Suppressing the vote

One talking point President George W. Bush is very fond of when justifying the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq is the need to bring freedom and democracy to the region. Meanwhile, closer to home, Bush?s party is trying to block thousands of voters from casting their vote, either through ?legal? methods or via dirty tricks. (Update: added an image of the flyer. See inside)

In 2000, voters ? predominantly black voters ? were ?purged? from voting rolls in Florida. BBC journalist Greg Palast documented how Gov. Jeb Bush?s office sent a letter to the Texas based company hired to complete such a list and told them not to worry about checking if the names on the list were indeed felons. Estimates about how many voters were disenfranchised that year range from several hundred thousand to one million. Either way, since the overwhelming majority of such voters would have cast their vote for Al Gore, this stunt was instrumental in handing the election to Bush.

This year, while voters purged ?mistakenly? through the list in 2000 are still largely ineligible to vote, a new list was created. Only after a judge ruled that the list must be made public was it discovered that the list again included a large majority of likely Democratic voters that had every right to cast a vote. This is far more than neglect; it appears to be intentional.

Now the GOP has announced they will send thousands of paid poll workers to Ohio to question the right of individuals that dare step into the booth expecting their constitutional right to vote be exercised without any intimidating interrogation.

A person who has had unfavorable experiences with people in authority, as many voters in poorer neighborhoods are bound to have had, will no doubt be intimidated by this and may even choose not to vote altogether. That?s exactly what the GOP is banking on.
Read entire entry

Bin Laden?s tapes lost much of their impact

A few weeks ago a very misleading campaign ad for President George W. Bush said Sen. John Kerry saw terrorists as a ?nuisance.? Kerry, unsurprisingly, never said such a thing, but rather said he hoped we could reach a time when terrorists are defeated to a point where we would not have everything revolves around the issue of terrorism. The way likely voters reacted to last week?s video statement from Osama bin Laden is an indication the nation is getting closer to dealing with terrorism in such a way.

When the video was released on Al-Jazeera, and shortly thereafter was played on virtually all television networks in America as well, pundits supporting either party tried to make the point that it helped their respective candidates while spelling certain doom to the other?s campaign.

Some argue that it helped Bush because it showed al-Qaida was still out there and plotting against American interests, a revelation that would rally voters behind the president. Others said that the message confirmed precisely what Kerry had been saying all along, thereby bolstering Kerry?s claim that Bush let bin Laden get away while focusing on Iraq.

But polls conducted over the weekend suggest that voters did not consider the video when making their choice for president. While Kerry gained ground in most polls (thereby debunking the claim the video was helping Bush) it is likely that it was simply the continuation of a trend that had begun before the video surfaced.

An official from the Pew Research Center said on NPR that the Pew poll did not see a trend suggesting voters were influenced by the video either way.
While both President Bush (who noticeably responded officially to such a video for the first time) and Sen. Kerry were fast to issue statements concerning the video, the American public, while still understanding the need to face the threat, seems to be tired of being scared.
Hopefully this is a trend that continues after the election.

Powell: We are losing the war in Iraq

Even Secretary of State Colin Powell, a former general who stays in touch with the Joint Chiefs, has acknowledged this privately to friends in recent weeks, NEWSWEEK has learned. The insurgents have effectively created a reign of terror throughout the country, killing thousands, driving Iraqi elites and technocrats into exile and scaring foreigners out. ?Things are getting really bad,? a senior Iraqi official in interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi?s government told NEWSWEEK last week. ?The initiative is in [the insurgents?] hands right now. This approach of being lenient and accommodating has really backfired. They see this as weakness.? Newsweek (via BlueLemur)

I take it Powell would not be interested in serving in another Bush administration should the possibility arise? Actually, I doubt Bush would ven pick him again. I mean come on, what’s this whole Powell doctrine thing about? The guy is obviously clueless. (By the way, this is sarcasm. Powell is the only person left in the Bush administration whose judgment I could respect.)

AP: U.S. Extends Iraq Tours for 6,500 Troops

Watch them spin that one. It’s going to be interesting to see if Republicans are as desperate to have absentee ballots cast by troops abroad as they were in 2000. Back then they even counted absentee ballots that were postmarked after Nov. 2, while “regular” votes were not treated in the same way.

The Army has extended by two months the Iraq (news - web sites) tours of about 6,500 soldiers, citing a need for experienced troops through the Iraqi elections scheduled for late January.

About 3,500 soldiers of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, and 3,000 from the 1st Infantry Division headquarters will remain in Iraq two months longer than planned, Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon (news - web sites) spokesman, said Saturday.
(…)
A description of the troop extensions posted on the Pentagon’s Web site Saturday mentioned “the troops’ frustration” over having their tours extended. It said some of the soldiers previously had been told they would be leaving Iraq as early as November. Instead they will stay through January. link

Something tells me this election may not be as close as is generally assumed. It’s going to be close, but there may still be a decisive winner by Wednesday morning. (Or call this naive thinking of a journalist who wants to get some sleep Tuesday night.)

GOP: bin Laden tape a gift

We want people to think ‘terrorism’ for the last four days,” said a Bush-Cheney campaign official. “And anything that raises the issue in people’s minds is good for us.”

A senior GOP strategist added, “anything that makes people nervous about their personal safety helps Bush.”

He called it “a little gift,” saying it helps the President but doesn’t guarantee his reelection. link

A terrorists threatens the United States and these guys call it a “gift.”

What would you like for Christmas? North Korea invading South Korea? Russia starting the Cold War again? Ah heck, you’ve been so good kids all year, why not have a nice WWIII.

Here’s to hoping we can start to have some realistic world views starting Jan. 20.

Offensive in Fallujah

Terrorists will not influence this election or this nation’s time table in any way.

NEAR FALLUJAH, Iraq (AP) — U.S. forces launched airstrikes against suspected militant bases in Fallujah and carried out probing attacks on the city’s outskirts, as they prepared for a major operation in the insurgent bastion that has become the symbol of Iraqi resistance. link

I repeat. Terrorists will not influence this election or this nation’s time table in any way.

Just testing if I could work for the Bush White House.

Cheney: Afghanistan, Iraq handled with brilliance

At an airport rally at a hangar in Montoursville, Pa., Cheney said the U.S. invasions of “Afghanistan and Iraq will be studied for years for their brilliance.” link

If this guy left the White House he’d probably die of culture shock. I almost feel bad for him. I’ll just file this under humor and leave it at that.

AP: State Department Tried to Stop Airing of Bin Laden Tape

AP is reporting the State Department (Which may be leaning a tad in Bush’s favor, just a hunch.) tried to suppress the bin Laden tape. Funny how even they thought it will not play too well for Bush.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The State Department on Friday urged the government of Qatar, which finances Al-Jazeera, not to broadcast a videotaped speech by Osama bin Laden, a senior State Department official said.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the State Department spoke to officials in Qatar before Al-Jazeera showed a portion of the tape. In it, the al-Qaida leader said the United States can avoid another attack if it stops threatening the security of Muslims.

The request to the Persian Gulf government, which is considered an ally in the U.S. campaign to counter terror, was passed through the U.S. embassy in Doha, Qatar’s capital. link

Bush not referring to bin Laden by name

Compare these two. First President Bush:

Toledo Express Airport

Toledo, Ohio

5:53 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Earlier today I was informed of the tape that is now being analyzed by America’s intelligence community. Let me make this very clear: Americans will not be intimidated or influenced by an enemy of our country. I’m sure Senator Kerry agrees with this.

I also want to say to the American people that we’re at war with these terrorists and I am confident that we will prevail.

Thank you very much. Thank you.

END 5:53 P.M. EDT link

Now Sen. Kerry:

West Palm Beach, FL

“In response to this tape from Osama bin Laden, let me make it clear, crystal clear. As Americans, we are absolutely united in our determination to hunt down and destroy Osama bin Laden and the terrorists. They are barbarians. And I will stop at absolutely nothing to hunt down, capture or kill the terrorists wherever they are, whatever it takes. Period.? link

Bush is referring to “the tape” not even mentioning the content of it, let alone bin Laden by name. Kerry vows to hunt down bin Laden. Period.

Who comes across stronger? (Hint: it’s not Bush.)

Update:Great minds think alike. Josh posted an almost identical entry a few minutes after mine. Since I think Josh’s site is one of the best out there, let me just say: Thanks for the compliment.

About the bin Laden video: Don’t panic, it is not as bad as it seems

Geesh. I take a day off to catch up on some sleep and get dinner with the wife. When I get back it’s all gloom and doom because bin Laden released a new video (full transcript here).

This is not good news for Bush, contrary to what some wire stories are saying. Let’s calm down and thing about this for a second:

Kerry has been accusing Bush that he let Osama get away. Four days before the election Osama shows up via a video that’s shown or quoted in virtually every news outlet there is. How could that possibly undermine what Kerry’s campaign has been saying all along, that Osama is still a threat but Bush ignored him?

Then there is the way this story has been reported. The St. Petersburg Times, a paper I learned to trust over the last four years, reported it this way on their Web site:

Note that when the story broke two other stories were considered breaking news: The tons of explosives that were lost in Iraq and an imminent attack on Fallujah, Iraq.

Over the last couple of days the Bush campaign has been unraveling. It’s former approach of denying bad news and then counting on spin and the echo chamber of the media to downplay the bad news is not working because the campaign cannot keep up. There is so much bad news that it’s virtually impossible for the Bush team to counter it all.

Don’t get me wrong, all bad news is bad news. The bin Laden tape is scary and the other two stories mentioned will likely cost lives of soldiers and civilians in Iraq. But at least in the term of the election it should give Kerry a surge because everything he has been saying during the debates and recent speeches is being confirmed.

There is still reason to stay alert, since it’s not quite over yet. But there is certainly no need to panic.

Update:I hope the DNC will put this ad on in swing states as much as possible: link It really speaks for itself.

Guardian: Sox win helps Kerry pitch

Maybe I was a bit premature when I jokingly suggested the Red Sox winning the World Series would be having an effect on Kerry. The Guardian seems to think it did.

“I’m feeling great,” (Kerry) told the crowd in a voice raspy from cheering on his team. He recalled the right-wing radio host who had taunted that he would never be president until the Red Sox won the title: a notion once dismissed as impossible for a team famously seen as cursed.

“We’re on our way, we’re on our way,” Mr Kerry gloated. link

Rumsfeld almost apologizes

People who use hair-triggered judgement… frequently make mistakes that are awkward and embarrassing. - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld link

Too bad this was meant as an attack against Kerry and not as an apology for his mismanagement in Iraq.

Mixed messages Bush sent during his presidency

A major cornerstone of the Bush campaign is Kerry’s supposed flip-flopping. Bush argues a commander in chief simply cannot change his stance, especially when allies or even enemies are concerned. He has stressed this point in virtually every stump speech, in a large part of his campaign adds and even did so quite vehemently in the debates. (Although it turns out we can indeed forget about Poland, as they are pulling out of Iraq)

The problem is, Bush himself has a rather damning record in that regard:

The Bush administration has disregarded the Geneva Convention at virtually every opportunity it had. We have “enemy combatants” in Guantanamo Bay, which were named that way to “evade” the Geneva Convention. The CIA smuggled prisoners out of Iraq, a direct violation of the Convention and the cases in Abu Ghraib are so obviously a violation of the convention it is hard to believe it’s not a conscious effort orchestrated by high ranking officials rather than “a few bad apples” acting on their own.

On July 28, 2002, the Bush administration signaled it would be beginning to test nuclear arms again after pulling out of a test ban treaty with Russia. (link) What kind of a message does it send when the US is telling its former Cold War opponent, now ally, that it will start testing weapons of mass destruction again? Is the arms race back on?
Read entire entry

Republicans growing despertate in PA, tie Kerry to 9/11

Polls have Kerry ahead in Pensylvannia. In repsonse, the Republican National Committee is sending out a three page flier to voters in which it suggests Kerry caused 9/11.

It isn’t stated expressly but by showing Kerry’s photo with the line “Kerry’s record” in close association with photos of the burning World Trade Center, that’s definitely the effect the RNC is going for.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have reached a new low.

Read more about it at BlueLemur

Media still avoids stating the obvious in fear of being biased

There?s a video floating around the Internet that has also gotten airtime on some networks. It?s President George W. Bush jokingly flicking off a camera before a taping of an address when he still was governor in Texas, calling the gesture ?the one-fingered victory salute.? It?s not the video that was revealing; it?s the way a network anchor responded to it that shows the media are still having problems with ?objective reporting.

After the video was shown on a nightly news segment, a network anchor said the video was ?purported to be President Bush making an obscene gesture.?

How obvious does something have to be before a news organization feels secure enough to point it out? The video was not ?purported? to show Bush; it clearly did show Bush. For anybody who saw it, as the viewers of the segment did, this was obvious.
Read entire entry

John Zogby calls the election

I just watched an interview with John Zogby, the man behind the Zoby poll (hence the name fried potato), on on the Daily Show. He said Kerry will win the election and was very aware that his companies livelihood may depend on him being right or wrong.

Momentum

This photo of Kerry in Madison, Wisconsin, is mind-blowing. If this guy cannot make people show up at the polls, then nothing can. (The prospect of 4 more years of Bush, if Kerry loses, being a nice bonus) Seeing that made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Full size image here: link

Nader tells press, “don’t waste time on me, the system is rigged”

I’ve been following Ralph Nader’s campaign very closely. I’ve spoken to him twice in the last month, once on the phone and once when he came to Tampa as part of his Florida tour the night before the first presidential debate.

I’ve been hoping he would give voters a clear sign that he would prefer them to vote for Kerry rather than Bush as he seemed to hint at that during an interview session in Tampa. Even though he acts cynical about Democrats almost as much as Republicans he is clearly a very intelligent man and must understand that Kerry would be a better choice than Bush, as far as all his personal beliefs are concerned.

I listened to the clip I recorded when he came to Tampa several times and I think my original assessment was correct. Back then I had the feeling he was essentially telling the press “I just discussed the issues with you and they are very important to me. But we all know the system is rigged, so don’t vote for me, I am just here to raise the issues.” Especially since he knew the cameras and recorders were still running it seemed like he was making a well calculated statement.

But decide for yourself. The clip is here (1 mb wav). As usual, a transcript is inside.
Read entire entry

How nice of you to join us

The NY Times has an editorial up that criticizes the Bush administration for not holding any high ranking members responsible for Abu Ghraib. It’s essentially the same I wrote a week ago (entry) but it’s nevertheless good that they address the issue and it’s worth reading. (I also hear they have slightly more pull than I do.) Read it here: link

Of course it’s rather sad that it took them so long to write an edit. I doubt it’s going to even be a blip on the radar over the next couple of days because it’s going to be drowned out by the candidates slinging mud at each other. Although I certainly wouldn’t mind to be proven wrong.

Not preventing 9/11 is nothing to campaign on

The attacks of Sept. 11 occurred more than three years ago. Several studies, most notably the 9/11 Commission Report, have proven that there were glaring intelligence failures as well as errors in judgment by government officials that bungled chances to stop the attacks in time. Yet not a single official has been reprimanded or held accountable for these obvious failures.

Now a Central Intelligence Agency report is said to clearly name individuals at fault, but the newly appointed Director of Central Intelligence Porter Goss, confirmed by the Senate on Sept. 22, is withholding the report.

Goss, a former Republican member of the House of Representatives, was nominated for his position by President George W. Bush. When the first report officially assigning guilt likely points at members of the Bush administration for at least part of the blame is withheld, it has something to do with next week?s election.

Robert Scheer first reported the study in a column on Oct. 19 in the Los Angeles Times. Scheer quoted several intelligence committee members saying the report had been finished in June only to be ?stalled,? first by temporary CIA Director John McLaughlin and now by Goss. (link)

The study was commissioned by a congressional intelligence committee, and withholding the finished report until after the election not only puts the oversight the committee is supposed to have over the CIA at risk, it is also illegal as it holds Congress in contempt.
Read entire entry

?Too close to call? means ‘go out and vote?

(Ed. note: This edit appears in today’s University of South Florida’s student newspaper The Oracle. I used the readership of the paper as an example of a group that has the power to sway the election.)

The mere possibility of hearing the words ?too close to call? again during the presidential election has been sending shivers down Floridians? spines for the last four years. Now most polls are again projecting a very close race. Even though some of the polls may be proven wrong, it may be as close an election as it was in 2000. Translated, this means: Go vote.

There are several things wrong with the polls. Gallup, one of the most respected polls for years, has consistently oversampled registered Republicans. The same poll represents an unrealistically high number of voters earning $100,000 per year or more. Both groups are more likely to cast their vote for President George W. Bush than Sen. John Kerry, which skews the poll in Bush?s favor.

Often, newspapers and TV stations emphasize the spread (the number of points one candidate is supposedly leading over the other) which gives viewers or readers an inaccurate impression of where the election stands. Historically, incumbents with an approval rating around or below 50 percent have had a tough time being re-elected. Bush has been dipping below and hovering around that magic line for the past few weeks, making the Bush campaign nervous.

In such cases, 60 to 70 percent of undecided voters usually vote against the incumbent. Undecided voters have seen the incumbent perform and did not like what they saw. Historically such voters give the challenger the benefit of the doubt. This means that if Bush is standing toe to toe with Kerry like the St. Petersburg Times reported Monday, it actually gives Kerry an advantage as more undecided voters are likely to vote for him than Bush.
Bearing these facts in mind, the election is still close, but could tip either way easily.

The number of votes Bush was ahead in Florida when the Supreme Court ruled to halt recounts and effectively appointed Bush president was 563 votes. This edition of The Oracle has a circulation of 12,000 and can potentially reach 41,000 USF students. If the election is anywhere near as close as it was in 2000, Oracle readers alone could decide this election.

The Sox won

The Sox won. Now Kerry can finally catch up on some sleep. Don’t you hate it when even baseball is politicized?

Katherine Harris almost run over

Before you ask, I have an alibi.

But this guy seems to like former Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris even less than I do.

Bush joke

It’s funny because it’s true:

Q) What’s the difference between Iraq and Vietnam?

A) Bush had a plan to get out of Vietnam.

(via Seeing the Forrest)