving moment in fine Moore movie making tradition). This was painful--for me--in the same way even conservative pundits describe cringing during Sarah Palin interviews. I doubt that everyone will respond to "Slacker Uprising" this way, though perhaps you can understand my reaction through the prism of the words I was writing at the time these rallies were happening: The GuvWurld Blog is Back, September 4, 2004In general, I like Moore and his films. But watching "Slacker Uprising" was like seeing the Charlie Brown Nation running up to kick the football that is always pulled away at the last moment. Will Charlie ever learn? Will we? Here we are four years later and my last two blog posts were "The Real Election Math," proving election results will again be unprovable this November; and "Hey Media! - Don't Report As Fact What Can't Even Be Proven (Federal Election Results)," in which linked to this speech (.mp3) I recently gave outlining a new campaign calling for the grassroots, progressive politicians, and progressive media to confront the corporate media in the simplest of terms. Despite Moore's gung-ho "get out the vote" attitude, or perhaps because of it, he is now a must on the media outreach list for this campaign. I stuck my toe in that water Friday afternoon with a call to the Peter B. Collins show during Brad Friedman's regular guest spot on election integrity. Listen to the excerpt in the GuvWurld News Archive, or catch the full hour in PBC's podcast archive. "Slacker Uprising" had no potential to come anywhere near Moore's box office financial successes, so I can see keeping it out of the theaters. What I'm struggling with is why anybody thought there was a good time to show this dated and painful reminder billed in the opening as "one filmmaker's failed attempt to turn things around." Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Paperless electronic voting +
Corporate vote counting guarded as proprietary secrets + Nonsensical results such as negative vote totals = "Election" results are UNPROVABLE. Tell the media not to report as fact what can't even be proven and what hasn't been independently verified. The media should be the greatest advocates of hand counting paper ballots because this method of counting allows media greatest access to observing and documenting the process, affording their reporting the greatest credibility. Transparent coverage of a transparent counting process would create a basis for confidence in the reported results where none currently exists. Listen to this .mp3: http://tinyurl.com/3sppbd Thanks for the encouragement Land Shark. I have posted an .mp3 of my talk at today's rally and there is a post about it in GD.
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Originally blogged at We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Hey Media! - Don't Report As Fact What Can't Even Be Proven (Federal Election Results) By Dave Berman 9/17/08 On August 17, 2005, I published an essay at the GuvWurld blog called "Why Old Election Numbers No Longer Matter." When I spoke at today's Constitution Day event at the Eureka courthouse, I read the beginning part of this essay: This apocryphal parable contains only true facts. I know because I made them up myself.After the reading, I ad-libbed pretty faithfully by the outline I posted yesterday. In all I spoke for just under seven and a half minutes. Since there were only about 30 people at the rally, this .mp3 in the GuvWurld News Archive will be (needs to be!) heard by exponentially more people, including the government and media types I'm recommending we aim our message at:The date was Sept 33, 1965. Samdy Kouflax ate eight live pigs, a new record among those in his Pagan cult. This sign of virility and luck soon paid dividends as Kouflax threw one of golf's most memorable games. Going all nine chuckers, Kouflax completed a no-hitter to lead his Chicago Whitehawks to the Super Bowl with a victory over the Boston Celtics. Kouflax's solo grand-slam leading off the first inning was all the offense needed that season. Many also remember this game for the unusual brawl that broke out between two Celtic mid-fielders. The ensuing power play enabled the 'Hawks to expand their zone defense with 20 men on the ice. All in all, it was a fabulous year for Samdy and his wife Whora.Can you imagine yourself getting into a debate about who won this game or what was the final score? Any such discussion would validate the legitimacy of the idea that there was an actual game with a winner, a loser, and a knowable point tally. If you were asked who won, or what was the final score, the only reasonable answer is that it cannot be known from such nonsensical reporting. There is nothing in this story to suggest that a real game of any sort was actually played. Hey Media! - Don't Report As Fact What Can't Even Be Proven (Federal Election Results).The media should be the biggest proponents of hand counting paper ballots because this allows for the greatest coverage of the process - transparent coverage of transparent counting creates a basis for confidence in the reported results, a reason to believe where currently none exists. I didn't get into the HCPB message today, though I was followed by Bob Olofson who did cover that on behalf of the Voter Confidence Committee. I was not the only speaker today to utter the phrase "Consent of the Governed." This reminded me that I had recently subscribed for Google alerts on this phrase. In the first seven days I've had 38 alerts. That compares with an average of about five per week that I've been getting for the phrase "We Do Not Consent." I encourage everyone to use both of these phrases and let's drive those numbers up. Another plug is due for the GuvWurld News Archive, brimming with recent articles on the economy. There is also a category called Revised Truth where I filed a Monday Washington Post article "The Power of Political Misinformation." The piece cites research indicating many people cling to mistaken beliefs more strongly when presented with information that debunks their erroneous belief. I find this interesting, but not surprising, as it would seem to support the description of ruthless honesty found in A Blueprint For Peaceful Revolution. Some of the specific suggestions of that paper are a bit dated now, but the overall concepts and strategy are still central to the We Do Not Consent blog and even today's rally. Finally, since I forgot at the courthouse I'd like to mention here that Velvet Revolution has launched a campaign to encourage and support candidates who raise challenges to election results. Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Originally blogged at We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Constitution Day and Citizenship Day By Dave Berman 9/16/08 Since I have been asked to speak Wednesday at a Constitution Day rally I Googled the phrase and learned from Wikipedia: Constitution Day (or Citizenship Day) is an American federal holiday that recognizes the ratification of the United States Constitution, and also recognizes all who have become citizens due to either coming of age or naturalization. It is observed on September 17, the day the U.S. Constitutional Convention signed the Constitution in 1787.<1>A guy (or even a country) could be forgiven for not remembering the creation or past celebration of this sort-of holiday. After all, a well-known dangerous man is said to have characterized the Constitution differently: "It's just a goddamned piece of paper!" It sure has been treated that way. So Ellen Taylor has assembled an array of rabble-rousers to speak at the Humboldt County Courthouse in Eureka tomorrow at noon+15. This will be my first public speaking event in several months, likely since I very quietly took my leave of absence from the Voter Confidence Committee (VCC). It was a sabbatical, and it is now ending. I've been talking with members of the group over the past several days and next weekend will attend my first VCC meeting in five or six months. It is not a done deal, but the odds look good for a shift in the group's emphasis over the next seven weeks. Tomorrow I'll be speaking about what I'd like to see happen, whether with the VCC or not, and not just here but everywhere citizens are organizing for election integrity. Frankly, it will not be much of a new message, just a different presentation based on timing. What follows is basically a stream of consciousness outline preview... It is well understood that federal "election" results are unprovable... Nothing that can be done here in Humboldt or in any other single given location can make federal "election" results provable... The government and media will tell us the results and expect us to accept them, which is exactly what we should not do... We need not and should not wait until after the "election" event to make our opposition known to accepting unprovable results (the objection is not to any particular result, but rather the claim that any result is even knowable)... In towns across the country, we need swelling groups of citizens to appeal to anyone claiming to represent the People, starting at the most local level, city councils on up, asking for a commitment to reject unprovable federal "election" results... The requested commitment may need to be conditional in some cases, going beyond the premise of secret vote counting necessarily producing unprovable results, spelling out familiar scenarios expected to repeat (electronic voting machines switching or losing votes, counting backwards, showing more votes than registered voters, etc.)... A further potential condition should be expressed, namely the twin prospects of the "election" being canceled, or a subsequent refusal to allow an orderly succession of power... Some may not be willing to commit to standing up against unprovable "election" results, but would finally make their stand if the Bush regime will not yield power... This scenario is not guaranteed to happen, of course, but at the same time nobody can credibly argue about anything at all by saying "they'd never do THAT"... So in one way or another we are looking for buy-in from the People and our representatives (sic), amplifying two messages... First, that WE DO NOT CONSENT to "election" results that can't be proven, and which attempt to assume our consent and take it for granted; but also... We must stand up to the media and insist they do not report as fact what can't even be proven, a sentiment repeatedly expressed here at WDNC for more than two years, as shown below in a June 2006 Humboldt Advocate article I called at the time "Best Election Protest Signs Ever."  Photo credit: Elaine Weinreb Well this is a start anyway. I'll be ad-libbing around these themes and hope to post at least audio tomorrow... Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Originally blogged at We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... Unemployment Rises, Media Act Surprised By Dave Berman 9/4/08 The word "unexpected" should not be used when referring to much anymore, but especially not an increase in unemployment numbers. First the Eureka Times-Standard caught my eye with this AP story: Jobless claims jumped unexpectedly last weekThat instantly sent me to Google news where I found similar stories all using the word "unexpected" in Forbes, Times UK, Hartford Courant, and of course many others advancing the official narrative. In contrast, here is what we all see and feel around us, acknowledged last month at Global Research: Ann Taylor closing 117 stores nationwide.Unemployment is on the rise. Who knew? Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/09... My Google alert told me this article had been reposted at a site called Conservative Revolutionary American Party. I get the acronym and see no evidence of an actual party so I think it is "just a name" for this site that has a pretty extensive news archive in blog format. Check it out.
Speaking of news archives, after being forced to change hosting services, GuvWurld.org is back online and adding content. About 70% of the original archive has been restored and I hope to get the rest soon. All restored content will keep its original URL. http://crap713three.blogspot.com/2008/09/h...
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Originally blogged at We Do Not Consent:
http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/08... Hurricane Gustav, Shock Doctrine and "Election" Events By Dave Berman 8/31/08 Hurricane Gustav bearing down on New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, expected to hit Monday, has already affected the presidential candidates' campaign calculus, and completely altered the media's telling of the campaign narrative. The NY Times reports the Republican convention scheduled to start tomorrow will be held in a very scaled back form and that the storm has also deflected media attention from both Obama's Thursday night acceptance speech (YouTube) and McCain's Friday veep announcement (YouTube). If there is destruction and chaos on the Gulf Coast, this could easily become the pretext for triggering federal martial law, as reportedly occurred locally in some places following Katrina. Only now the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive has modified succession of powers, enabling any event to trigger consolidation of all government under the executive. See Naomi Wolf's "End of America" for various historical precursors to this "echo," a repeating pattern in which the rise to absolute power comes through a series of superficially legal maneuvers, including funking up elections. Because November's "election" event, if it is even conducted, cannot produce a conclusive and verifiable outcome, the People's huge preference must be undeniably evidenced prior to that. 84,000 were in attendance for Obama's outdoor stadium acceptance speech, which saw all tickets accounted for in a one day application process. On Friday, McCain announced the relatively unknown yet scandal-plagued Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate at a rally that couldn't fill a 10,000 seat venue. Lost in the equation are compelling visual examples of Obama's clear and commanding lead. Instead, the media perpetuate the false narrative of a close race. Let me be clear that I endorse no candidate. I'm a fair election supporter. Though I don't think he'll be a revolutionary agent of change, if Obama has the votes to win then he should win. But first he should become outspoken about the process. Part of addressing the process, from my view, in this case, is something Obama supporters could do. I'm not usually in the position of offering advice to this seemingly massive and growing majority, but this is what I can see as the most likely way to ensure the outcome of the "election" event reflects the will of the People. As with the juxtaposition of the numbers above, there must be constant and overwhelming collective displays of public Obama preference beyond individual expressions such as buttons, bumper stickers and lawn signs. There must be aggressive efforts to ensure the media depiction, including reporting on opinion polls, shows comparisons of candidate support are unequivocal. In this way, just having the "election" event becomes a formality. The inherent uncertainty of the unverifiable results may be neutralized without the suspense and doubt of a seemingly close race, a facade created for the power play necessary to funk up the results. In addition, these pre-"election" displays need to directly address what will be done should the outcome be funked up. For that matter, such demonstrations of People power also ought to address rejecting the final dictatorial power grab looming over us, threatening the prospect of even having an "election" event. Velvet Revolution has launched a campaign to encourage and support candidates who raise challenges to election results. They also have a prosecute Karl Rove campaign. Lest anyone think my suggestions or perspective are partisan, I reiterate my view that this is all simulated competition and Obama is in many ways a false alternative. That is not to say Obama and McCain are identical, but rather that Obama's talk of change is woefully inadequate at busting the myths of democracy, capitalism, free speech, free press, free markets and the rest of The Big Lie. However, while McCain appears ready to use the storm backdrop for political theater, Obama is pledging to wait and see, then organize, inspire and motivate citizen volunteers to assist in the aftermath. And what can we expect this to look like? There is already a heavily armed military and law enforcement presence, while the war criminal enterprise Blackwater seeks to hire more mercenaries for the scene. The Department of Homeland Security (sic), FEMA (sic), and the Department of Defense (sic) will of course interfere with the command of state governors. And in a recurring theme here at WDNC lately, Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" illustrates the pattern of exploitative security and privatization responses to disasters. Pulling that thread just a little further, the North Coast Journal recently published Shane C. Brinton's book review of "Shock Doctrine," followed by my letter to the editor based on the review (the letter was given the great title of "Fascists!"). This week's Journal includes another wonderfully titled letter "Mas Fascismo" based on my letter. The Journal is a free weekly paper with a focus on local Humboldt County, CA events. I always enjoy seeing them publish letters from readers outside our area, and in this case from an H.M Johnson coincidentally located in Redwood Falls, Minnesota, just under 100 miles from the partly aborted Republican convention, where some blatantly fascist police tactics have been used on protesters. See Uptake.org for lots of video, and also Twin Cities Daily Planet for some additional reporting. Between Gustav and two potential flash points to create excuses for declaring martial law, this is shaping up to be a dangerous week. October 17, 2007 Official White House Transcript Q Mr. President, following up on Vladimir Putin for a moment. He said recently that next year when he has to step down, according to the constitution, as President, he may become Prime Minister, in effect keeping power and dashing any hopes for a genuine democratic transition there. Senator McCain -- THE PRESIDENT: I've been planning that myself. (Laughter.) Permalink: http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2008/08... |
My Forums
Democratic Underground forums
and groups from my "My Forums" list.
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted
on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the
last 24 hours.  Rec this puppy if you think Bush should face trial in America for WAR CRIMES 158 recs : By derby378 Nadler Introduces Resolution Opposing Bush Pardons 66 recs : By Hissyspit The Official "Hillary will be a great SOS" Thread! Come in and show your support! 35 recs : By Katzenkavalier Somali Pirates in Discussions to Acquire Citigroup 34 recs : By BR_Parkway Please Help (Iroquois) 32 recs : By H2O Man Congress Opposes Bush Pardons 30 recs : By davidswanson I remember you from the General Election. 29 recs : By Bicoastal **Please Help Send a Request to the Obama Transition Team** 29 recs : By JeffR Michael Moore: "We're seeing ... the end of capitalism as we know it....And I say good riddance." 28 recs : By marmar My (horrible) experience on the floor of the NY Stock Exchange 26 recs : By Cyrano Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Discussion Forums
Big Forums
More Forums
Today's Featured Forums
|
