Normally, I'd be for making sure there's a fair recount. In 1999, I'd be completely for a fair recount.
But after the bullshit, accusations of partisanship, anti-Americanism and more levelled by the Republicans against anyone who wanted a recount in 2000 and 2004, this is the ultimate in hypocrisy. We came to the Republicans with bigger, more compelling evidence than 1,000 votes that may be illegal--BBC journalist (and American citizen) Greg Palast discovered more than 90,000 Floridians who were not allowed to vote at all, despite the fact that they were allowed to do so under Florida law. All we heard was how this was a partisan attack on Bush because "we" lost.
Well, guess what--the shoe is on the other foot now. It's the Republicans who lost the governorship in Washington state. Now they want a recount after actually letting the Dems have theirs! Silly Republicans! Truth is for adults!! You can't play partisan games now!! You've had your chance to set an example and boy did you set one.
Now, if you're a Republican, it's YOU who are anti-American.
Why? Because it was your kind who scoffed in the face of mountains of evidence of botched and even fixed elections in 2000 and 2004, telling anyone who wanted an investigation that they should "move on."
Because it's your people who were not critical of Bush's drive to war--a war that all of us dissenters GOT RIGHT. Saddam had NO WMD and this is something we ALL KNEW BEFORE Bush invaded a country in violation of International Law (in upper-case letters because that's how important it is). When Kofi Annan (the guy who runs the UN) tried to point this out to the press and the world, the US government told him to shut up.
Most Democrats have clammed up and done nothing to try and stop this Republican monster so they get to have a good chunk of the blame, too. I'm sure most feel overwhelmed and powerless to stop the Republicans (aside from those who have all but joined them, like Feinstein from my home state), but no one is completely powerless. Go to the press, start a blog, bitch and moan about how you couldn't get Bush impeached if you wanted to because Democrats are scared little pussy cats and the Repbulicans would never allow an impeachment hearing of their beloved Son of God, George Bush.
The Republicans are out of control, you know. They're trying to ditch the filibuster, they're trying to get the governorship of Washington state (don't they have enough states to govern??), they already have control over most of each of the three branches of government--hell, Texas politicians have even put forward a bill that would ban what an article from AP.org available at MyWay.com referred to as:
"overtly sexually suggestive" cheerleading to more ladylike performances.
"Girls can get out and do all of these overly sexually performances and we applaud them and that's not right," said Democratic Rep. Al Edwards, who filed the legislation.
Edwards argued bawdy performances are a distraction for students resulting in pregnancies, dropouts and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
Ribald performances are not defined in the bill. "Any adult that's been involved with sex in their lives, they know it when they see it," he said.
While it was a Democrat who put the legislation forward, you don't have to wonder if the Republican dominated state government will pass this Big Brotherian bill. The ACLU points out that a law already exists that bans public lewdness by students on or near schools. The real funny thing is that most heterosexual men of most ages think there's just something hot about a woman dressed as a cheerleader. So, stop it on the field and it will have no effect since you can do a Google search for "cheerleader porn" and find enough fodder to go through a box-and-a-half of Kleenex... not that I'd know anything about it...
So, here it is again, compliments of the Republicans, Democracy Inaction.
They're not interested in truth unless it helps them. Since they've already compromised the truth about Bush's elections and the Iraq war, they shouldn't be allowed the truth either--at least not until the rest of us are treated to it.
From AP.org:
GOP Wins Election Challenge in Washington
By REBECCA COOK
Associated Press Writer
WENATCHEE, Wash. (AP) -- The Republicans won an important victory Monday in their legal challenge to the election of Gov. Christine Gregoire when a judge allowed them to use a type of statistical analysis to try to prove illegal votes swayed the race.
Republican Dino Rossi is trying to have the election results from November declared invalid. Rossi won the first count and a machine recount, but his Democratic opponent won by 129 votes in a hand recount of 2.9 million ballots.
The trial is set for May 23.
State law includes provisions for challenging and nullifying an election, but they have never been used to try to remove a governor.
Republicans claim they have identified more than 1,000 illegal votes - mostly ballots cast by felons, but also unverified provisional ballots and votes cast in the names of dead people.
Superior Court Judge John Bridges gave the GOP the go-ahead to apply "proportional analysis" to the illegal votes.
Using proportional analysis, they want the court to subtract illegal votes from both candidates' totals according to precinct voting patterns. For example, if 10 illegal votes came from a precinct that voted 60 percent for Gregoire and 40 percent for Rossi, six votes would be deducted from Gregoire's total and four from Rossi's.
Democrats said the method amounts to statistical guessing. At the same time, they have been collecting evidence of illegal votes in GOP-leaning counties, and plan to use the same proportional analysis in court.
In arguments before Bridges, David Burman, an attorney for the Democrats, likened proportional analysis to flipping a coin. To overturn an election, "They have to be certain," he said. "Mathematical chances are not good enough."
But GOP attorney Mark Braden said that without proportional analysis, both sides would have to bring thousands of witnesses into the courtroom, to ask how they voted on a secret ballot. That, he said, "is a nonsensical interpretation of Washington law."
Both sides have acknowledged that whatever happens in Superior Court, the case will ultimately be decided by the state Supreme Court.
---
On the Net:
Court documents: http://www.secstate.wa.gov
© 2005 The Associated Press
From AP.org and MyWay.com:
Texas Lawmakers OK Cheerleading Ban
May 3, 11:53 PM (ET)
By APRIL CASTRO
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - After an alternately comic and fiery debate - punctuated by several lawmakers waving pompons - the state House on Tuesday approved a bill to restrict "overtly sexually suggestive" cheerleading to more ladylike performances.
The bill would give the state education commissioner authority to request that school districts review high school performances.
"Girls can get out and do all of these overly sexually performances and we applaud them and that's not right," said Democratic Rep. Al Edwards, who filed the legislation.
Edwards argued bawdy performances are a distraction for students resulting in pregnancies, dropouts and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
Ribald performances are not defined in the bill. "Any adult that's been involved with sex in their lives, they know it when they see it," he said.
The bill passed on a 65-56 vote. It still must be approved by the Senate and signed by Republican Gov. Rick Perry.
One critic questioned the legislation's priorities.
"Have we done anything about stem cell research to help people who are dying and are sick advance their health? No," said Democratic Rep. Senfronia Thompson. "Have we done anything about the mentally ill, school finance or ethics?"
The American Civil Liberties Union said the measure was unnecessary because state law already prohibits public lewdness by students on or near a school campus.
Copyright 2005 Associated Press
No comments:
Post a Comment