Mark Drolette

A quarter mil for a shill: so much for a free press

The Bushies really should have come to me before bribing -- uh, hiring; no, no, I was right the first time -- right-wing commentator Armstrong Williams to shill for the federal No Child Left Behind Act in his newspaper columns and on his radio and TV show “The Right Side.” According to Eunice Moscoso of the Cox News Service, Williams raked in $240,000 for his best Fox faux facts impersonation.

I would have saved the administration (well, us taxpayers, actually) a wad of scratch by charging a lot less than ol’ Army. True, my political views are about as conservative as Dubya’s speech is eloquent, and (understatement just ahead) I’m also not quite as well-known as Williams (whom Moscoso identifies as “a prominent black conservative voice” with columns appearing in “various newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, the Detroit Free Press, USA Today and the Washington Times”), but perhaps the White House has some connections in the media somewhere and could put in a good word with somebody willing to help an eager, wet-behind-the-ears, 48 year-old corporate media rookie get started on his way to talking head stardom and mountains of unearned cash.

Nah, just kiddin’. For one thing, I could never assist in promoting the hideous Bush agenda. Not unless, somehow, I was doing it unwittingly, like, say, if I’d been beheaded per orders from Dubya (or, more likely, Karl Rove) and my noggin was then displayed on one of those spiky-things in the White House fence as a warning for journalists not to start taking all that First Amendment stuff too seriously.

For another, I also happen to know, unlike the old Armster, that the number one asset of any journalist worth his/her pay off -- er, paycheck -- is credibility. And just how do I know this?

Well, I sure didn’t learn it in journalism school, which could possibly be because I never went. Just attribute it to intuition; either that, or the fact I apparently have at least one functioning gray cell somewhere. (Conspiratorial, whispery voice here: One doesn’t have to be Albert Einstein, or even Alfred E. Newman, to figure it out.) Thus, when “in an interview, Williams attributed his mistake to a lack of training in journalism” (as reported by David D. Kirkpatrick of the New York Times), he’s only diggin’ that hole deeper.

The most basic problem, of course, is that Williams is obviously not a journalist but still plays one on TV. With my sincerest apologies to members of the world’s oldest profession, he’s a whore -- a very dangerous, democracy-destroying whore -- much more suited to joining the streetwalkers union than any to which real journalists might apply. (Chances are slim, though, the hookers would take him; professional integrity, you know.)

Williams, however, still seeks to semantically split hairs while in damage control mode when he claims, per Moscoso, “that although he [is] a commentator, and not a journalist, he still should abide by the same ethical standards.” (Funny how ethics come up after checks have been cashed and beans spilled.)

Whatever he decides to call himself, he’s still a member of the media, the now-verified government house organ that systematically dishes swill to millions of Americans who regrettably believe that the (dis)information they receive can somehow better qualify them to participate in America’s (now-dead) democratic system.

Naturally, the White House has trotted out its standard reply when it’s been popped yet again, claiming that Graftgate is an “isolated incident.” ‘Fraid not: this is far from the first time the Bushies have been caught shamelessly shelling to shills to sugarcoat shitty shenanigans. Here are other “apparent efforts by the Bush administration to influence media coverage,” per Moscoso:

“The General Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress, said.that the Office of National Drug Control Policy broke federal law when it produced and distributed packaged news segments about drug use among the nation’s youth. The GAO said the videos, broadcast by nearly 300 stations, amounted to ‘covert propaganda’ because they were not identified as government-made.”

“The GAO scolded the White House in May [2004] for creating television news spots that promoted the new Medicare law, which is intended to help older Americans with the costs of their prescription medicines. The segments had actors posing as television reporters.”

“Also last year, the Department of Education paid a public relations firm to rate the reporting on the No Child Left Behind Act of writers from 13 newspapers so that those with low scores could be ‘targeted for doing more education about the issue.’“
“Television news shows in more than 20 cities last year included a pre-packaged, favorable story about the federal student loan program that wasn’t identified as taxpayer-financed. The story was prepared as a ‘video news release’ for the Department of Education by Ketchum, Inc.”

One thing about criticizing the Bushies: It’s almost impossible to engage in hyperbole. (The qualifying “almost” almost isn’t necessary.) “Democracy-destroying” and “(now-dead) democratic system” are not flippant lip-flappings. Laurence W. Britt’s article “Fascism Anyone?,” appearing in the Spring 2003 issue of Free Inquiry magazine, lists fourteen “basic characteristics” of fascist regimes (this is number six):

“A controlled mass media. Under some [fascist] regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.”

Personally, I kind of think “bribing media pundits” would fit rather nicely inside that “methods” part. ‘Course, maybe that’s just me.

A free press is essential to keeping a democratic system healthy and its government honest. This latest sleazy episode only confirms further that American corporate media are a definite part of the problem and cannot be counted on to help provide the solution needed to chase the dark shadow of fascism now cloaking our nation. (A rare exception is Frank Rich’s scathing take on the Williams matter in the January 13 New York Times -- in the, uh, Arts section, sensibly.)

How many more Williamses are there? Who are they? How long have they been feeding Americans taxpayer-bought-and-paid-for-government-propaganda-as-news? Given the Bush administration’s non-record in telling the truth and its absolute obsession with secrecy and spin -- plus its ability to unfailingly demonstrate it possesses not one lick of morality -- I feel uncomfortably comfortable in predicting we’ve seen but the tip of the iceberg.

Personal reflection upon the recent death and tragic story of investigative reporter Gary Webb finally drove it home for me: The American press is not going to “wake up” and save us. We, the people, must challenge the corporate media with a communications network of our own, and the Internet is the obvious candidate to be its central component. We must all assist as much as we can with donations of money and/or content to worthy “alternative” media websites.

The Bushies are no dummies (well, with one notable exception): They and their filthily wealthy right-wing pals and partners have, for years, sought (and now gained) control of the media in the United States because they know that controlling the media means controlling the message, and controlling the message is a proven means of controlling the masses. We must as quickly as possible gain the media upper hand to disseminate our message -- the truth -- to have any kind of a shot at regaining control of our political destiny.

Make no mistake: This is a fight for our freedom. Though actual terrorists who wish to injure the United States undoubtedly exist beyond our borders, those who are best positioned to bring this country forever to its knees are headquartered well within its boundaries: at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

I’ll give Georgie Bush and the Bushie Bunch this much, however: They couldn’t make it any simpler for those of us who comment on today’s American political landscape to do so, because searching for a topic just isn’t a problem and a lot of columns roll right on out. I even sometimes wonder if media critics during Mussolini’s regime had it this easy.

What, you can’t name any? Neither can I. Which is actually kind of the whole point.

Copyright © 2004 Mark Drolette. All rights reserved.

Lifetime detainment: no pros, all cons

I just read another well-written, facts-inclusive article about the malevolent Bushies that comments on their continuous coddling of that country commonly commended for its commanding compassion: Saudi Arabia. The author, Paul Heller, explains how the sensitive Saudi government had recently (and characteristically) lopped off the heads of a couple of drug dealers, and points out the rather incongruous matter of Bushco supporting a terrorist regime while allegedly committed to combating terrorist regimes.

With friends like these, who needs other friends? Then again, in Bushworld, who the hell cares?

Heller started me a-ponderin’ how far down the scale we are sliding as a nation. Then I realized: we’re plumb out of slide-down room. We have hit bottom and we ain’t a-movin’ on up, to the east side, to the west side, or any old side ‘cept sideways, which is where, these days, one finds ideal American ways -- always.

A glaring, galling example of the administration’s basement-level baseness is provided in a recent article by Dana Priest of the Washington Post:

“Administration officials are preparing long-range plans for indefinitely imprisoning suspected terrorists whom they do not want to set free or turn over to courts in the United States or other countries…The Pentagon and the CIA have asked the White House to decide on a more permanent approach for potentially lifetime detentions, including those for hundreds of people now in military and CIA custody whom the government does not have enough evidence to charge in courts.”

Well, where to start? The indefinite imprisonments? The fact that one need only be “suspected” of being a terrorist (as so designated by George W. Bush; now there’s a comforting thought) to be detained for a “lifetime” because of a lack of “enough evidence to charge in courts”?

Not to be an alarmist (impossible these days, anyway), but this means you or I could be put away forever simply at Dubya’s discretion. If you consider this far-fetched, I remind you here that Education Secretary Rod Paige dentified the country’s largest teacher’s union, the National Education Association, as a “terrorist organization”; it is a small step indeed for the Constitution-reviling, Patriot Act-revering team of Bush/Cheney to label -- yes, believe it or not -- even non-educators as mortal enemies of the state.

Fortunately, our cat-like elected officials are right on top of this one, ferociously guarding our freedoms. Priest quotes Representative Jane Harmon (D-CA), Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, thusly: “The details about the system may need to remain secret.”

That Jane: what a tigress for liberty, huh?

A Yahoo News item compiled “from Times staff and wire reports” presents this sparkler uttered by usually-thoughtful Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) during his January 2 appearance on Fox News Sunday: “There must be some modicum, some semblance of due process…if you’re going to detain people, whether it’s for life or whether it’s for years.”

Yo, Carl!! That due process thing is kind of a non-starter once the topic turns to lifetime detainments.

Not to be outdone, Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN), appearing on the same show, made a fine bid for understatement of the epoch by saying that lack of court oversight regarding permanent detention “is a bad idea.”

Wow…ya think?

Undoubtedly, the government has done plenty of rotten things for years, but previously, when the public would finally catch ill whiff of questionable capers’ unquestionable vapors, hearings were held and hands were slapped (or, hands were held and hearings were slapped). Maybe even a president was rightly forced to resign (golden times, eh?).
And, far more often than not, policy changes were made to at least try to prevent similar things from happening again.

No longer. In the case of this beyond-draconian suspect-for-life prison proposal, there’s no pretense of even trying to deny this medieval scheme really exists. Now that the cover’s blown, the government agencies involved -- the Pentagon, the CIA and even the State Department -- have entirely dispensed with the time-honored and well-honed tradition of exclaiming, wide-eyed: “Oh, my, how could this have happened??” followed immediately by the requisite public back-pedaling. Instead, we are presented with outright admission but still full intention to implement this latest arbeit-macht-frei, war-is-peace, screw-the-Constitution plan of the administration.

Those who may seek some sort of solace by claiming American citizens aren’t affected by this beyond-the-pale tale pursue false refuge. Priest again: “Little is known about the CIA’s captives, the conditions under which they are kept -- or the procedures used to decide how long they are held or when they may be freed.”

Plus, of course, we already have the cases of Yaser Hamdi and Jose Padilla, two men who are U.S. citizens. Well, Padilla still is anyway -- at least on paper. Approaching the three-year mark since his May 2002 arrest and subsequent designation by George Bush as an enemy combatant, he languishes in a South Carolina naval brig and has yet to be charged with any crime.

Hamdi, also deemed an enemy combatant, was imprisoned for more than two years without charges before making a deal with the government (in what Mike Whitney in ZNET calls “a clear case of coercion”) to renounce his American citizenship and be deported to Saudi Arabia (where he also is a citizen) in October 2004.

Truly, though, it’s inconsequential if indefinitely incarcerated suspects are Americans, Afghanis, or Ashcrofts (in the latter case, I could see an exception being made). Once upon a time in America, it used to be a “suspect” was just that: a suspect, with the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial (or a trial, period). Now, in Bush Country, the term is shorthand for “Put ‘em in jail and throw away the key.”

This all comes as nil surprise, though. The writing was scrawled on the dungeon wall in big bloody letters the day (June 8, 2004) U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft refused to provide to the Senate Judiciary Committee an August 2002 Justice Department memo that specified how interrogators could “legally” commit torture. (Never mind it had already been leaked to the press; Ashcroft has his principles, you know.)

This was also the same hearing in which Ashcroft, according to Lawrence M. O’Rourke of the Sacramento Bee, responded to Senator Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) straight-up question, “Has there been any order directed from the president with regard to interrogation of detainees, prisoners, or combatants? Yes or no,” by declaring, “I’m not in a position to answer that question.” The smoke plume generated by this non-answer grows even thicker now in light of the FBI email obtained recently by the American Civil Liberties Union that specifically refers to just such an executive order.

The AG’s weaseling was, as always, sickening to observe. But the most elementarily appalling aspect by far was that a hearing on torture would even need to be held in the U.S. Senate. What in sweet justice’s name was there to discuss??

Today’s obvious statement: Not only is torture completely repugnant, immoral, un-American, and -- “practically” speaking -- impractical, but once the torture-as-topic door is open, the bar of what constitutes “acceptable” behavior is instantly, and markedly, lowered.

Thus, the inevitable end result: No bar exists (except for the one down the street that mindful folks probably find themselves frequenting more frequently these days).

I’ve accumulated quite the depressing little pile of clippings related to the ongoing saga of America’s continuing experiment with state-sponsored torture. The headline for each, accompanied by a pull-quote, follows:

“U.S. OKs Evidence Gained Through Torture” (Associated Press, Michael J. Sniffen, December 3, 2004): “Evidence gained by torture can be used by the U.S. military in deciding whether to imprison a foreigner indefinitely at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as an enemy combatant, the [U.S.] government says.”

“AP: FBI Letter Cites Guantanamo Abuse”(Associated Press, Paisley Dodds, December 6, 2004): “FBI agents witnessed ‘highly aggressive’ interrogations and mistreatment of terror suspects at the U.S. prison camp in Cuba starting in 2002 -- more than a year before the prison abuse scandal broke in Iraq -- according to a letter a senior Justice Department official sent to the Army's top criminal investigator.”

“At Guantanamo, a Prison Within a Prison” (washingtonpost.com, Dana Priest and Scott Higham, December 17, 2004): “Within the heavily guarded perimeters of the Defense Department's much-discussed Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, the CIA has maintained a detention facility for valuable al Qaeda captives that has never been mentioned in public, according to military officials and several current and former intelligence officers.”

“Briton Details U.S. Abuse at Guantanamo” (Associated Press, Jocelyn Gecker, December 17, 2004): “A Briton released from the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay told Europe's top human rights body Friday he was beaten, shackled, kept in a cramped cage and fed rotten food as part of ‘systematic abuse’ in American custody.”

“Pentagon Interrogators ‘Impersonated’ FBI- E-Mails” (Reuters, Will Dunham, December 20, 2004): “Defense Department interrogators impersonated FBI agents at the Guantanamo Bay prison to avoid being held accountable when they used ‘torture techniques’ on a prisoner held there in the U.S. war on terrorism, according to FBI e-mails…”

“Further Detainee Abuse Alleged” (washingtonpost.com, Carol D. Leonnig, December 26, 2004): “‘On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water,’ an unidentified [FBI] agent wrote on Aug. 2, 2004…‘Most times they had urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18, 24 hours or more.’”

“Doctors aided in detainee abuse, journal says” (Washington Post, Joe Stephens, January 6, 2005): “U.S. Army doctors violated the Geneva Conventions by helping intelligence officers carry out abusive interrogations at military detention centers, perhaps participating in torture, according to a report in…the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine.”

And certainly no discussion along these lines would be complete without mentioning “renditions,” which, according to Priest, are “used by the CIA…to transfer captives it picks up abroad to third countries willing to hold them indefinitely and without public proceedings. The transfers…depend on arrangements between the United States and other countries, such as Egypt, Jordan and Afghanistan, that agree to have local security services hold certain terrorism suspects in their facilities for interrogation by CIA and foreign liaison officers.

“The practice has been criticized by civil liberties groups and others, who point out that some of the countries have human rights records that are criticized by the State Department in annual reports.

“Renditions originated in the 1990s as a way of picking up criminals abroad, such as drug kingpins, and delivering them to courts in the United States or other countries. Since 2001, the practice has been used to make certain that detainees do not go to court or go back on the streets…

“‘The whole idea has become a corruption of renditions,’ said one CIA officer who has been involved in the practice. ‘It's not rendering to justice; it's kidnapping.’”

It’s times like these I discover even my very deep well of umbrage does not hold words adequate to properly express, uh, my very deep umbrage. (See what I mean?)

Perhaps, though, it is premature to worry about the well-being of big-hearted America’s much-ballyhooed moral center, since our soon-to-be new attorney general, Alberto “Burn ‘Em If You Caught ‘Em” Gonzales -- that’s right, the same Mr. Gonzales who, according to David Johnston and Neil A. Lewis of the New York Times, “personally requested” the aforementioned and now-infamous Justice Department memo -- has suddenly seen the light.

Yes, indeedy, the very same Mr. Gonzales who, per R. Jeffrey Smith and Dan Eggen of washingtonpost.com, “chaired the meetings” which led to the memo’s drafting and “included detailed descriptions of interrogation techniques such as ‘waterboarding,’ a tactic intended to make detainees feel as if they are drowning” to which Gonzales “raised no objections,” has now recanted.

Or something.

Admittedly, I was a bit anxious at first about Gonzales’ nomination for attorney general, what with his being smack dab at the center of the formation of America’s (literally) shocking new torture policy and all. You can imagine my relief, then, when he promised during his opening statement at his Senate Judiciary Committee nomination hearing: “I share [the president’s] resolve that torture and abuse will not be tolerated by this administration, and commit to you today that, if confirmed, I will ensure that the Department of Justice aggressively pursues those responsible for such abhorrent actions.”

I’ve gotta tell you, I’d never even considered such a thing as a torture mulligan! A do-over, in other words. How brilliant is that?? I’m just hoping this translates well in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and who knows where else, so that those we have tormented and abused and killed (well, too late for them, I guess) will know that the first time ‘round didn’t really count and that, starting right now, we, really, truly, honest-to-God (ours, of course), promise not to do it anymore.

Gonzales also made another interesting statement that led me to believe someone had viciously circulated unfounded rumors about him. To wit:

“Contrary to reports, I consider the Geneva Conventions neither obsolete nor quaint.”

I did some digging, and, honestly, I don’t how some of this character assassination stuff gets started. In a January 2002 “Memorandum for the President” Gonzales authored, here’s what he really said: “In my judgment, this new paradigm [of the ‘war against terrorism’] renders obsolete Geneva’s strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions…”

Now how’s that for twisting a guy’s words?

Of course, back here in civilization or whatever little remains of it in the wake of decisions made by folks like Gonzales, the truly twisted thing is that such a depraved liar could be considered qualified to be even a house dick, let alone America’s top cop. (Not that there’s anything wrong with being a house dick because there isn’t and furthermore, if I belonged to the house dick union I would do everything in my power to blackball Gonzales if he started hangin’ around the union hall lookin’ for employment after AIBF [America’s Inevitable Big Fall].)

So, let’s see: Lifetime detainments, secret prisons, torture, doctors who assist in torture, renditions…yep, we got yer American values right here, all right, all courtesy of the right.

Normally, this might be where I’d rail against Il Dunce and his corner men. Not today, because I’d just like to stipulate for the record the Bushies are outright evil and fascism is upon us. Thank you, your honor.

No, my targets del dia are American citizens, specifically the ones who remain silent about U.S. neo-barbarity. It is no secret America now routinely tortures people and seeks to imprison them for life, as every one of the articles cited earlier is from the corporate media. It’s painfully true one can’t expect the whoreporate newsies to dig too deep, but when the subject is America committing torture in any capacity, what more is needed: a fair and balanced panel discussion on the under-appreciated merits of the rack?

Any one of those articles -- hell, just about any one of those headlines -- should be enough to thunderously peel the lost-liberty bell for even the most tone-deaf of Americans, and every single citizen of this country should be instantly and evermore repulsed by the thought of a president authorizing, or the U.S. engaging in, torture.

But, heil nein. Instead, we have tens of millions of self-proclaimed patriots who, by voicing no opposition, give implicit permission to those in position to press their mission: torture, disappearing, and rendition.

It’s become quite commonplace anymore, as horrors emanate non-stop from this administration, to hear people say America is increasingly becoming less distinguishable from those who really do wish it harm.

Such a sentiment may be understandable, but it’s also wrong. America is not becoming anything.

A man who steals a stallion is not turning into a horse thief; he is a horse thief. A nation that tortures people…well, you get the idea. Too catastrophically bad for freedom and plain human decency that millions of other people in this country don’t.

J. Kenneth Blackwell: A Man All for Democracy, Except, Uh, When He’s Not

Read the following two items carefully because there is a quiz afterwards:

1) From Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell’s op-ed, Cincinnati Post, December 8, 2004: “No, Ohio’s system of elections is not perfect…I look forward to working to improve it with those who have constructive proposals…”

2) From Associated Press, December 27, 2004: “[Blackwell], who declared President Bush the official winner in Ohio, is seeking a court order to keep himself from being interviewed as part of a court challenge of the Nov. 2 vote.”

OK, ready? Here goes: Pick the real J. Kenneth Stonewall -- er, Blackwell. (Hint: The answer is not an odd number.)

How quickly the worm turns (often, this is just an analogy): Secretary Blackout stayed pretty congenial on MSNBC’s Countdown on November 29 when Keith Olbermann asked about Ohio’s then-upcoming recount (although he did froth a bit over Jesse Jackson, who had had the audacity to publicly question Ohio’s voting process the previous day. Secretary Blockwell asserted that “Jackson has not had the courage or the credibility to run and get elected to dog catcher,” which got me to thinkin’: in Ohio, are Diebold machines used in that contest?)

But overall, the secretary was co-operative and pleasant.

However, as Maureen Dowd points out in her book Bushworld: “The Bushes are always gracious, until they need to go ugly.” For a non-relative, Secretary Blackheart is about as Bushy as they come: he co-chaired Ohio’s Bush/Cheney re-selection campaign. And now he’s got his own ugly going.

‘Tain’t surprising: The real study in human (or with today’s GOP, demon) nature comes when the pressure’s on, and Secretary Blockall must be feeling some; he’s got Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro (a Republican, of course) running interference on the aforementioned lawsuit spearheaded by attorney Cliff Arnebeck. (I was going to make a crack here about the AG’s surname’s obvious Bush-like connotations -- you know, like Mr. “Petro-chemical” or “the oily Mr. Petro” -- but backed off because I didn’t want to take any cheap shots.)

The AP article again: “Petro…said the voters ‘are not trying to actually contest the presidential election but are merely using this litigation to cast public doubt on the voting system of the State of Ohio without a shred of evidence.’”

Mr. Petro does have a point, since there literally isn’t a shred of evidence -- there are lots of shreds, a few of which the article mentions: “long lines, a shortage of voting machines in minority precincts and problems with computer equipment.” As far as “cast[ing] public doubt” (and plenty of private scorn) on Ohio’s electoral system, I’d say Mr. Petro’s home state has done a bang-up job of that all by its lonesome.

But, hey. Maybe I’m just engaging in “frivolous conduct,” the sort of behavior of which Secretary Blockhead, per AP, “accused 37 voters challenging the results” of exhibiting. (He also harrumphed that the troublemakers were making “abusive and unnecessary requests of elections officials around the state.”)

If trying to get to the bottom of what really happened in the Buckeye State on November 2 is somehow “frivolous conduct,” then methinks there was a whole lotta frivolity goin’ on’ that particular day and verrryyyyyy long evening (only for queued voters in Democratic precincts, though). To those mentioned above, I’ve added just a few other frivolities: the amazing automatic votes-subtracting/adding voting machines; Diebold’s chief executive and board chairman Walden “Wally” O’Dell promising in September 2003 “to [help] Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president”; the curious exit polling data (fine for the Ukraine, nyet for America); and post-election: the Triad Systems employee who fiddled with one of his company’s machines before the Hocking County recount; the still-unexplained bizarre “Warren County lockdown” (if nothing else, it’s a great bluegrass song title); and the denial of voting records access to election observers in Greene County, supposedly per the direction of, yep, you know who. (I’d list more, but I want to keep the piece under 100,000 words.)

And still Secretary Blacksick audaciously leads a Washington Times op-ed, in highest Kafkaesque style and apparently straight of face, with: “The electoral system in Ohio worked well on Nov 2…”

This is where we traditionally ask: “Do Republicans think we’re really that stupid??” That, I can’t answer, but they most assuredly believe Americans are ill-informed, with excellent reason: ‘cause most are (if informed at all).

Those who await the U.S. corporate media to awaken and finally carry this story face a severe disappointment, because it ain’t gonna happen. The media and government have been seriously involved in a long-running incestuous relationship and are way too far-gone to serve anyone or anything but their own perverted self-interests.

This is all so nauseatingly familiar; I mean, has it really been four years since we last participated in America’s now-established quadrennial Post-Stolen Election Obfuscation Olympics? ‘Cause it’s seemed more like twenty since we defeated Dubya the first go-round. Time flies not when you’re under his thumb.

It is up to us to get out from under that huge, oppressive digit by giving its owner a big, fat finger of our own. Concurrently, we must jettison dismissive, corrupt politicians like J. Kenneth Blockade who demonstrably don’t give a cat’s wet whisker about American democracy; otherwise, real American traditional values laid out so wondrously in the Constitution are history.

We need a senator to sign an objection to Ohio’s (or any other state’s) electoral votes during the votes’ January 6 reading during a joint congressional session. Reportedly, some representatives are already on board, but we’re still a senator shy. I’ll (again) be sending emails off to mine. You?

Admittedly, even if an objection is tendered, it’s unlikely to stop Dubya’s re-coronation. But, while the work continues on proving the fraud beyond doubt, it would send a clear message to frauds like J. Kenneth Blackwell and others of his ilk that we won’t stop until he and the rest of them are down for the (re)count.

Copyright © 2004 Mark Drolette. All rights reserved.