Many folks across the country, particularly those who have worked on the inside of the struggle to stop the use of electronic voting systems, held our collective breath as we watched election results on the evening of November 7th.  I count myself among those who were sceptical that the Democrats could pull out a win.  Greg Palast predicted that a 4.5 million-vote thumb had been placed upon the vote-tally scale.

Between the robo calls (here and here), rampant voting machine failures and other dirty tricks, I was inclined to take Karl Rove at his word that the Republicans would walk away being declared the winners yet again. So did he… 

As a programmer, and recognizing that one number is as easy to program as the next, I found it compelling to believe that if the 2006 election were to be stolen, it would not matter how many votes the Dems managed to encourage out to the polls.  But folks like Thom Hartmann simply insisted that if 4.5 million votes were going to be erased, we would simply have to come with 5 million votes.

Imagine the collective sigh of relief as the returns failed to disappoint the sceptics.  

Did Democrats turn out such massive numbers that to steal sufficient votes would have been too obviouis?  Jonathan Simon thinks so.

Jonathan Simon, who did a lot of the analysis of exit polls and statistics in 2004, was hard at work capturing the National Election Poll (NEP) data that night.  Surprisingly, just like in 2004, he discovered that unadjusted NEP data was publicly revealed for a period of time before being “adjusted” later that night.

Simon and the Election Defense Alliance have published a report that has led to this article, claiming that they have demonstrated that an attempt was made to steal the November 2006 election.  And TruthIsAll, a poster at Democratic Underground who likes to study such numbers, has performed this analysis.

Was the election closer than it might have been without some illicit help?  Dunno…  I really don’t.  But I know that until we return to a point where we have verifiable elections that elicit trust and confidence in the process, and use equipment that can withstand scrutiny and recounts, such questions will linger with every future election.

Demand meaningful election reform!

Click here to find out!

An interesting read, courtesy of The Conservative Voice:

It is now three days after the Nov. 7 election. I have read one Republican analysis of the party’s failure after another, most of which seem at a loss as to where the blame might squarely be laid. Like President Bush, no one could see how the Republicans had done anything wrong, or how they might have done anything significantly different.

Well, I am just one of the small, average shmoes out in middle America who, like most of the small average shmoes with whom I associate, has no trouble at all giving a prompt, accurate and much-needed diagnosis of why we voted Blue. I am registered as a Democrat currently, not because I have any great love, or even infatuation, for the leaders of that party, or even because I have great admiration for the Democratic agenda. I voted Democrat because of all the things I noticed about the Republican party.  Story here…

From GreenIsTheNewRed.com, the lame duck Congress is moving quickly to regain its pace at passing unconstitutional legislation.  Read this one carefully as it describes how the language of this bill has been used to prosecute non-violent activists, charging them with terrorism, for the simple act of running a web site.

They did it. Corporations, industry groups and the politicians that represent them rushed through legislation labeling activists as “terrorists” on the first day back from Congressional recess. Just moments ago the House passed the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act as part of the suspension calendar: in other words it was put on a list of non-controversial bills to pass with one swoop by voice vote.  More here. 

Looking around a bit, I found this article about the AETA bill, and here is discussion over at Democratic Underground.  Here is the House bill that passed.  And here is the ACLU’s take on it.

Combined with the Military Commissions Act that recently passed, we have now potentially lost (at the whim of the President) Habeas Corpus as well as free speech. 

I thought the President swore an oath the DEFEND the Constitution!

As we know, California’s 11th Congressional District has a new US Representative (Just why do you so hate the environment Mr. Pombo?)  His replacement is Jerry McNerney.

But we get more than a replacement for the environment-hating, slash and burn Pombo - we get an expert in alternate energy!  McNerney is a wind energy guy.  Read this article.

It simply gets better and better.

David Sirota served as a top strategist and researcher for Ned Lamont’s U.S. Senate campaign.  His insightful thoughts on the Lamont/Lieberman race, and how the entrenched DC power base worked to disregard the democratic process, is a worthwhile read when planning future campaigns.

As mentioned in this 1998 story, it was the exagerated analysis of intelligence provided by Robert Gates that led us to arm Afghanistan fighters (thus creating Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda) so that they coud combat the Soviet Union.

The CIA, ever mindful of the need to justify its “mission,” had conclusive evidence by the mid-1980s of the deepening crisis of infrastructure within the Soviet Union. The CIA, as its deputy director Robert Gates acknowledged under congressional questioning in 1992, had decided to keep that evidence from President Reagan and his top advisors and instead continued to grossly exaggerate Soviet military and technological capabilities in its annual “Soviet Military Power” report right up to 1990.

Given that context, a decision was made to provide America’s potential enemies with the arms, money - and most importantly - the knowledge of how to run a war of attrition violent and well-organized enough to humble a superpower.

Late in the 80’s, the guy who lied about the strength of the Soviet Union and helped create Al Queda was deeply involved in the Iran Contra scandal:

Gates was investigated during the late 1980s and 1990s by independent counsel Lawrence Walsh over whether Gates had told the truth about the Iran-contra affair, which occurred during his tenure as deputy to Ronald Reagan’s CIA director, William Casey. Questions about Gates’s knowledge of secret arms sales to Iran—and the diversion of proceeds to support the Nicaraguan contras—caused Gates to withdraw his nomination to succeed Casey as CIA director in 1987. 

Ray McGovern, a CIA analyst from 1963 to 1990, is on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.  According to him:

Gates is the one most responsible for institutionalizing the politicization of intelligence analysis by setting the example and promoting malleable managers more interested in career advancement than the ethos of speaking truth to power.

So now the Bush Administration has decided that the best replacement for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is a man who is a known liar, and whose legacy is the politicization of intelligence.  As if the US has not suffered enough but such politicization of intelligence which led us into the Iraq war - now we have the guy who refined the process.

That decision is going to come home to roost.

Interestingly, the ties to the Bin Laden family run deep.  On September 11, 2001, George HW Bush and the Carlyle Group were meeting in Washington.  What was “41″ doing that fateful morning? 

On 11 September, while Al-Qaeda’s planes slammed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Carlyle Group hosted a conference at a Washington hotel. Among the guests of honour was a valued investor: Shafig bin Laden, brother to Osama.

Ever since the election this week, much controversy has been made of the possiblity of impeaching George W. Bush, and the assertion that such plans are not on the table. 

Elizabeth Holtzman represented New York in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1973 to 1981, and played a key role in the impeachment of Richard Nixon.  In her Common Dreams article, she points out:

Even if impeachment is “off the table,” according to Democratic leaders such as Nancy Pelosi (who as the new Speaker of the House will be next in line for the presidency after Vice President Dick Cheney), recent national polls and impeachment-ballot initiatives in San Francisco, Berkeley, and two townships in Champaign-Urbana, Ill., and elsewhere, show it is on Americans’ table.

And what of those polls?  Well, according to Rawstory,  an MSNBC online poll shows that the overwhelming majority of its participating voters believe President Bush should be impeached.  How great a majority?  How about 87 percent? 

Before any impeachment actions would take place, there would need to be investigations.  And there are several such investigations that have already begun, but due to Republican House Rules the Democrats were not allowed to take sworn testimony or to use the power of the subpoena.

John Conyers, soon to become the Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has plenty to work with. He has already looked at the NSA Warrantless Surveilance programs, the irregularities that took place in Ohio in the November 2004 election, trumped up evidence which led us into the war in Iraq, and other significant events.  Indeed, Congressman Conyers will have his hands full.

And then there is Congressman Henry Waxman.  Ever diligent, Waxman will similarly have plenty to occupy him.  So much so, he’s not quite sure where to begin, there are so many issues which have been left unattended to.

The Democratic congressman who will investigate the Bush administration’s running of the government says there are so many areas of possible wrongdoing, his biggest problem will be deciding which ones to pursue.

There’s the response to Hurricane Katrina, government contracting in Iraq and on homeland security, political interference in regulatory decisions by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration, and allegations of war profiteering, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., told the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce.

“I’m going to have an interesting time because the Government Reform Committee has jurisdiction over everything,” Waxman said Friday, three days after his party’s capture of Congress put him in line to chair the panel. “The most difficult thing will be to pick and choose.”

So clearly, Mr. Bush can look forward to having his attention drawn to the many investigations that will loom. And if you recall, it was not necessary to impeach Richard Nixon.  Confronted by reality, Nixon simply decided that it was time to go.

Reality is about to beset Mr. Bush.  And if the work of Conyers, Waxman and other members of the legislative branch don’t sufficiently raise the specter of that reality for him, when the American public begins to understand what the media has failed to inform them about over the past 6 years, the public pressure will most certainly bring reality to Mr. Bush’s doorstep.

It’s only a matter of time.  For George W. Bush, the next two years are most certainly going to be an abrupt change from the status quo of the past six.  An abrupt change indeed…

Attorney David Lane said that on June 16, Steve Howards was walking his 7-year-old son to a piano practice, when he saw Cheney surrounded by a group of people in an outdoor mall area, shaking hands and posing for pictures with several people.

According to the lawsuit filed at U.S. District Court in Denver, Howards and his son walked to about two-to-three feet from where Cheney was standing, and said to the vice president, “I think your policies in Iraq are reprehensible,” or words to that effect, then walked on.

Ten minutes later, according to Howards’ lawsuit, he and his son were walking back through the same area, when they were approached by Secret Service agent Virgil D. “Gus” Reichle Jr., who asked Howards if he had “assaulted” the vice president. Howards denied doing so, but was nonetheless placed in handcuffs and taken to the Eagle County Jail. More here.

It is time to withdraw our forces from Iraq. The 9-11 Commission and the Senate Intelligence Commission stated that there was no connection between Iraq and 9-11. Our military has done it’s best, but cannot defeat the growing Iraq Insurgency . Iraq is moving toward a civil war. Continuing to fight the Iraq war will only cost more American lives and waste more American tax dollars.

I believe we should begin a phased withdrawal of our forces. “Staying the course” is not a reasonable option . An abrupt withdrawal could cause a full scale Iraqi civil war and destabilize the Middle East . Other countries know this and will commit forces and resources for their own protection as we withdraw.

We are in a war we should not be in and that we cannot win. We should begin withdrawing our forces and hold Bush and Cheney accountable for this unnecessary war.

Neil Posson