Guest Blogged by Jim Cirile
“No recounts? I mean, why bother even having elections? Bring in these electronic voting machines, hire a few people to flip the votes, outlaw recounts. You’d save a lot of money by outlawing elections!”
“We conducted a mock arrest at the Secretary of State’s office. We went over with our 10-foot high arrest warrant for grand voting theft which we issued to McPherson for certifying those evil machines — the TSx — with a 30% failure rate and announcing the certification on a holiday weekend when nobody was paying attention.”
— Marcy Winograd, Candidate U.S. House of Representatives, CA 36th District
Marcy Winograd “was tired of our leaders not listening to us.” So she decided to run against one of them — Jane Harman, another Democrat — who she felt wasn’t listening.
You may not have heard of Winograd yet. But it’s time you do.
Winograd hopes to represent California’s 36th congressional district (West and Southwest Los Angeles). On June 6th she faces off in the California primary election against the powerful incumbent Harman — a six-term Democratic U.S. Congresswoman who Winograd describes as a “Bush Democrat”.
A 12-year board-certified teacher and activist, Winograd received the 2004 Los Angeles Democrat of the Year award. She’s been making waves in the progressive community with her grassroots assault on the incredibly well-financed, pro-war Harman, who has a record of voting consistently with the Bush administration.
Drive around the west side of Los Angeles and you’ll see plenty of signs for both Harman and Winograd on telephone poles — but on people’s lawns, you only see Winograd signs. She’s making waves?and even Harman’s beginning to listen.
Winograd is part of the Impeach Team — three congressional candidates who have made impeaching George W. Bush and Dick Cheney part of their platform.
She’s also a staunch defender of election protection issues and has been fighting tooth and nail to prevent the hostile takeover of California’s elections by the right. Unlike so many Democrats, she’s unafraid to talk about issues of election integrity — and she’s got a plan in case there’s any whiff of chicanery at the ballot box. Okay, so now she’s got us listening too.
She recently gave The BRAD BLOG at least an hour of her time for an exclusive interview on everything that actually matters to America right now. We thought that was a refreshing change of pace for a Democrat. So we like her. A lot. And think you will too?
BRAD BLOG: What made you want to get into this race?
MARCI WINOGRAD: I was tired of our leaders not listening to us. I was particularly outraged at my opponent’s lack of regard for our rights and her willingness to go along with Bush’s illegal wiretaps, not to mention supporting the Iraq war since before the first bomb was dropped.
I call her a Bush Democrat, and I wonder who she’s working for. Her top contributors were defense contractors. Up until a few weeks ago, she was wearing a B-2 bomber pin. I wonder, would she wear a pin with the face of a child whose face had been blown off?
BB: You support immediate withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. Polls show it’s what Americans want. So why do you think the issue seems to be a non-starter with the Democrats in general?
MW: I think many of them have the mentality that only we can resolve the situation. Some of them may be well-intentioned, wanting to fix the mess that we’re in. But some of them may also want to have a hand in Iraq’s governance. I think there are probably some leaders in both houses of Congress who believe the United States knows best and should be police officer of the world.
BB: Do you think there’s anybody in Congress that would stand up and try to stop Bush from going into Iran?
MW: I hope so. I hope that we do have some heroes left. Conyers, Feingold, Kucinich, I know they’re concerned about Iran and the administration’s reckless wars. Will there be a resounding chorus? I don’t know. That’s one of the reasons why I ran–when I watched Jane Harman surrender the constitution on Meet the Press, I thought, what’s she going to do when Bush tries to invade Iran? That’s why I’m here today. We have to raise our voices in opposition.
There’s something fundamentally wrong when you’re on the House Intelligence Committee, and you’re bankrolled by the defense industry. There’s a conflict of interest. She shouldn’t be taking any donations from defense contractors.
BB: You’ve been outspoken on election protection issues, but the corporate media refuses to deal with it and often treats the issue with hostility.
MW: I wonder if it has something to do with the fact that newspapers and television stations are cutting their staff, spending less and less money on investigative reporting. People are unwilling to spend the time and energy or are not getting paid to do that, to scrutinize our election process. There are details involved, and one needs to stay on top of those details and probe a little. [Perhaps they don’t] feel it’s worthy of their investment–even though it’s our democracy on the chopping block.
I think it’s unfortunate that the Democratic party has not recognized the problematic nature of electronic voting machines. They’ve allowed county registrars and secretaries of state to use machines that are highly vulnerable to manipulation and are jeopardizing our vote.
But any time you start talking about election protection, it’s almost as though you are morphing into a conspiracy theorist.
BB: That’s what they try to paint us as. As you know, here in California, they ousted a secretary of state who ardently protected our voting rights.
MW: Yeah. I ran the 2004 Democratic Club headquarters in Santa Monica. We were all so confused at that time. [Former CA Secretary of State] Kevin Shelley said that electronic voting machines had to have a paper trail. And that was when we started with early voting, I believe, in LA County. Early voting machines didn’t have a paper trail. We called up the Secretary of State and said, “What’s going on? They should have a paper trail.” Called up our County Registrar — “Nope, they don’t have to have a paper trail.” I guess there was a war underway before we realized it.
Unfortunately, now we have [Secretary of State] Bruce McPherson, who’s not doing his job.
BB: He has caved at every turn to the voting machine companies.
MW: I testified against his confirmation, realizing that he was a very popular guy — affable and very well-liked in Sacramento. It wasn’t his personality at issue but his strength of character. His transition team included a Diebold lobbyist and a Republican fundraiser and strategist. The fact that he put them on his transition team, or allowed someone else to put them on, spoke volumes about his judgment.
BB: The swiftboating of Shelley [who resigned under fire in 2004 after decertifying Diebold machines in CA], and then the installation of McPherson–it’s obvious certain people had their eye on stealing California from the get-go.
MW: It definitely looks like a plot.
BB: You sent a barnburner of an e-mail to everyone on your list warning them not to vote early but to wait ’til election day because of the potential of election fraud. This is the first time we can think of a Democratic candidate ever doing that, and we say bravo! But aren’t the Ink-A-Vote cards [paper ballots used in LA County] counted by a Diebold central tabulator?
MW: That is a possibility. I haven’t gotten a straight answer on that. Depending on the occasion and who I talk to, I am told that we’re using MicroTally or we’re using Diebold. At one point a group of us showed up at the county registrar’s office, and the woman who was rolling a cart by told us, “Yes, of course we’re using Diebold.”
I don’t feel comfortable about that either, but at least we know that we do have a paper trail that if we wanted to, we could recount.
BB: A lot of folks believe [Paul] Hackett lost to [Jean] Schmidt in Ohio’s recent special election courtesy of electronic vote manipulation. Do you have any way to prevent this from happening to you?
MW: We are going to have parallel elections outside specific precincts. The LA Times is supposed to do some polling, I think. So we’ll see how all that stacks up. We’re letting people know that we’ll be watching and that we’re ready, and we’re not going to roll over. I’ve heard from sources in Washington that [Harman and I are] running very close. I have not done a poll myself. But if [the results are questionable], I would feel that I have an obligation to [fight], because I’m not just running as Marcy Winograd, I’m running as part of a progressive movement.
BB: You’re running as the vast majority of America who are just pissed off with the way things are going. Tell us about the Impeach Team.
MW: I have teamed up with Bob McCloskey, who is running against Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Charles Coleman, who’s running against Howard Berman (D-CA), another incumbent. We cut a commercial that is airing on Air America urging people to sign our petition calling on all the members of Congress to impeach George Bush and Dick Cheney. The ads are also going to be running on KNX 1070 news radio here in Los Angeles.
[The Impeach Team website is here. You can listen to their audio ad online here.]BB: Down in Florida, as I’m sure you’re aware, they’ve passed anti-recount legislation.
The machine’s verdict is now final.
MW: That’s very, very scary. No recounts? I mean, why bother even having elections? Bring in these electronic voting machines, hire a few people to flip the votes, outlaw recounts. You’d save a lot of money just by outlawing elections.
BB: I’m sure you’re aware of Florida election fraud whistleblower Clint Curtis, who’s running against the man that he says asked him to create vote-rigging software, Congressman Tom Feeney. Like yourself, Curtis is making a splash with his tough talk on election fraud. Hopefully things in California are not as bad as in Florida.
MW: I hope. We try to put people on notice. We conducted a mock arrest at the Secretary of State’s office. We went over to the Secretary of State’s office with our 10-foot high arrest warrant for grand voting theft which we issued to McPherson for certifying those evil machines — the TSx — with a 30% failure rate and announcing the certification on a holiday weekend when nobody was paying attention.
We occupied the office for awhile, and we sang to the tune of “This Land is Your Land,” “This Vote is Our Vote.” We tried to deliver the summons, but what do you know? We were blocked. But we have to keep the pressure on.
BB: Tell us a little about IRV, instant run-off voting.
MW: Right now, under this winner-take-all system we have, people are reluctant to vote for candidates they think might not win. But under instant run-off voting, you vote for a candidate, and then you have a second choice. So either one of their choices could count. I think it would go a long way towards democratizing our choices. Because clearly we see the Republicans and the Democrats colluding [to eliminate third party challenges]. I think the more voices we hear, the richer the dialogue.
There’s still a lot of confusion out there about it, though. There’s some education to be done first.
[For a quick IRV primer please visit www.fairvote.org/irv/faq.htm.]BB: What’s it going to take to get the Democrats to wake up and just refuse to play ball with any Bush policies, appointees, wars, you name it?
MW: Some successful challenges to their positions of power. It may take a few million people marching into the halls of Congress. It may take soldiers refusing to fight. It may take a lot of different forms. But I think the challenge in the primary is very important. I just could not sit by and watch the Democratic party collude with Bush and Cheney, deny us our civil liberties.
Everywhere I go in the 36th district, people say, “Where are the Democrats? Why don’t they have any spine?” And I wonder, don’t these people in Congress hear this conversation?
BB: Marcy, it was wonderful to talk to you. We here in the blogging community have your back. Is there anything you’d like to add?
MW: Just how wonderful it is to be in this campaign. It’s just fun driving around, meeting people in the streets, talking about getting out of Iraq. We were able to get United Teachers of Los Angeles to rescind its endorsement of Jane Harman. The union represents 40,000 teachers. When I first called them and told them I was running for Congress, the head of the personnel action committee couldn’t wait to get off the phone with me. I’m not somebody that you say no to. I had been a member of UTLA for 12 years, so we brought our Winograd vs. Harman poster and reminded them that the union had adopted an anti-war resolution a few years ago. Did they know that their union was about to endorse a pro-war incumbent? After a few lobbying sessions, we were able to turn the vote around.
People will say, “How can you take on a 6-term incumbent with more money than God who’s the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee?” And my response is you can have all the money and perceived power in the world, but you can’t rewrite your record. [Harman’s] record is one of championing a war based on lies and not providing oversight on the House Intelligence Committee, of becoming an accomplice, if not an architect, of this messy little wiretapping program? There’s nothing you can do to rewrite that kind of history. The voting record is there.
Just for the record, in case people say, “Oh, she doesn’t have the resources,” I have invested my own personal money in this campaign, and outside of that we have raised over $100,000 so far.
[For more information on Marcy Winograd, please visit www.WinogradForCongress.com.]
Sounds like a winner 🙂
Though, it saddens me that we’re running elections based on this damn war and all the pissing on the Constitution that Shrubby has done. We should be running this election on -real- issues that matter to America, instead we’re trying to undo this huge mess these pricks made.
I’m all for getting out incumbant Dems who are "Bush Democrats", but I’d like to hear more about "other issues" and where candidates stand..
I’d like to see more "Democrats" running as Indies.. but, we know that will hurt things in the short run.. As Dredd keeps pointing out (and it pisses me off that he’s right), the current setup of "2 party system" doesn’t let the 3rd party count as "one of the other 2" for "majority status" when stacking up the comittees like the Pugs have done. We need a Democrat Majority so we can change the rules of how we populate these comittees.. This is a Democracy.. we should have full-on voting for who is on and chairing comittees.. We should also be able to "vote them out" of comittees if they aren’t doing their jobs.. then this 2 party system would lose some of it’s stink.
If(big if) the democrats take the house in Nov, watch how quickly Brad drops the voting issue.
Go Marcy, GO!!!
Keep that Jane from Harman our Constitution and rule of law. Preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America means nothing to a Representative who takes an oath to a president to remain silent over egregious infractions occurred by his Executive orders. How does allowing a president to break the law, knowing of it and not speaking out /up about it protecting, preserving and defending the Constitution from which said laws are made from?
I’m only wishing that I was in your district.
My current House Rep. is one of the Patriotic 37 signed on to H. Res. 635.
Go Marcy, GO!!!
WE’RE ALL IN IT TOGETHER!
Marcy, I hope you can compete. Use that as a slogan of a true progressive Dem.
The Pubs (and Pubs in Dem clothing) can’t make that claim. They show over and over that they believe it’s every man for himself. They believe in Power, no matter what and no matter how they get it… We believe in fighting, but we fight for everybody.
pRicky, I doubt the issue will be dropped until there’s been a national debate on it, and the machines are tossed (well, Brad might not stick with it till the machines are gone, but I would if it was my blog.. the concept is just wrong and is not required to have effective and fair elections).
And, once the election issue is resolved (across the board), I’m sure Brad will find some other noble cause to champion on his blog. He will find something else that needs to be exposed.. Eventually, we’ll live in a eutopia and the Blog will become boring and about how he mixed up his sox before going to the movies.. Boy, do I long for that day… 😀
She’s a MILF . . . . . But to move 2500 miles to cast a vote . . . Hmmmmmmmmmmm
Ricky — shut up, that’s just crap.
Judge of Judges — stay on topic, or shut up.
And to the others:
1. Ignore the trolls when they try to take important conversations off-topic. Just IGNORE them. I know it’s hard, but IGNORE them. If you do, they eventually go away, meanwhile, we don’t waste our time.
2. DONATE! I went to her website (the URL in the article is wrong, but you can get there by using just the end) and donated $20. Everybody should.
Charlie L
Portland, OR
And what can we do to collect evidence anywhere there is no paper trail? Marcy says she plans parallel elections at certain precincts. She needs to remember they’ll steal at every precinct…
Are we up for having 2 – 3 people at each precinct (Ohio counties that were supposed to come out 55-45 Bush in ’04 came out 60 or 65% Bush – – and nobody stopped to ask about those as they were busy working the inner city election fraud beats…. – they stole votes in California, just to try to "win" the popular vote as well as the electoral college…) to ask folks to vote in a parrallel election on paper?
Would this be a reasonable thing to do?
If folks signed their names that they voted for a certain candidate, and the official numbers come out differently, what then?
shw
Charlie L – A good Troll is hard to find . . . . . But a hard Troll is good to find . . . Chill Chief.
pRicky You’re assuming that Brad is a traitorous idealogue such as yourself and the whole collusive GOPig machine–Go fuck yourself, you treasonous ass.
Charlie L – J of J made a pertinent remark, that he’d like to be able to vote for Marcy W, a really splendid candidate, but he lives too far away.
I make the same claim, but I’m a lot father away – a 3500 mile diagonal away! Doggone…
Well, I agreed with the first part of his statement more 😀
Thanks for the great article on Marcy. I’m volunteering for her campaign (although she’s out of my district) because I think she’s such a great candidate. I like where she stands on the issues, and that she’s not afraid to be a real progressive; a real Democrat.
"How can you take on a 6-term incumbent with more money than God who’s the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee?"
That’s an easy one. Just enough money to get your rational message out and honest vote counting.
How refreshing to hear this candidate talk truth!
Savantster said:
"Eventually, we’ll live in a eutopia and the Blog will become boring and about how he mixed up his sox before going to the movies.. Boy, do I long for that day".
AMEN!
Go Marcy. More and more patriots are being reported on.
Matt,
Please refrain from the use of such language. You do your friends no justice by making obscene comments like that. Hating me is ok, but telling me to go f@#$ myself makes both you and your liberal friends look bad. That fact that I have to be the one to tell you this, even worse.
Great interview. I’m in Marcy’s district, am a volunteer on her campaign. It’s about time we elect a real Democrat who will listen, and act.
Reminds me of the 10th Congressional Illinois races in the 1970s with Abner J. Mikva.
Ah yes, the bad language, ’tis so offensive & sullies the discourse, tis true.
But the far, far more offensive and evil policies of this greed-and-power-driven administration are the true obscenities.
Defaming brave patriots who speak truth…heaping hardship upon the vulnerable…trampling the Constitution…twisting our laws into aberrant knots and our republic into an unrecognizable Babel of shame…inflicting hideous injury, agony & death upon a country & a people that posed no threat to us…THESE are the obscenities that deserve your scorn, not a few bawdy words!!
Are you ready yet to join us, ricky, in working to try and save this country before it’s completely destroyed?
If not, here, I’ll put it into a more palatable vernacular for you…
richard, get thee gone and fornicate with thyself.
Bruce McPherson is California’s Katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell all rolled into one. This is Swartzenneger’s appointee to Secretary of State. Can anyone guess why he is trying so hared to legitimize Diebold machines in California—the state with the largest number of electoral votes? hhhmmmm.
Perhaps pRicky would rather we quote one of his heros.. and, in the voice of Cheney, say.. "go fuck yourself"..
Oh.. wait..
Marcy Winograd is the wrong candidate, in the wrong race, at the wrong time. It is one thing to honestly run against the party’s incumbent because you don’t like her voting record, and you feel she is not representing you. That is not the case here. Jane Harman was not Marcy’s Representative until the day before the filing deadline, Marcy lived in Henry Waxman’s Pacific Palisades.
Contrary to Ms. Winograd’s assertions and those would think this is just a family fight, this is not a safe Democratic district. In the recall election, this same district went 61% Republican, with 48% to Schwarzenegger and 13% to McClintock. A very popular Democrat, the late Mike Gordon, barely won in a State Senate race that is configured almost exactly along the same lines.
Folks, this is a swing district – Venice is not the only part of the CD 36, it also includes Torrance, and no one wins this District without winning Torrance. Torrance and Manhattan Beach, THE HOME OF BOEING, NORTHRUP-GRUMMAN, and other defense contractors that provide 75,000 jobs directly, and most of the district indirectly. Jobs that Marcy and her friends would glady eliminate.
Jane Harman is about one thing – taking back the House. Marcy refused at the West LA Dem Club mee t on Tuesday to endorse Francine Busby, who is considered a progressive by almost everyone. I guess she doesn’t pass Marcy’s litmus test. When asked what was more important, party or ideals, Marcy quickly responded with ideals. Well, Marcy, then run as an Independent. Try to see if your "ideals" will get you the oversight and subpoena authority that being a majority party attains. Try getting a hearing on the War in Iraq, Wiretapping, or any of a dozen issues without being the majority party.
I am hopeful the lease she took on her Marina del Rey apartment the day before the filing deadline is short term. She can move back to the Palisades on Wednesday.
At least we agree that such language isnt needed. In true Bradblog fashion you give a pass to your own people for the same thing you complain about in others.
Venice Dave #22
I used to shoot pool with a Dave, a scriptwriter, at the Hannano Cafe. Ever been there?
The points you make do have tactical truth to them, but I certainly advocate taking out "Bush Democrats" (a term I invented here months ago) when possible.
Everyone posting here for awhile knows I want the republican rubber stamp congress to change to a democratic majority. But certainly not at any cost.
One point you may want to consider is that this election is one where the public is mad as hell at the republican dictatorship. And democrats and independents are mad as hell at Bush Democrats.
Two good things could happen … the democrats take control of congress, and the Bush Democrats are all voted out and new true blue congress members replace them.
We are not mad at republicans for being republicans, we are mad at them for allowing a dictatorship to embryonically form thru the efforts of neoCons within their ranks.
We would have no morals if we support the democrats who do exactly the same thing. There are 5 or 6 in the Senate that I would love to see go, and some in the House (such as Harman).
Fascists supporters of the military industrial complex, no matter what party, have to go. They seem to be hell-bent on destroying the planet and all of us along with them.
But I do respect your careful tactical analysis that says in the end we must stop the republican dictatorship first … no matter if we are forced to retain, for as short a while as possible, some Bush Democrats.
The link to Marcy’s site is here.
I would rather have her as a representative than Jane Harmon … but … of course I must leave that to the California voters.
Venice, you must work on the Harman campaign. The points you make are irrelevant. The fact is that Harman represents everything that sucks about Democrats–complicity with the NeoCon fascist/corporatist agenda, spinelessness and being owned by defense contractors.
Why should Marcy Winograd run as an independent when her ideals are consistent with what Democrats are SUPPOSED to stand for? Why doesn’t Harman run as a moderate Republican? It comes down to one thing: Harman is anti-Bushco accountability and Winograd is pro-Bushco accountability. End of story.
Marcy has worked in all parts of LA as a teacher’s teacher, and I am sure has a much better grasp of her constituency than Harmon. I applaud her commitment to serve, and her willingness to move a couple of miles to be in the district. Jane Harmon did the same thing when she first ran, but our friend Venice Dave forgot to mention that.
Go Marcy! Show them how to speak truth in Washington. We need you badly.
Savantster 20.0 – ROFLMFAO >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I applaud Marcy Winograd for taking on pro-war, pro-Patriot Act, Jane Harman. Even if Marcy loses, voters will still have a peace candidate in November. I am the Peace and Freedom Party candidate in the race, and a Venice labor and community activist. In this election, voters will not be limited to only Coke vs. Pepsi (Democrats vs. Republicans) – parties that are both dominated by corporate and military interests. A real democracy depends on having more than two branches of the same military-corporate-political structure to choose from on election day. VoteSmithforCongress.org
Local p.r. exec for hire, David Buchanan, sez:"Contrary to Ms. Winograd’s assertions and those would think this is just a family fight, this is not a safe Democratic district… A very popular Democrat, the late Mike Gordon, barely won in a State Senate race that is configured almost exactly along the same lines."
Mr. Buchanan is snowing you. Please note:
A) CA-36 is not exactly the same as AD-53 (the Assembly district won by the late Mike Gordon in 2004… and it was the *Assembly* that Mike Gordon was elected to, David, *not* the State Senate). CA-36 includes a greater portion of liberal West L.A. than does AD-53, and CA-36 also includes the heavy union stronghold of San Pedro. AD-53 does not. CA-36 is a more liberal and more Democratic district than AD-53.
B) About that AD-53 race that Mr. Buchanan says was “barely won” by Democrat Mike Gordon… Mike Gordon beat the Republican by EIGHT (8) POINTS (50.4%-42.5%). An 8 point cushion counts as “barely won”?! Also, Mike Gordon’s *razor close* 8-point win in ‘04 came against a tough opponent: the longtime Mayor of Redondo Beach. By contrast, the GOP’s nominee for CA-36 this year is a political non-entity with no electoral experience, no campaign experience, no activist experience, no volunteer base, no website, no campaign staff, no campaign office, no campaign phone number, no campaign signage, no stationery, and no clue whatsoever.
For Mr. Buchanan to imply that, in November of ‘06, Marcy Winograd will be in electoral peril against a GOP cypher because, two years ago, a Democrat *eeked out* an 8 point win in a more conservative district against a tougher opponent should be insulting to anyone who has the misfortune of reading it.
This coming Tuesday, the Democrats of CA-36 really do have the opportunity to vote their hearts, and without fear. Don’t let hucksters like David Buchanan tell you otherwise.
Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA
"In true Bradblog fashion you give a pass to your own people for the same thing you complain about in others."
Actually, no. Not quite true. "Fuck" is just a word, but an impolite one. I use it in my own house at times, in jest & among friends, or sometimes out of anger or frustration. Like most people, I would venture to guess.
There are many places & situations where I would consider its use wildly inappropriate. I think that’s just part of being a "grown-up".
Certainly the Senate is one of those places, for dick cheney or any other adult, but certainly for public figures and especially for a public figure who occupies the second-highest position in our government and who, along with his boss, was supposedly going to restore honor & dignity to the white house.
Inappropriate and pretty fucking stunningly ironic.
Just to clarify. 🙂
Venice Dave (Comment #22)-
I was on the fence as to whether to contribute to a candidate out of my district but your comments convinced me to go ahead and contribute to Ms. Winograd. You are an absolute shill! I’m sure you are the kind of person (and there are WAY TOO MANY of them on the political scene) who would happily tout the virtues of Ms. Winograd and disparage Ms. Harmon if Ms. Winograd or those representing her were willing to pay for your services. Thank god they don’t/won’t. Please take your disinformation to another website! It’s not going to fly here.
Thank you for covering this Brad and GO MARCY!
I think Harman is trying to recover some votes by joining with Conyers to pass a new act to make Bush follow the law. The LISTEN act being advertised all over the blogosphere, will be a law to force Bush to obey the law. Does that make any sense? What makes them think Bush would listen to this law?? Duh!!! Why doesn’t Conyers and Harman introduce articles of impeachment, not this bogus crap. Conyers still has not attempted to actually hold Bush accountable for illegal wiretapping. Why not? Why is John Conyers trying to help Harman look like she is doing something? 🙁
I just heard her on the Ed Shultz show . . . . . She sounds as good as looks. . .
For Ricky: If the Democrats get control in November, I’d assume Brad will not drop the election fraud issue, unless Democrats make it a priority (in which case he won’t have to, except to offer support).
The problem all along has been that neither party has addressed it. We can argue all night the reasons why, but the fact is it hasn’t been addressed. There has been a bi-partisan coalition, opposed to dealing with the obvious problems with our elections. And that is unaccptable, regardless of one’s party affiliation.
Not very complicted, really.
:O 😛 😀 :hehe: the moonbats lost again!!!!!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Would love to hear what Marcy thinks of the results. Does she think them accurate or rigged? Please if anyone knows post it. Did the methods she used to attempt to ensure an honest election work.