Sunday, October 15, 2006

Why Are These Men Smiling?

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Michael Abramowitz, in today's Washington Post, writes that President Bush and trusted pit bull, Karl Rove, seem convinced that their House and Senate majorities will remain secure after this coming election.

Abramowitz writes:
Amid widespread panic in the Republican establishment about the coming midterm elections, there are two people whose confidence about GOP prospects strikes even their closest allies as almost inexplicably upbeat: President Bush and his top political adviser, Karl Rove.

Some Republicans on Capitol Hill are bracing for losses of 25 House seats or more. But party operatives say Rove is predicting that, at worst, Republicans will lose only 8 to 10 seats -- shy of the 15-seat threshold that would cede control to Democrats for the first time since the 1994 elections and probably hobble the balance of Bush's second term.

In the Senate, Rove and associates believe, a Democratic victory would require the opposition to "run the table," as one official put it, to pick up the necessary six seats -- a prospect the White House seems to regard as nearly inconceivable.

So, what exactly does Karl Rove know that we don't?

2 things concern me.

First, as I have previously blogged, Democrats are allowing themselves to be severely outspent in the most competitive races. If we manage to win those seats in question, it will be despite the handicap of being bludgeoned by more numerous GOP political ads.

Second, I question the integrity of the entire electoral process.

Robert Kennedy Jr., Mark Crispin Miller, The Brad Blog and others have warned about past efforts to manipulate election results.

If you are not aware of the prior writings, please click on the above hyperlinks to read what they have to say.

Charges of election fraud and deliberate voter disenfranchisement have not been cast frivolously. They have been accompanied by exhaustive references to support those claims. A reading of "Fooled Again," by Miller, or Kennedy's essay in Rolling Stone, as just 2 examples, are backed up with a plethora of supportive facts.

Unfortunately, when this important questioning of the process is initiated, the right-wing, and their willing accomplices in the media, simply scream 'paranoia' and the discussion comes to an end. One rarely hears specific charges rebutted. Instead, we are treated to charges that Democrats allow dead people to vote and how everything allegedly balances out with irregularities on both sides.

As we head towards the mid-terms, I urge you to be reading about some of the tactics that have been used in the past and be prepared to respond if the same tactics are used in the upcoming elections.

Considering that the GOP base is supposed to be demoralized and hardly passionate about supporting their party, keep something in mind. If the GOP retains their majority, in direct contradiction to polling, especially exit polling, challenge them when they claim that their passionate base, and well-organized political machinery, is behind their victories.

For starters, if hackable voting machines without paper trails were used, demand that your representatives in Washington begin taking action to help ensure that the votes one casts is the vote that gets recorded.

To answer the question in my headline...Karl Rove and George W. Bush know that, despite major questions of voter fraud in '00 and '04, the Democrats never challenged the results. They crawled away with their tail between their legs.

I suspect they are smiling because they don't expect a challenge in '06 either.


Anonymous said...

For an alternate scenario, "tristero" at Hullabaloo, predicts that many of the races will be squeakers with the Dems putative victors. BUT the Reps will cry foul and demand so many recounts, they will bankrupt the Dems! (Has tristero been going to sleep with the audiobook of The Prince? Just asking...)

Another source, Senator John Conyers (MI-D), whose book What Went Wrong in Ohio?, contains sworn testimony taken in hearings held in Ohio, in Dec.2004, when he tried to get to the bottom of the Ohio Disaster. The book is comprehensive but dry (as most government documents are), but it is sourced so thoroughly, it can't be denied. The tragedy was compounded by the corrupt MSM that failed to report on it, thus conferring legitimacy on Bush's relection victory. (That sound you hear is me, gnashing my teeth!)


Anonymous said...

Scoot, your second scenario should be first or only. Diebold, ES&S, and Sequoia have not been hobbled or even exposed to the much needed scrutiny the MSM should be providing. Therefore, I predict only a published "attempt" at a Democratic landslide, i.e., Rove will allow only a gain in each house to project a suggestion of "legitimacy."

But, it won't matter. Rove is prepared to "Go to the Wall" in their plan for Eternal Repugnikon Rule. He will force Blood in the Streets if need be. Their desperation is palpable and overwhelming but to no ultimate good. Their "House" will inevitably self-destruct, consumed as it is with Their Power Mad leadership.

They will be replaced in the History books with large blank spaces.

scootmandubious said...

Hey Naomi, I've been gritting my teeth a bit too. I hadn't considered the root cause, though!

One of the true problems we face is that the msm does not report on issues of vital importance. How can we blame them when the Dems themselves are silent.

As for the vote fraud scenario, it may be the big story here, but Dems also need to be reminded that we have allowed the GOP to severely outspend us in this, the most vital of elections. That is why I bring it up.

It cannot be forgotten.

Anonymous said...

You folks need to put the crack pipes down! to think that the MSM would help out Bush in anyway demonstrates the insanity of your thinking. They hate him and you know it. Folks just refused to vote for a man who stabbed his fellow Americans in the back!

scootmandubious said...

There you go again...a typical neo-con response to a post that challenges George W. Bush.

Instead of making references to crack pipes and clearly false statements such as "the media hates George Bush and you know it' why not try something intelligent and back up your argument with specifics. Or did Fox and the RNC not provide you with talking points?

The media went far crazier obsessing over what Bill Clinton did with his pants down than they ever focused on even a single lie from this administration.

To ignore that is to ignore reality. Come to think of it, you sound well qualified to be in the Bush cabinet.

Would Clinton have gotten away with lying us into a war?

Give me a break.

Amish Trivedi said...

First of all, I thought you HAD to reject reality in order to be a Republican these days :)

I saw your post on HuffPo which links to this post of yours and I responded, but I don't think it's been posted yet.

Either way, I agree totally, and offer this: