let's try to have some fun with this, shall we?

[click image]

.

I mean, I think it's time we start cheering for Piglips.

Sarah Palin has added a veteran Republican strategist to serve as chief-of-staff for her political action committee, Sarah PAC, CNN has learned.

Michael Glassner, an attorney and longtime adviser to former Kansas senator and presidential candidate Bob Dole, has signed on to steer the former Alaska governor's political operation as she considers a possible 2012 presidential bid.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Glassner managed vice presidential operations during John McCain's unsuccessful White House bid.

"We are happy and excited that Mike is joining our team," Sarah PAC Treasurer Tim Crawford told CNN.

NB: I said cheering, not voting, for her. We can't vote for Barackhenaten either. Or, we can vote for whoever we want—I'm voting the straight Christopher Walken ticket—but let's please, please, please not agonize our way through this next presidential election cycle, okay? Let's give ourselves a break, knowing it's all theater and we have no say one way or the other, let us all rejoice in the comedy, even if it is dark, dark black comedy... and this time I pray the only one making a squillion bucks off it will be William Shatner.

Glassner, for his part, is probably the hallmark of Barackhenaten's approval rating among the Supreme Council of Space Lizards. He really has outshone Dubya and Fudd by mega-lumens. This will be his reward, the long-fought battle to run against Sarah Palin. I think there would be several great advantages to her winning... all of them having to do with yanking people's heads out of their asses across the political spectrum... but, uhm, that is extreeeeeemely unlikely to happen. So let us please be light-hearted about it... save our vitriol for the jackasses engaged in the partisan shit-slinging it will entail.

.
love, 99
.

he's not going to let this crisis go to waste

[click image]

.

Don't forget what kind of willpower drives Rahmbo. That's what sets fuckers apart from plebes after all. Never has there been a better student of the Shock Doctrine than this back room assassin.

Rahm Emanuel was thrown off the ballot for mayor of Chicago Monday by an appellate court panel, a stunning blow to the fund-raising leader in the race. ...

Emanuel, speaking to reporters at The Berghoff in the Loop, said he is confident he will win an appeal and return to the ballot.

“I have no doubt at the end we will prevail,” Emanuel said. “ As my father [a member of Irgun and so would know] has said, nothing is ever easy.”

The Emanuel campaign sent out a text to its supporters asking them to assemble at 5 p.m. at Dearborn and Washington to “rally for Rahm’s right to be on the ballot and let Chicagoans choose.”

Yes, yes, he is the son of a terrorist pediatrician and named after a member of the Stern Gang, but, hey, he can't help his parentage. Just so. But when he spends his life living up to it, and makes Wikipedia take down its entry on his father, I think it is completely fair to mention. I think it is highly unlikely he will be denied.

It seems the opposition in Chicago knows they're toast if he stays on the ballot, NOT because the people will vote him in, but because the only way you can prevent an election being thrown in someone's favor is to make sure he or she is not on the ballot.

.

UPDATE:

Lest you doubt me on the matter of Rahmbo's terrible powers:

Chicago's top election official today suggested voters might want to hold off before voting early next week, given the uncertainty surrounding the ballot.

The comments by Langdon Neal, chairman of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, came after the Illinois Supreme Court today reinstated mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel and agreed to hear his appeal that he belongs on the mayoral ballot.

“If the voters have any questions, any doubt, any uncertainty, I would encourage them to wait until the end of the 18 days,” Neal said, noting that early voting ends on Feb. 17. “It’s up to the voters.”

Early voting starts Monday at 51 locations across the city. As of now, Emanuel's name will be on the ballot.

In addition to the pending state Supreme Court case about Emanuel, candidates for alderman in 15 wards also have challenged in court the decisions that knocked them off the ballot, Neal said.

If the Supreme Court rules in Emanuel’s case or lower courts rule in any of the others, early voting would be halted at the affected locations so touch-screen voting machines could be swapped out, most likely overnight, he added.

Neal also noted voters have the option of waiting until Feb. 22 and going to their precinct polling places.

“Some voters vote early in the process because they have to — their personal schedules, their travel, whatever it may be — or they feel they want to take the risk,” Neal added. “It’s an individual choice. And that’s the beauty of early voting.”

A voter education effort will be made.

"We are going to let the voters know, as best we can, that there may be still be a question open," Neal said. "They have 18 days to make their decision. There’s no requirement that they show up on the first day and vote."

The guy doesn't lose, and can't be made to so long as you let fascists continue to run our country.

.
love, 99
.

globalization

[click image]

.

I would think the fact that they're doing it to the whole damn world would be a matter of quite some visible outrage on the streets of every town on earth. I would think it would have started here. I would be wrong.

I fucking can't believe that's wrong.

.
love, 99
.

another not-crestfallen pissed-off american

[click image]

.

Who has the grace to admit the Tea Partiers make more sense than the Democrats.

I went to the polling station in the church one block from my house to cast a vote, and found myself in conversation with an ardent local Democrat who was handing out local Democratic sample ballots, and an equally ardent Tea Party guy advocating for a right-wing candidate running for the local congressional seat. I found myself agreeing much more with the Tea Partier.

The Tea Partier said that the government had “lost touch” with ordinary people. I couldn’t agree more. He said that the health bill was a costly and overly bureaucratic disaster. Again, I couldn’t agree more. The Democratic activist countered that Obama and the Democrats in Congress weren’t getting credit for any of the good things they had done in the past two years. I just don’t see it. Judges? Obama named two very mediocre, middle-of-the-road jurists who may even side against liberal positions, like the death penalty, or presidential executive power. The wars? We still have 50,000 troops and an enormous army of mercenaries in Iraq, and a ballooning quagmire in Afghanistan that is looking more like Vietnam every day. That’s change? And education? Show me the money. All we’re hearing is charter schools, and the studies show them to be costly failures that simply suck the life out of the rest of the schools in a district. Jobs? Right. Regulating the banks? There’s a laugh! They are bigger, more concentrated, and more powerful than ever, and engaged in the same crooked behavior that caused the economic crisis.

The good news is that the voters have told Obama, the Democrats, and their oh-so-smart political advisers, “Fuck you!”

That was good to see.

.

Ya know-oh, I was going to say something snide about this, but it occurs to me that I don't give a flea on a rat's ass what he says or thinks. He's full of shit. He's a politician. It's all a game. Presidents kill people. It's their job. Get over it. Take pride in that long list of great nothings he has done for us. Yadda yadda yadda. I find myself appalled by how many people still put stock in elections, in voting. I do it because I refuse to cede them that, but for sure I don't put any stock in it. It's not worth discussing. It's like bothering with the subject of that Lohan girl's drug problems and jumbled sexual orientation... as germane to the project of overcoming our issues. No. Really.

Don't forget: I'm out here in the world this last week and have been rubbing elbows with regular people.

I'm on this.

And a full-blooded Pomo actually squealed at me that presidents kill people and there's nothing we can do about it, except try to get them another term to kill more, but it was only sadder to me that she's Pomo. Whites say it plenty too. In fact, I begin to wonder if I'm racist for my soapy ideal that the first black president would be the greatest statesman in our history. That was just always the way I saw it. I never saw it as impossible. I knew it would happen, but I also always saw it that way. I think a drop of my anger has to do with that, but then I realize he's NOT our first black president! He's our first half white one.

We might have just had a great time showing the bastard, but it didn't do anything beside forcing Conyers back into the basement for any hearings he wants to hold. Yep, he earned that one for sure. Yay us. Way too many people who should so know better by now still have their heads stuck in big pots of glue, but at least Lindorff seems to be tugging on his.

.

I think I'm making my way home tomorrow. I seem to have lived through my combination food poisoning and too much booze thing... and am feeling sort of creeped-out that I actually caught a snatch of an ad for a radio program dedicated to telling people which restaurants are SAFE to patronize while dabbling in my go cart stereo from the eighth dimension—complete with subwoofer—on the way back here from Berkeley. I mean, I do not have a delicate constitution. I have mighty biotic-fighting juices coursing through my giddy veins. I was sober by the time I fell asleep and sick by a couple hours after that. It was more than the booze. I shoulda listened to that damn radio show. The end is so nigh.

I am forced today to start moving some eggs into the DNA-upgrade-from-the-galactic-core-in-2012 basket. Those of us who have not died from dining out can then live to make reparations with whatever's left alive on our only planet by then.

.

Oh, well, okay, I'll say it. Notice how he takes responsibility just like Dubya does? Astonishing what lip flapping can fail to make actual, ain't it?

.

Oh, and I almost forgot today's update in how that hopey changey thing is working out for us.

Obama drops plan to limit global warming gases
By DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press – 1 hr 58 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Environmental groups and industry seem headed for another battle over regulation of greenhouse gases, as President Barack Obama said he will look for ways to control global warming pollution other than Congress placing a ceiling on it.

"Cap-and-trade was just one way of skinning the cat; it was not the only way," Obama said at a news conference Wednesday, a day after Democrats lost control of the House. "I'm going to be looking for other means to address this problem."

Legislation putting a limit on heat-trapping greenhouse gases and then allowing companies to buy and sell pollution permits under that ceiling narrowly passed the House in 2009 as a centerpiece of Obama's domestic agenda, but it stalled in the Senate.

Republicans dubbed the bill "cap-and-tax" because it would raise energy prices. They then used it as a club in the midterm elections against Democrats who voted for it. Thirty of the bill's supporters were among some 50 House Democrats whom voters turned out of office Tuesday.

"It's doubtful that you could get the votes to pass that through the House this year or next year or the year after," Obama said Wednesday.

The new battle over global warming in Congress will target the Environmental Protection Agency, which is poised to regulate greenhouse gases for the first time, after the Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that it could treat heat-trapping gases as pollutants.

John Engler, a former Michigan governor who leads the National Association of Manufacturers, said he expects a Republican-controlled House to take a "fresh look that will get at a lot of questions" dealing with the EPA's role in regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

Environmentalists, meanwhile, urged Obama to hold his ground.

"While there will be attacks on (EPA's) authority, it is important that there not be any surrender on EPA's ability to do the job," said Trip Van Noppen, president of Earthjustice.

The Senate in June rejected by a 53-47 vote a challenge brought by Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski that would have denied the EPA the authority to move ahead with the rules. Six Democrats voted with Republicans to advance the "resolution of disapproval," which the White House had threatened to veto. A similar resolution has broad support in the House, with 140 co-sponsors.

Engler said efforts to block the EPA will only be strengthened by Tuesday's election results.

Obama, when asked about the EPA's authority Wednesday, said that while a court order gave the EPA jurisdiction, the agency still wants help from Congress.

"I don't think ... the desire is to somehow be protective of their powers here," Obama said.

"One of the things that's very important for me is not to have us ignore the science, but rather to find ways that we can solve these problems that don't hurt the economy, that encourage the development of clean energy in this country, that, in fact, may give us opportunities to create entire new industries and create jobs."

Swell. I mean, I know he'd already dropped it, and that it was not going to be particularly effective, but it's official, now that the GOP has mysteriously taken over the House to bluster about repealing that fascist-friendly insurance enrichment act we suckers thought might improve something for somebody someday....

.
love, 99
.

54° yesterday and 78° today

[click image]

.

Notwithstanding waking up to the taste of a grocery receipt in my mouth, I finally went off and did those chores I couldn't put off any longer three days ago. Don't even ask what I've been eating these last three days... mostly my miracle mush and coffee and water. But today I went out armed with a list that I remembered to write, remembered to bring with me AND remembered to read. So I only forgot two major things.

I've been hauling heavy things in and out. I've been paying everyone every damn penny I manage to scrape. I'm not remiss about anything, anything, anything, except the bullshit that can just go out there and swim in its Gulf of Sludge. I propose Obama wear swimming trunks on his next trip to tour the cataclysm, whot? Fancy enough pants for government work.

And so it's been raining pretty much all week, and turned too damn cold to keep my heater off again yesterday, but right now I have all my windows and doors open to keep the breeze up enough so I don't have to strip naked and call the fire department.

.

Oh, oh, wait! I forgot to ask! Did Bert Lahr win his primary on Tuesday?

.

oh, everything

[click image, audio, 45 minutes]

.

Scott Horton of Harper's talks with Scott Horton of AntiWar about lots and lots of stuff. The flotilla massacre, the ignoble treatment of Helen Thomas, and, oh, torture.

Harper's Scott is fence sitting, doing his sound-even-tempered-about-it thing, which by now is BULLSHIT, but he says some good stuff in here anyway.

.

Actually, some hours later, I'm losing my feeling of equanimity about Harper's Horton's lawyerspeak. I notice that lawyers, after about the age of 45, become incapable of speaking like PEOPLE anymore, EVEN when not in the office, let alone court. They turn determinedly sophist in there somewhere and can't seem to bust out of it. I've been trying manfully to endure this crap out of him, whether in interviews or on his blog, because he's dealing with important stuff, but he's pissing me off more and more with this... and it's making it so I'm going to have to stop wasting time on him.

.

I saw it trying to happen to me and I got the fuck on out, and that's before I started in with the Zen stuff. I can not condemn people for needing their incomes so badly they can't cut their noses off despite their faces QUITE to the extent I do, as I have too many times to count anymore, but IF they are going to stay chained to that income, it is their DUTY not to let this happen, despite the pressure... or they're NOT worth anyone's attention.

.

For Immediate Release, June 10, 2010

Twenty-Seven to Go on Trial for Protesting the Obama Administration’s Failure to Close Guantanamo, Plan for Indefinite Detention, and Refusal to Prosecute Torture

Contact:

Jeremy Varon — M: 732-979-3119 — varon@aol.com
Helen Schietinger — M: 202-344-5762 — h.schietinger@verizon.net

WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Monday, June 14 twenty-seven will face trial stemming from arrests at the U.S. Capitol on January 21, 2010 — the date by which President Obama had promised the closure of the Guantanamo detention camp. The human rights activists will hold a press conference outside the courthouse defending their protest, condemning the Obama administration’s continuation of Bush policies, and explaining their use in court of the “necessity defense.” The press conference will be held Monday, June 14th at 8:30 am, across from the Federal District Courthouse (333 Constitution Avenue, NW).

On January 21, twenty-seven people dressed as Guantanamo prisoners were arrested on the steps of the Capitol holding banners reading “Broken Promises, Broken Laws, Broken Lives.” Inside the Capitol Rotunda, at the location where deceased presidents lie in state, fourteen activists were arrested performing a memorial service for three men who died at Guantanamo in 2006. Initially reported as suicides, the deaths may have been — as recent evidence suggests — the result of the men being tortured to death (see Scott Horton, “Murders at Guantanamo", March 2010, Harper's).

“The continued operation of the prison camp at Guantanamo is unacceptable,” Matthew W. Daloisio of Witness Against Torture. “If Guantanamo was a foreign policy liability and stain on the rule of law on day one of the Obama presidency, it surely is eighteen months later.”

“The deaths at Guantanamo show how barbaric US policies have been,” says Helen Schietinger, a defendant in the trial. “We are still waiting for accountability for those who designed and carried out torture policies under President Bush. Obama can’t restore the rule of law if he doesn’t enforce the law.”

The human rights activists plan to mount a “necessity defense” before Judge Russell Canan. “We will be arguing that we broke the law only after exhausting all legal means of opposing a much larger crime—the indefinite detention, mistreatment, and torture of men at Guantanamo and other US prisons,” says Jerica Arents of Chicago, Illinois, another the defendants.

The January protests were the culmination of a twelve-day fast for justice and an end to torture organized by Witness Against Torture in Washington, DC. More than 100 people participated in the fast and daily actions throughout the nation’s Capital.

Futile Gesture #38,423....

.

gotta change the name for it

[click image, video]

.
The Tea Party Movement has already been too assailed by attempts at coöption for it to survive. I've been saying maybe "Coffee Convention" or something to get it on a clearly modern American footing—back to grassroots from all the astroturf being laid over it—away from the horrendous mess being made of mobs of angry people getting up and yelling bloody murder, whether they're clear on what exactly to yell or not.

THE IMPULSE IS SOUND AND WE CAN MAKE THAT HAPPEN WITH THE EXECUTION AS WELL.

How about "EspressOurselves"?

Coffee Ground Force?

We can start bullhorning for the genuine article to switch to coffee and make a better run at it.

Unfortunately, I did not leap on this link on the day because I was busy melting down over Citizens United, and the PDF is not at their link anymore... maybe will be back up, pending release by a bigger blog, but the video is enough to give you an idea of what's afoot... and I think it's a good idea to have that idea....

This stuff is only going to get waaaaaaay worse....
.

hoping for cold comfort

[click image]

.
Notwithstanding that election fraud will be deciding this race, I hope Brown wins so he can tank this travesty mandatory health insurance shit....

Coakley, Brown cast votes in tight Mass. race
By STEVE LeBLANC, Associated Press Writer – 38 mins ago

BOSTON – Republicans looked for an upset and Democrats fought to hang onto a Senate seat long in their column Tuesday as voters turned out in strong numbers despite bad weather to pick a successor for the late Sen. Edward Kennedy.

The GOP voiced increasing confidence that Scott Brown, previously a relatively obscure state lawmaker, could win a razor-thin race that Democrat Martha Coakley seemed certain to win a few weeks ago.

Election officials in Boston said the turnout was more than twice the participation rate in the December party primaries. And a line of cars, at one point, was stretched for nearly a half-mile from a gymnasium at North Andover High School, the polling place for a community of about 30,000 about a half-hour north of Boston. Some drivers turned around in exasperation.

Speaking to reporters after she voted, Coakley voiced confidence she would win, saying "we've been working every day."

"Every game has its own dynamics," she said. "We'll know tonight what the results are."

Brown, who drove his pickup truck to a polling place to vote, played down the import of becoming the 41st Republican vote to uphold a filibuster, telling reporters, "It would make everybody the 41st senator, and it would bring fairness and discussion back to the equation." He that should he win, he hoped Democrats controlling the state's election apparatus "would do the right thing and certify me as quickly as possible."

But he also dismissed polls showing a swell of support for him. "I've never been a big poll person," Brown said. "I'm up in some, I'm down in some. And we'll see what happens, 8:01 (p.m.)."

Voters faced backups at some polling stations, and Secretary of State William Galvin says he expected from 1.6 million to 2.2 million people to vote — a spread of between 40 percent and 55 percent of registered voters.

A light snow started falling steadily shortly after the polls opened north of Boston, covering roads and sidewalks with a slippery coating. Some voters in Haverhill, about 35 miles north of Boston, grumbled as they navigated snow banks and thick slush to get to the polls. National Weather Service meteorologist Charlie Foley called it "kind of an annoyance."

Some voters, like 38-year-old computer programmer Sara Perry, said keeping the filibuster-proof majority in Congress was more appealing to her than Coakley herself. "I'm not a big fan of hers, but I really want to keep that balance," she said.

Elsewhere, supporters who huddled under umbrellas with their Brown campaign signs said they were optimistic that his message — and his potential importance in the health care debate — is resonating with voters.

"People are tired of all of the back-room deals on health care and everything else. Nobody likes the secrecy, and this is a way to put the kibosh on that," said John Pepper, a Republican from Cheshire, Conn., who took a day off from work to campaign for Brown in western Massachusetts.

In Washington, senior White House adviser David Axelrod said the White House expects Coakley to win. Axelrod said Obama, who campaigned with Coakley Sunday in Boston and cut a last-minute ad, did everything he could to help.

"I think the White House did everything we were asked to do," Axelrod told reporters. "Had we been asked earlier, we would have responded earlier. But we responded in a timely fashion when we were asked."

The swift rise of Brown has spooked Democrats who had considered the seat one of their most reliable. Kennedy, who died in August, held the post for 47 years. The last time Massachusetts elected a Republican to the U.S. Senate was 1972.

A Suffolk University survey taken Saturday and Sunday showed Brown with double-digit leads in three communities the poll identified as bellwethers: Gardner, Fitchburg and Peabody. But internal statewide polls for both sides showed a dead heat.

A third candidate, Joseph L. Kennedy, a Libertarian running as an independent, said he's been bombarded with e-mails from Brown supporters urging him to drop out and endorse the Republican. Kennedy, who was polling in the single digits and is no relation to the late senator, said he's staying in.

No. Seriously. However it might happen, Obama needs to feel sorry for his manifold perfidies. And cold comfort as this would surely be, I'll take it.
.

Oh, oh, are you freaking about how I could suggest such a thing?

Be serious, now. HOW ARE THESE DEMOCRATS BETTER THAN THOSE REPUBLICANS?

They aren't. They aren't. They aren't.

And insofar as their vicious excuses still fool people, they're actually WORSE.
.

politically feasible

[click image]

.
.

becoming downright medieval in the philippines

[click image]

Twenty-one bodies of twenty-nine abducted family and friends of a politician on the southern island of Mindanao who is challenging the local governor have been found... seems the incumbent is not happy about the prospect of this challenge... sent his militiamen after them....

Campaign seasons seem to be bloody, and getting bloodier, in the Philippines.

In fact, it doesn't seem as though an election anywhere has gone well in a long time....

======================================

24 hours later:

8 mins ago

MANILA, Philippines – A Philippine police official says 11 more bodies have been recovered from a mass grave in the country's south, raising the number of massacre victims to 35.

Chief Superintendent Josefino Cataluna says Tuesday more bodies are expected to be recovered in a remote hilly area in southern Ampatuan township where supporters of a local politician and journalists traveling in a convoy were seized by dozens of gunmen Monday.

Police said the convoy of about 40 people was going to register Mangudadatu, vice mayor of Buluan township, to run for provincial governor when they were stopped.

Soldiers and police later found 24 bodies, including those of Mangudadatu's wife, Genalyn, and his two sisters, sprawled on the ground or shot in their vehicles.

======================================

15 hours later than that: 46 bodies....

======================================

52 bodies... 18 of them journalists....

======================================

One ayem, 25 November, al Jazeera is reporting 56 on the air....

The suspect and his family say they won't stand in the way of investigations. Isn't that civilized?

the kind of thing i mean when i mention vision

[click image]

Take out a mere fourteen minutes to catch a glimpse....

AND MAYBE YOU WANT TO HAVE A SCAN OF THIS AFTER YOU'RE DONE LISTENING TO DELE OGUN... just to get a hot shot of irony... just to let the winds of astonishment suck the breath out of you over the millions dead because timocracy, oligarchy, democracy and tyranny are this imperfect.... Sheesh.

jesus!

[click image]

Just as I'm packing it in, this slides under my bouncing eyeballs. Whoa, this dude knows his stuff. Take that, war pigs, take that!

Sources: Abdullah to pull out of Afghan runoff
By HEIDI VOGT and EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writers – 1 hr 2 mins ago

KABUL – Afghan presidential challenger Abdullah Abdullah plans to boycott next week's runoff against incumbent Hamid Karzai following a breakdown in talks on how to fix the country's electoral crisis, two people familiar with the discussions said.

A boycott would severely undermine a vote intended to affirm the Afghan government's credibility. However, an Abdullah spokesman said no final decision had been made on the candidate's pullout, and it was possible that word of the boycott was a negotiating tactic by the Abdullah camp.

The political stalemate in Kabul comes as President Barack Obama has been meeting with his advisers to try to determine U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, including troop levels. A weakened Afghan government will make it harder for Obama to get public support for his efforts.

Abdullah, who was once Karzai's foreign minister, put forward several conditions this week to avoid a repeat of the massive fraud of the August presidential election, including the replacement of the top election official and the suspension of several ministers.

He set Saturday as the deadline for his demands to be met.

A Westerner close to talks between the two sides said their agenda also included a power-sharing proposal by the challenger and cited both Karzai and Abdullah as saying that talks broke down Friday, prompting Abdullah to decide on a boycott of the Nov. 7 runoff.

An Afghan figure close to Abdullah said Saturday that the boycott decision came after a contentious and fruitless meeting Thursday over Abdullah's conditions for a runoff.

Both spoke on condition of anonymity, saying that the announcement must come from Abdullah himself.

The Afghan said a boycott was certain, and that Abdullah would likely tell his supporters to simply stay home during the vote. The likely boycott was first reported by CNN.

The Afghan constitution says that any vote cast for a candidate who withdraws will not be counted. However, it does not specifically address a candidate who does not formally withdraw but urges supporters to boycott the polls.

A spokesman for the Abdullah campaign, Fazel Sancharaki, said no decision had been made on a boycott and that the candidate would wait until the end of Saturday to see if his demands are met before making any announcement, likely on Sunday.

The runoff election in Afghanistan became necessary after widespread fraud in the first round of voting in August resulted in thousands of Karzai's ballots being invalidated, pushing him below the required 50 percent margin to win. Concerns have been raised about a possible repetition of the ballot-box stuffing and distorted tallies in the second round.

Abdullah complained Monday that there were no assurances that the November vote would be fairer than the first balloting and demanded that the head of the Karzai-appointed Independent Election Commission, Azizullah Lodin, be fired.

Lodin has denied allegations of bias in favor of Karzai, and the election commission's spokesman has already said Lodin cannot be replaced by either side.

Abdullah's conditions also include the suspension of several ministers and for more safeguards around the actual vote.

In private discussions, Abdullah also pressed Karzai for a power-sharing agreement instead of a vote, but Karzai refused, insisting instead on a vote and then a power-sharing agreement, the Westerner close to the talks told The Associated Press.

Despite the massive fraud and rejected ballots, Karzai's vote in the first round was far higher than Abdullah's and he is widely expected to win the runoff.

This year's election — the first run by Afghans since the ouster of the Taliban — was supposed to affirm the government's credibility. Instead, the massive fraud raised questions about the Karzai administration just as U.S. officials are debating whether to send more troops.

The Taliban, who threatened voters during the August balloting, have warned Afghans that they risk further attacks if they do not stay away from the polls next week.

On Wednesday they targeted a U.N. guest house where 34 staff — including a number of U.N. election workers — were sleeping. Eight people were killed in the assault, five of them U.N. staff members.

Jesus.

new boss worse than the old boss

[click image]

no one can ever WIN an election again

[click image]

Karzai, Abdullah both claim lead in Afghan vote
By JASON STRAZIUSO and ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press Writers – Fri Aug 21, 9:33 pm ET

KABUL – Both main candidates for Afghan president claimed to be ahead Friday after an election marred by violence, spotty turnout and fraud allegations — threatening U.S. hopes for Afghans to come together to combat the challenges of Taliban insurgency, corruption and poverty.

President Hamid Karzai's campaign insisted he would have enough votes to avoid a runoff with his chief challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, a former foreign minister. Abdullah countered that he was leading but suspected there would be a runoff.

Election officials called on the candidates to refrain from such claims, which could delay formation of a new government. Officials of Afghan and international monitoring teams agreed that it was too early to say who won or to know whether fraud was extensive enough to influence the outcome.

Millions of Afghans voted Thursday in the country's second-ever direct presidential election, although Taliban threats held down the turnout, especially in the militant south where Karzai was expected to run strong among his fellow Pashtuns. Insurgent attacks claimed more than two dozen lives.

Partial preliminary results won't be released by the election commission before Tuesday with final official returns due in early September. Officials count ballots at voting centers around the country and then send the figures to Kabul, where they are tabulated, verified and announced.

Nevertheless, the absence of official figures didn't dissuade supporters of the two leading candidates from issuing their own claims, which they said were based on reports from their representatives at the counting centers.

Karzai's campaign spokesman, Waheed Omar, said the president's campaign believes "we are well ahead" in the ballot count and will end up with more than 50 percent of the votes — enough to avoid a runoff that Omar said would be "logistically, financially and also politically" problematic.

"Our prediction is that the election will not go to the second round," Omar said. "Our initial information is that we will hopefully be able to win the elections in the first round."

Abdullah challenged the claim, telling The Associated Press that he was in the lead "despite the rigging which has taken place in some parts of the country."

He alleged that government officials interfered with ballot boxes and in some places blocked monitors from inspecting boxes or their contents. Abdullah said there "is a likelihood" that neither he nor Karzai would win more than 50 percent of the vote, setting the stage for a runoff in early October.

The U.S. Embassy and Afghanistan's Independent Election Commission dismissed both sides' claims, saying it was too early for anyone to declare victory. Commission chairman Noor Mohammed Noor said candidates had no basis for such claims and should refrain from making them.

"Anything else is speculation at this point," U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Fleur Cowan said. "We will wait to hear from the IEC and electoral complaints commission."

Clearly, however, there were some irregularities.

The Times of London newspaper reported Friday that election officials at a polling station near Kabul recorded 5,530 ballots in the first hour of voting Thursday, even though no voters were at the site when the Times' reporter arrived at 8 a.m., one hour after the voting began.

Election workers said the area was pro-Karzai and was controlled by a lawmaker who said he had already voted for the president, even though his finger wasn't marked with indelible ink, a fraud prevention measure, the Times reported.

The International Republican Institute, a U.S.-based nonprofit organization that had about 30 election observers in Afghanistan, said the vote was at a "lower standard" than the 2004 presidential ballot and 2005 parliamentary vote but that "the process so far has been credible."

Low turnout — estimated between 40 and 50 percent nationwide — showed that Taliban efforts to keep people home were at least partly successful, creating an election "defined by violence," said Richard S. Williamson, the IRI's delegation leader in Afghanistan and a former U.S. ambassador to the U.N.

"There is no denying the fact that a notable reason for low turnout was the lack of security, and obviously that must be addressed," IRI said. "Second, there were many credible reports that voter registration cards were sold. ... While it is difficult to determine how widespread this practice was, the magnitude of such reports of fraud warrant investigation."

Human Rights Watch cautioned against declaring the election successful, given the violence Thursday and low turnout in areas where Taliban influence is greatest.

"Early impressions of turnout suggest that violence and intimidation succeeded in keeping voters away from polling stations in a huge swathe of the country, which adds up to a successful day for the Taliban," said Rachel Reid, Afghanistan researcher for Human Rights Watch. "If international standards are dropped, there risks being a serious credibility gap — which will only serve to increase disillusionment with the efforts to create a democracy."

Many of the irregularities and low turnout occurred in the southern and eastern areas where Karzai draws his strength and — ironically — where the Taliban is strongest. Abdullah, who is half Pashtun, is widely seen as the candidate of the northern Tajiks.

In Washington, a former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, Ronald Neumann, told the BBC that the credibility of the election will depend on whether enough Pashtuns voted that their community does not feel disenfranchised and whether Afghans perceive the fraud went beyond levels they find acceptable.

One American election observer said the delay in announcing results was fueling rumors and allegations that threaten to poison the atmosphere at a time when Afghans need to come together to deal with the problems facing their country.

Glenn Cowan, the co-founder of the U.S.-funded observer group Democracy International, said announcing results more quickly would serve as a "pressure valve release."

"Instead what you get is a buildup," Cowan said. "What's very interesting to us is that we don't know very much more about this election today than we did on Wednesday. The paucity of information is really incredible. You've had no election returns whatsoever."

As the counting continued, so did violence. A U.S. service member died Friday from wounds from a bomb in eastern Afghanistan, the NATO-led military alliance said. No other information was released. Two British troops in the south died on Thursday, officials announced.

Two policemen were killed in a suicide attack Friday against a police station in Jalalabad, officials said. Witnesses said three assailants attacked the station after sundown and two of them escaped.

hold on to your hat!

[click image]

An Iranian friend emailed me the link to this video of someone stumping for Mousavi in the Iranian parliament, not allowing himself to be gaveled down. Here is my response:

This perfectly fits our saying, "Hold on to your hat".... Whereas a similar situation here was more sedate:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6wl_86qnsI

Oh, shoot, you can't watch. It's all the representatives coming in front of Al Gore as President of the Senate to protest the rigged election in 2000, and him having to deny their complaints because they weren't signed by a senator. This would have overridden the Supreme Court decision and given Gore the presidency. Senator Boxer had been willing to sign them, but Gore asked her not to.

He said publicly that after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of GWB the only recourse left to him was "armed insurrection". That wasn't true. He could have let a senator sign off on the complaints from the House. But for some completely unfathomable reason he laid down.

In 2004, Kerry won, everyone was on top of the recount to prove it, and HE too laid down.

We have had two PROVEN stolen presidential elections, and numberless lesser stolen ones.

Both Gore and Kerry wanted to be President really, really badly, and both did have the means to get past the rigging and take office, yet both mysteriously just gave up, and neither ran again. This says to me, now that I have been able to see things play out that Obama is owned by the same people who frightened Gore and Kerry out of their rightful position. He's owned by the same people who owned Bush. THEY MEAN YOU HARM.

I didn't add that, no matter what, they are safer with the regime they have, because we have been fighting about this back and forth for two weeks now. The Green Revolution is fixated on things inside Iran and ignoring the dangers lurking on the outside trying to get in. They are so fixated that they won't stop to look around, won't see how their indignation, righteous or not, is making Iran much more vulnerable than before.

It is never good to go all in with your emotions, your indignation, what you only think. It creates blind spots the size of nations and more often than not serves only to defeat you, even when you win.

nope, not so alone

[click image]

What If Ahmadinejad Really Won?
by Robert Parry
June 15, 2009

It’s fast congealing into conventional wisdom that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stole re-election through fraud and that the so-called “green revolution” of Mir-Hossein Mousavi – which was based in the country’s intelligentsia and middle class – got robbed.

But a strong case can be made that the large turnout, which was estimated at about 85 percent, was the key to a genuine landslide for Ahmadinejad, who is viewed as a friend of more traditional Iranians from the working classes and among the rural peasants.

That is the assessment expressed by Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty in a Washington Post op-ed citing their findings from extensive polling across Iran in mid-May that detected roughly the same 2-to-1 margin in favor of Ahmadinejad that emerged from the final tallies.

Ballen and Doherty also knocked down one of the central arguments cited by analysts who are claiming that Ahmadinejad committed fraud. That argument is that Mousavi, an Azeri, surely would have won Azeri-dominated districts which instead were recorded as going heavily for Ahmadinejad.

However, Ballen and Doherty reported that “our survey indicated … that Azeris favored Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi.”

Their poll also undercut the widespread media assumption about Internet-savvy youth backing Mousavi. They found that only 1 in 3 Iranians have access to the Internet and the “18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.”

Nevertheless, the rush to the “fraud” judgment among much of the U.S. news media is shaping the political realities that now confront both Washington and Tehran. One of the snap media judgments has been that Ahmadinejad’s “theft” of the election proves that hardliners in Israel and neoconservatives in the United States were right all along about the impossibility of dealing rationally with Iran, that President Barack Obama was the "big loser," and that force is the only option to employ against Iran.

It also has been curious to see U.S. news organizations care suddenly about legitimate elections when most of them ignored, ridiculed or covered-up evidence that George W. Bush stole the U.S. presidential election in 2000 and possibly in 2004 as well.

In Election 2000, Florida – a state controlled by Bush’s brother Jeb and Jeb’s cronies – was the scene of widespread election irregularities. Then, when a recount was attempted, the Bush campaign sent well-dressed hooligans from Washington to Miami to stage a riot aimed at intimidating vote counters. Finally, Bush got five partisan Republican justices on the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the counting of votes and award the White House to Bush.

Yet, the U.S. press corps was extraordinarily passive about this well-documented election theft. Even when it became clear that Al Gore won the popular vote and would have carried Florida if all legal ballots had been counted, major U.S. news organizations, including the New York Times and CNN, misrepresented the facts to protect Bush’s “legitimacy.” [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Gore’s Victory.”]

Similarly, serious irregularities in Election 2004, especially in the key state of Ohio, were never seriously investigated by the mainstream news media, which instead mocked Internet sites (including ours) and citizens groups as “conspiracy theorists” for citing some of the bizarre vote tallies favoring Bush. [For details, see our book, Neck Deep.]

Yet, when an election occurs in another country and an “unpopular” leader appears to win, an opposite set of rules apply. Anyone who doesn’t immediately accept the assumption of voter fraud is naïve; every “conspiracy theory” is cited respectfully while contrary evidence is downplayed or ignored, for instance the assumption about the Azeri vote that Ballen and Doherty debunked with their poll findings.

Another irony is that Iran's religious leaders now have ordered an investigation of the fraud allegations in a country not known for its democratic institutions. That is more than Americans got in 2000 and 2004.

AND BLESS GLENN GREENWALD'S BIG HEART!!!

some i love are bitterly disappointed

[click image]

... and I have been trying mightily to understand the context for the Iranian elections, trying to drop all my own feelings and get a sense for how it must be in Iran. I do not think that this huge victory for Ahmadinejad is necessarily the election fraud claimed by Mousavi supporters, but also would not be at all surprised if was indeed election fraud. Listening closely to a bunch of al Jazeera reports late last night and today, I get the distinct impression that Mousavi was really perceived by many of his supporters as merely the lesser of two evils... something entirely familiar to me. I gather from some of the exchanges between pundits and anchorpersons that Mousavi was not the model of support for fair elections when he was prime minister. I also have heard a great deal of fairly convincing talk about how Ahmadinejad may have won back support by reminding everyone somehow during the debates, in which it is reported that he was eloquent where the others were not, of having protected Iran from certain perfidies committed by the West. Anyway, I do not find it so shocking that Mousavi's expat, youth and Tehranian supporters may have been outvoted by their less Westernized brothers and sisters across Iran.

I'm troubled by the repeated mention of Mousavi's less-antagonistic-toward-Israel rhetoric as a reason for the fervent support. If true, it is a cruel delusion to think changing the front man for the ayatollahs would have any effect whatsoever on how things shake out in the current antagonisms. I know also that there is a great longing among the women and youth of Iran for a relaxation of strictures in dress and gender equality, that they want to feel more in step with the sophistication of the rest of the world, but, again, while I particularly identify with the desires of Iran's women to be shut of these stupid rules and taboos, it is also a cruel delusion that Mousavi could have brought the change they desire.

My understanding of the post of "president" in Iran is that he is to handle administrative matters and public appearances the ayatollahs have no wish to fool around with, but that he can do nothing nor say anything without their approval, which makes him more Minister of Tedious Stuff than president. Even if he has the impulse to oblige his followers in their hopes, he cannot deliver on them. I actually think that Ahmadinejad is better for the job since he more closely reflects the ayatollahs' rule in word and deed. I actually think if there really was a Mousavi victory in this election it means more that the ayatollahs should be pushed out of power than that Mousavi should be president.

This is a very, very problematic subject. It seems that even Iranians need reminding that the Iranian president isn't a president in the usual understanding of that term. It seems sort of cruel to get everyone all worked up to vote when they are only voting for a Minister of Tedious Stuff and the ayatollahs will only let win who they want to win after all. The election results can be whatever they are, and still they are not official until the ayatollahs say they are official and should be respected.

Iran is a theocracy. Not a democratic republic. Not even a democratic theocracy. The clerics' word is law.

The good of the huge display of support for Mousavi can only be that it has shown them how the population, or a good portion of it, feels. It should instruct them on how they should proceed, and if they don't make the necessary adjustments to try to please the people, they will have to become more oppressive to hold down dissent... if they can....

I'd like to remind everyone that Iran is the only country on the face of the earth that has stood behind the freedom fighters in Palestine and Lebanon. No matter what would have ever come out of Mousavi's mouth, that would not have changed, and he would very swiftly have been vilified and made to seem as reprehensible as Israel and America have made Ahmadinejad look over the past four years. There can be, outright, NO question of that. While I have seen that there is a great deal of solidarity within the Iranian population with the release from suffering at the hands of Israel, I have also heard some Iranians griping that they wish their government would just back off and attend more to domestic issues. This really puts me in a bind because I so greatly admire the Iranian government's stance on the liberation of Palestinians and Lebanese from Israeli tyranny, but I also feel any government should be listening to and obliging its people to the greatest extent possible.

I'm outraged that American liberals claimed the Lebanese election result as a victory brought about by the power of President Go Fuck Yourself's address in Cairo, and am vastly relieved they can't claim that shit in this case at least. [Except, it seems, that there REALLY is no winning for losing with these fucks....]

I'm wondering how many people here are feeling sorry for the Iranians being squelched this way by their power elite, while we are being squelched by our power elite identically. Yes, it does NOT matter even if the president is the president in the ordinary sense of the word "president" if that president is being forced by the power elite to ignore the will of the people. Our president is ignoring ours as surely and as thoroughly as Iran's is, and it actually seems to me that Iran's president, and perhaps his masters, really do care more for the welfare of their people than ours do. That isn't saying much. That may be close to not saying anything at all, but it's really time you let it sink in.

It's also comforting to find Russian state media very respectfully reporting this election result. It means to me that they still have Iran's back, and that is very possibly literally of planet-saving significance. I mean, truly, do try not to confuse the issue. Israel and its allies are the aggressors, the ones threatening egregious harm... nukes, air strikes, military intervention.... Ahmadinejad did not pick this fight. Nor did the ayatollahs. ISRAEL did. WE did.

They have resisted brilliantly and kept their people safe against tremendous odds. It actually could be that they really won, or, anyway, I can find it plausible that they really won... even if there isn't any way to tell for sure.

-----------------------------------------------------

Even if you tend to believe obviously biased Western media reports, I submit one should try to look for what wisdom there may have been in the cheating, OR delight the imperialists and bring about regime change in Iran. IS Mir-Hossein Mousavi the man for this job? From everything I have heard, he absolutely is not. As for myself, I am going to hope that the people get behind someone truly fit to lead them if they want to throw off the yoke of this theocracy. It has to be someone who can ally seamlessly with Russia and/or China, or it will be Western corporations that reap all the benefits of Iran's resources, NOT the Iranian people, AND Lebanon and Palestine will be left without what support Iran has been able to provide for them.

rush holt is really pissing me off

[click image]

This bozo's election reform bill in 2007 went down in flames after a concerted effort by everyone interested in election integrity to help him turn it into a truly decent bill and he couldn't bring himself to do that. He's bringing it up again. If there was a shadow of a doubt that he was trying to keep legislated in easily gamable elections while seeming to be guarding against them, it is gone now. He may have been ignorant when he started, but there is no question that he has been educated and yet, here he is again, pretending to be trying to protect our votes while selling them to the highest bidder.

OUR GOVERNMENT IS BROKEN.

discount election fraud

[click image]

this is getting embarrassing

[click image]

Friedman is dead set that he shouldn't be seated until Coleman's legal challenges fail, if they fail, which everyone pretty much agrees they will, because he says there should be no doubt about the rightful legal winner of the election. Except, judges don't always help with that, now do they? And what the fuck is that bit about

"There's not a question in anyone's mind, an assertion by anyone, that there's been any fraud or wrongdoing in this election," [Harry Reid] added.

doing in there?

Doesn't anybody find it fishy that Norm Coleman was the senator for a blue state to begin with, let alone only lose to Franken by 225 votes out of some three million... when Obama won there by so much?

It's as though everyone WANTS only rigged elections for the rest of time.

Anyway, I agree Franken should be seated now that the careful and thorough recount has shown he is the winner. I also agree that state law should hold, and that's why they can't certify him until Coleman's challenges are dropped or adjudicated, but, this is just too stupid to be borne. We need all hands on deck. Badly.