yesthattom: (Default)
[personal profile] yesthattom
A senator enjoyed the House complain about Ohio! It was Boxer!

Update: If you saw Fahrenheit 911, you’ll remember the very dramatic scene where the house and senate vote to accept the results of the vote. Each member of the black caucus objected to the Florida results. As you remember, it takes one Senator and one U.S. House representative to both complain. In the documentary it was painful to watch as representative after representative objected and was not joined by anyone from the Senate.

Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones, enjoined by Senator Barbara Boxer changed history today by objecting.

Pressure from the Democratic base was huge yesterday. The senate buildings were filled with people from Ohio and other states meeting with Senators explaining their stories of disenfranchisement and asking them to object along with Stephanie Tubbs Jones or Conyers (both were rumored to be objecting). While the media only talks about “recount”, that isn’t the issue. The issue is that there are 2 outstanding lawsuits objecting to the way the election was handled and accepting the Ohio results until those law suits are settled. Recount is a red herring... the real issue is that there was “poll starvation”, Democratic precincts weren’t given enough voting booths to take all the votes. A recount won’t show that there was intentional “poll starvation” in the black districts. It’s a whole new Jim Crow.

But most importantly further election reform has stalled and without making a statement like this objection keeps the hope alive.

Date: 2005-01-06 10:53 am (UTC)

Date: 2005-01-06 10:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] whipartist.livejournal.com
Incidentally, do you know WHY none of the senators would sign the objection in 2000?

It's actually very simple-- Al Gore had requested that they not do so.

Date: 2005-01-06 11:06 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] alanesq.livejournal.com
Kerry isn't part of this objection (http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050105-105120-2573r.htm), either.

Date: 2005-01-06 11:17 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] awfief.livejournal.com
There's a difference between saying, "people were disenfranchised" and "Kerry should have won." People were disenfranchised, no matter who won with a recount or whanot.

At this point, Tom is fighting for justice, not for Kerry.

I said yesterday in another journal, "It doesn't scare me that illegal and immoral tactics *may* have been used, by either side, in the election. What scares me is that we have evidence, and that may be ignored." I want Bush to be known as a fraud, especially since it seems Clinton is being billed as "that guy who schtupped the intern."

Date: 2005-01-06 11:20 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] whipartist.livejournal.com
Right.

However, I heard an interview with (I think) Barbara Boxer on KQED a couple of months ago. They asked her about that scene from Fahrenheit 9/11, and why she didn't sign the objection.

Her response was that Al Gore had specifically asked that the senators not sign an objection. His feeling was that the supreme court had made a decision, and that it was time to let it go and get on with it.

Date: 2005-01-06 01:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] aillecat.livejournal.com
but the guy schtupping the intern was a stud, right?

Date: 2005-01-06 01:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yesthattom.livejournal.com
(sarcasm) Yeah, that worked so fucking well. I guess we should just do it again.(end sarcasm).

Look, the reality is that following the wimpy advice of a candidate that has lost all his ability to fight didn't work, so we have to do something different this time. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results is the definition or insanity.

I'm sick of the Dem leadership at the top saying, "give up! don't make a stink! don't fight for what you believe!".

Fucking battered children acting like appeasing their abuser will make things better.

Until Democrat leaders start acting like the leaders they claim they are, I'll be advocating them to take stronger positions.

Date: 2005-01-06 01:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yesthattom.livejournal.com
Thank you for ignoring everything I've said.

Fuck it... I'm deleting your post.

Date: 2005-01-06 03:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] whipartist.livejournal.com
Hey! Yo!

I wasn't arguing that there was nothing to fight this time. Far from it.

I was just pointing out that Michael Moore made the senators look like a bunch of insensitive idiots, when in fact they were being very sensitive to the man who was presiding over the whole affair.

Date: 2005-01-09 02:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yesthattom.livejournal.com
> At this point, Tom is fighting for justice, not for Kerry.

Thank you for acknowledging that. You seem to be one of the few people that didn't misinterpret my remarks.

Date: 2005-01-09 02:20 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yesthattom.livejournal.com
> I wasn't arguing that there was nothing to fight this time. Far from it.

Understood.

> I was just pointing out that Michael Moore made the senators look like a bunch
> of insensitive idiots, when in fact they were being very sensitive to the man who
> was presiding over the whole affair.

I understand that was true in 2000, but in 2004 when Kerry was out there campaigning saying that if its close, he'll fight it, but then doesn't fight it, then there's no reason to listen to him if he asks people not to contest it. While he wasn't at the vote, he did enter into the congressional record a statement saying that he supports the investigation of irregularities.

I think this entire event was about the old saying, "If the people lead, the leaders will follow". The Dem base is sick and tired of leaders that won't put up a good fight.

One thing I said to senator's staffs when I met with them was, "You know Michael Moore is making a new movie, right? Standing with Conyers [then thought to be the rep that would reject Ohio] will make it difficult for Moore to make his next movie. Don't you want that?"

It always got a smile out of them. However, I think that was the basic truth. Nobody wants to be embarrassed a second time.

Date: 2005-01-09 02:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yesthattom.livejournal.com
I didn't understand that comment.

Date: 2005-01-09 02:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yesthattom.livejournal.com
Yes. Third parties do a good job of being the test-bed for wacky ideas... since you need a thousand wacky ideas to come up with one good one. :-)

Date: 2005-01-09 03:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] aillecat.livejournal.com
In my world, Clinton did nothing wrong, except lie to his wife, and MAYBE lie on the witness stand (proven by trial to not be the case)... otherwise WAY TO GO BILL! :)

He was schtupping his intern, it made him a stud.

Date: 2005-01-09 06:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] yesthattom.livejournal.com
OIC. Yes, now I understand.

December 2015

S M T W T F S
  12345
6789 101112
13141516171819
202122 23242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Feb. 3rd, 2026 07:47 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios