The November Surprise

Pardon my paranoia, BUT ...
There is little doubt that the Republican Party has for years included voter suppression as part of its ongoing strategy. Evidence of this policy continues to roll in from around the nation. Evidence also continues to mount that Barak Obama will overwhelmingly win the popular vote and the vote of the Electoral College ... IF legally registered voters are allowed to vote and IF those votes are fairly counted.

The Republicans very likely know that their efforts at voter suppression will be nowhere near sufficient to materially change the outcome. So, what is a good and dutiful Republican to do? What strategy should they employ? the one thing at which they have repeatedly excelled: incompetence. Aggressive, willful incompetence. It's worked in Iraq; it's worked on Wall Street; it's worked on energy policy, on global climate change, on the environment, on healthcare. Perhaps it will save their hides now.

Earlier in the week I received an email from a colleague reporting that his effort at early voting consumed fully eight hours. This qualifies us for an "inferior" rating as even a third-world country. We've all heard similar stories. My colleague lives in Georgia. Georgia's secretary of state is a Republican. Both chambers of the Georgia* legislature are Republican. Why would such party affiliation matter in a Federal election. You guessed it: the Electoral College.

Given the "rule or ruin" mindset of fundamentalist Republicans, given the growing outrage over the last eight years of Republican misrule and given the broad public support for Barak Obama, the obvious solution is to break the system at its weakest point. They don't have to steal or even suppress votes, all that is required is that questions be raised about the validity of the voting process. Chaos at the polling place will do the trick, even minor chaos, just enough to raise questions and doubts. Complaints will come from would-be Democratic voters and they will come from Republicans who want to feed the chaos.

Then the lawyers swing into action. Under the Constitution, state legislatures have responsibility for establishing rules for the selection of Electors and how they are to vote. So the secretary of state says "Oops, sorry" (regrets to Mr. Greenspan, I know that's his line), then the Republican legislatures (one house is probably sufficient) wring their hands ... . But wait, if, for whatever reason, the Electoral College fails to reach a conclusion, then the choice moves to the Democrat-controlled U.S. House of Representatives. Yea. The republic is safe.

Except for all those lawyers, who are not overly focused on lobbying the legislature, they're in court -- federal court, state court, traffic court, whatever. Which is where it gets really ugly, because we've already suffered one judicial coup d'état, in 2000, in Florida, courtesy of, among others, Florida's Republican Secretary of State Katherine Harris and the United States Supreme Court. (No, Justice Scalia, I will not "get over it", it's still a bloody outrage.) I'm not saying these people are imaginative or original or creative; I'm saying they are VANDALS. It worked then and they likely believe it will work now, or, since they're out of options, it's worth a try. The Supreme Court is even more fundamentalist than it was in 2000 and the courts are now packed with dues-paying members of the Federalist Society and their fellow-travelers.

They want God to be sovereign, or the President, or the King, or Sinbad, but not, definitely NOT, the people. And they are wrong. They are morally wrong, they are ethically wrong and they are politically wrong; but the relevant error is that they are legally wrong. The Constitution is clear that the people are sovereign. The solemn oaths these people swear (or affirm) in order to claim their office is not to God/President/King/Sinbad, it is to the Constitution and, thereby, to the people. And, just to demonstrate the depth of my paranoia, I've included below samples of the oaths taken and which are legally binding to the oath-takers.

So, go vote. Take along note paper and an ink writing instrument. If things get weird, take notes ... of what happened, of who was involved, at what time and get as many names as possible, participants and witnesses alike. If you've already voted and noticed manifest incompetence, write down your recollections. Then start raising nine kinds of hell, loudly and publicly. Our futures may depend on it. Oh, and have a nice weekend.

I truly and deeply hope I'm wrong. For those of you given to praying, please pray that I am.

When I wake from this nightmare on November 5, we can start to work removing the Electoral College from the Constitution.

*- potentially critical states with Republican legislatures include: Florida, Georgia, Ohio, Missouri; states with split legislatures include: Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada.

Oaths
From Wikipedia
***
The oath or affirmation of office of the President of the United States was established in the United States Constitution and is mandatory for a President upon beginning a term of office. The wording is prescribed by the Constitution (Article II, Section 1, Clause 8), as follows:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
***
In the United States, federal judges are required to take not just one, but two oaths. The first oath is this:
I, XXX XXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as XXX under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.
The second oath that federal judges must take is this:
I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
***
The Oath of Office is a solemn oath taken by officers of the United States Uniformed Services on commissioning. It differs slightly from that of the oath of enlistment that enlisted members recite when they enter the service. It is statutory (i.e. required by law) and is prescribed by Section 3331, Title 5, United States Code. It is traditional for officers to recite the oath upon promotion but as long as the officer's service is continuous this is not actually required. One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to obey lawful orders, officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States.
==Text of the Oath==
I, [name], do solemnly swear, (or affirm,) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. (So help me God.)
***
From Cornell University Law School

An individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath: "I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God." This section does not affect other oaths required by law.
•••

Comments

[rugbymom]

One difference from 2000 and 2004 is that the Obama campaign and the Dean-led DNC have already demonstrated that they are not going to slink away quietly wherever and whenever the outcome of the election seems to rest on shaky or shady "voting" or "counting." They have already fought back against numerous voter-suppression schemes, and won those battles, mostly in front of Republican-appointed judges.

Republicans are persistent but not completely stupid. They must realize by now that they are up against a very different opponent than in past years.

My guess is that more of the efforts are going into (a) the grab-and-smash operation in Washington for the remaining weeks of Bush/Cheney, and (b) designing traps for the incoming Administration to try to hamstring it, setting up the Republicans for a big midterm win in 2010 and the Presidency in 2012. It will be far worse than Clinton faced, and that's going some.

[DickTater]

lastly....

That these people would try this stuff is not shocking.
That our media would totally ignore, then snuff out all stories about rightwing massive election crimes
...is just the same old playbook going back since Kennedy. Rightwing and Corporate inbreeding has produced a media dominated culture....where the media is basically in charge of keeping you confused, keep you shopping, and hide all their dirt.

I mean, cmon. Who is going to do the big Network Expose of media corruption and guilt.....a big network?

[ResistanceisFutile]

What media will do it? It is anbody's guess. MSNBC is so Republican except for Oberman and Madow.

On morning Joe, all of the guests admitted it would be good for the country to elect Obama but they were still going to vote for McCain. Unbelievable!

[DickTater]

Well, my point is NONE will do it. Corporate Media will not examine it's own malfeasance.

Their job is so far away from INFORMING us....it is mostly hiding all the corporate crimes, and now that they are so totally complicit in aiding, abetting, and profiting from those crimes they have increasingly to hide THEIR OWN crimes....not just corporate misdeeds.

They are owened by corporations. They are funded by advertising for corporate america....yo know, so their biggest customers are corporate and their masters are corporate.....there isn't a thing they can really talk about without making their masters and customers angry.

And they certainly can't examine their own role in doing corporate bidding, hiding info from the public, and rigging info to misinform the public. That would ruin EVERYTHING for them. They would lose all the fake public trust for their news divisions and prove they were poisoning the TruthStream in america, and bastardizing their own roles as KEEPERS OF THE FLAME of justice and objectivity, and deliviering you the news...more people trust ABC than any other news....blah blah.

Is this who we want controlling our airwaves, our information delivery system? Are these the folks who should be at the power controls, and who decide what journalism is?
Who among them is going to hold someone accountable? None

[DickTater]

Continued

Republicans ...."Each one capable of stealing 10s of thousands of votes"
as opposed to a couple hundred 'voter registration' neer-do-wells who prob. cannot even account for one bad vote apiece. Their effect may well be zero, even if they do pull off their nefarious scheme of mispelling a word or address in order to stick it to the man.

But no, massive flipping and stealing and intimidation and preelection crimes and rights abuses and lies (college kids being told they will lose scholarships or their parents will be commiting tax fraud if they don't vote in their parents precinct.)
none of this stuff gets any airtime in the corpmedia, but what DOES make huge amounts of airtime? Voter registration crap. A non-existent, non-harmful, semi-happening that can't ever really skew a race.
Wall to Wall coverage from many of the networks. Thousands of repeats. No evidence, in fact.... a long line of evidence that republicans have made these bogus claims before, and their pressure on DOJ turned into the attorney firing scandal....all over malicious prosecution of voter registration fraud. No solid cases could ever be made, EVEN when the usatt. was playing dirty for his party. Those who wouldn't play dirty were later fired. At KRovees behest.

[DickTater]

Problem - Suppression of voter suppression STORIES in the corporate media.

This is easily a huge story. If the media helped publicize and hunt down the perpetrators....it would be a long line of republican operatives, some at the highest levels, rigging elections. Each one capable of stealing 10s of thousands of votes. Cahootinizing with Diebold and other huge corps. to have the votes turn out the RIGHT way.
Running every scam imaginable, esp. 90 days before election. That makes these actions ILLEGAL. It is happens mostly/only in swing states. It always favors the republicans...the affected areas are always DEM bastions. How come there are no 10-17 hour waits at republican-heavy precincts? How come it is only Roll Purging in heavily DEM areas of databases?

This is a huge story, with TONS of relevance to the american people. Tons of evidence, but it is 100% KEPT on leftblogs and NEVER given any credence by making it onto the nightly news. Occas. a mention creeps in, but no follow-up and it is called shenanigans instead of CRIMES.

THE MEDIA IS HIDING more than showing. WAKE UP!
Media reform has to be a highestpriority. In their slavish devotion to corporoamerica, they have thrown the wool over/eyes, stuffed a hood over our heads, and throwing us over a cliff.

This would have all been solved by 2000 with a competent, vigilant press. Winking and grimacing at Election Fraud has got us where we are.

[waitforme]

Exactly. Exactly. Exactly.

I challenge MSNBC and CNN and ABC, CBS and NBC to take up this story, deeply look into it -- even a shallow brush with this story, outlining its main components and facts would do -- and keep it in front of the public.

If not, what are they for?

It gives a Kafkaesque feeling, a feeling of eeriness and irrelevance to listen to TV anchors rattle on about 'poll numbers', 'states in play' and what the candidates said today, when, actually, none of this makes any difference and is just to fill in time -- I have had to turn it off, can't listen to it. Instead, they avoid, but should be attending to: HOW TO KEEP THE VOTING PROCESS FAIR AND DEMOCRATIC AND UP TO CONSTITUTIONAL GUIDELINES.

THIS story is the nub of the drama and ethics and ongoing spiritual balance (or not) of these times.

[shanefish]

We are only "told" that there is a left-wing main-stream media. I don't buy it for a second! They aren't even "lefties". The election is not even close, it is merely the media keeping it that way for ratings. Our nation has become a mockery of itself, where soundbites are more important than realities. Wake up sheeple!

[cinthia7]

I think the term aggressive and willful incompetence sums the Republican party up very well. Let's not forget mean spirited and calculating. Diabolical yet fumbling.

[DownerCow]

I think the neocon money (The literal Amway, Dobson, Blackwater, Jeb Bush family) is already looking to 2012. Why did Romney drop out so precipitously? Engineer a total collapse of the economy and world political situation, then march in and pick up the pieces.

[itmaybetoolate]

And what is the plan if they steal the election, again?

[waitforme]

This is my question.

[Zuzette]

"Rule or ruin" is the most succinct & accurate discription I've ever read about Republican hubris & arrogance. It reminds me of violent ex-boyfriends who proudly say "If I can't have her, nobody will". The Repulican "rule or ruin" is equally dangerous & just as sick, & every American has paid (some with their lives in Iraq) for 8 horrible years.

[waitforme]

Good point. The Republicans who will resort to dirty tactics just to win an election are emotionally immature, twisted people. Dangerous, as you say. MOSTLY::::UNPATRIOTIC!!!

[krocklin]

Ok. We know that:
1) a younger demographic favors Obama so that gives him an edge among first time voters.
2) more Hispanics than ever are voting Democratic.
3) Obama's organization is broader and more eficient than previous Democratic get out the vote drives, including in some Red States where polling shows the closest election in decades.
4) Palin has a high disapproval rating that has significantly increased every week.
5) McCain himself is lame, seems stumbling and creepy and capable of waging only a specious ad hominem campaign.
6) Obama was widely thought to have won all three debates by a large margin, as did Biden.

So why wouldn't the margin be much greater than the polls indicate?


My theory: McCain and Palin get far more MSM coverage overall than Obama and Biden, despite the latter's great advantage in ads. They have discovered that if you come up with new smears and revive old ones every few days, the MSM will dutifully give you free airtime and endlessly discuss the merits of the flimsiest allegations. Who needs campaign funding if this tactic unfailingly dominates the newscycle?

This has been their formula, and it has successfully kept them alive, if not ahead. And unlike the Obama camp, they have "doubled down" with Palin, while Biden has hardly been heard from.






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals!

[fpie]

And of course the great unknown, those electronic voting machines and tabulators. Who knows how they count the votes. Scores of independent experts say they are rigable, hackable, unreliable and uncheckable. And it seems all made, programed and opperated by friends of GWB.
A landslide for Democrats seems the only hope. But it seems, this time at least there is a hope.