THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH - BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
I AM THE ONE I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR.
Posted on 04/20/2008 4:30:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Like most members of the media, we here at Jossip firmly believe Barack Obama is going to win the Democratic primaries, and then usher in an era of change, unicorns, and free beer and candy for all Americans.
Shockingly, some people do not share this belief. One of them is Mark Crispin Miller, a professor of media studies at NYU, and author of The Bush Dyslexicon: Observations on a National Disorder, and Fooled Again to The Real Case for Electoral Reform. He is also the editor of an upcoming anthology on election fraud, Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy 2000-2008, which comes out next week, conveniently.
Since we haven’t written books on election fraud, and he has, we dispatched intern Anastasia to get the scoop on his zany ideas. The professor also shared his thoughts on the media’s coverage of the election and why even Heidi Montag can’t get him to vote for John McCain.
Full disclosure: Miller’s also Anastasia’s professor at some flea bag school called New York University. She’d like point out that she does not necessarily agree with his assertions and doesn’t want the Republican party to kill her in her sleep.
Anastasia Friscia: You’ve said in class that the Republicans would rather run against Hillary than Obama. What makes Hillary a more attractive opponent?
Mark Crispin Miller: She has very high negatives, in part because of the Republicans’ long propaganda drive against her (and, of course, against Bill Clinton, too). While Obama would appear to be a unifying figure, Hillary Clinton tends to polarize.
In any case, a contest between Clinton and McCain would suit the propaganda purposes of the Republicans, who would cast him as Rambo and her as “Hanoi Jane.”
Throughout the GOP’s campaign against the Clintons, there was, predictably, a lot of stuff about the Sixties: Bill’s opposition to the war in Vietnam, Hillary’s early work, as a lawyer, on the impeachment of Richard Nixon, and so on. So it would be a natural propaganda move to contrast McCain’s months in a North Vietnamese prison camp with Hillary’s (alleged) ties to the student left.
AF: You’ve also mentioned election fraud. What are the exact connections between Diebold voting machines and the Republican Party? What is the evidence that they’ve tampered with machines in the Democratic primaries?
MCM: It’s not just Diebold. It’s Diebold, ES&S and Hart InterCivic–the three biggest of such companies. Their ties to the GOP are many. In 2004, Wally O’Dell, CEO of Diebold, which is headquartered in Canton, Ohio, sent out a fundraising letter in which he pledged to do all in his power to deliver Ohio’s electoral vote to Bush.
For four years back in the Nineties, the CEO of ES&S was Chuck Hagel of Nebraska - who stepped down to run for the Senate from that state. (They used ES&S machines to count the vote in his two elections; and in both he did far better than expected!) And one of the main investors in Hart InterCivic is Tom Hicks, a top fundraiser for, and old friend of, George W. Bush.
All that is the least of it, however. The fact is that Republicans started all three companies, and hold the major management positions; and it’s been the Republicans primarily (although not exclusively) who have pushed to get the e-voting machines used nationwide.
As far as the Democratic primaries are concerned, there’s been a marked discrepancy between the unadjusted exit poll results and the official vote-counts in most of the big-state races, which have seen Hillary consistently do better than the exit polls predicted by some 7 percentage points. And there also was the weird outcome in the New Hampshire primary, in which she won where they counted ballots by machine by a little over 4 points, while Obama won where they counted ballots manually by over 6 points. Although the pundits trotted out all sorts of theories to account for the discrepancy, none of them hold up under close scrutiny.
AF: What is the larger Republican strategy for winning this election?
MCM: They’re less concerned with really winning a majority of votes than they are with generating a convincing rationale that will “explain” their “victory.” In other words, their strategy is actually to steal the race, not win it. If you take a look at what the Supreme Court and the Department of Justice have been doing, and also what the GOP in many states has been up to, you’ll find there’s been a major effort to eliminate as many Democratic votes as possible, whether by pre-emption or manipulation of the e-voting machinery.
AF: The media seem to love Obama. If election fraud has affected his chances of winning, why wouldn’t they cover it more thoroughly?
MCM: Well, they did begin to mention it after New Hampshire, but that was as far as they would go. They haven’t covered it because they never do, in any case–and it’s the same with him. He won’t talk about it either; although he did file a complaint against the Clintons over their egregious vote-suppression tactics in Nevada. The press, however, didn’t mention that complaint. [ed note: a Lexis-Nexis search for “obama AND clinton AND nevada AND suppression” from the past six months turns up four relevant articles—three from the Washington Post and one from an Australian paper] So it doesn’t matter whether or how much they like Obama. The fact is that they’re deep in denial over this whole problem, which by and large they simply can’t perceive.
AF: Can you elaborate on that? Why is there a denial of the problem? Has there been any coverage in alt-weeklies or blogs?
MCM: This has been the central problem from the start–the inability/refusal to face the awful truth, i.e., that the US today is not a democratic country, and that its ruling party is authoritarian: much closer to fascism than conservatism. Conservatism is about limited government, fiscal prudence and a refusal, or reluctance, to interfere in the affairs of other nations. The Bush regime is obviously not at all conservative in that sense: on the contrary. While true conservatives believe deeply in our Constitutional ideals, this government has deprived Americans of their inalienable rights–not the least of which is the right to vote, as Tom Paine once noted.
That’s an enormous pill to swallow; and while a lot of people, at the grass-roots level, can perceive, or intuit, that this has happened, the Establishment can’t do it. By “Establishment” I mean, basically, the government, the two parties and the mainstream media (and, for that matter, much of the left/liberal press as well). While the media can, and often does, deal with important scandals, they always shy away from those that, if allowed to resonate, would shake the very basis of our system. The Bush Republicans’ subversion of our voting system–and the Democrats’ general acquiescence in that crime–is certainly the most important scandal of them all, and therefore one that the media will not even acknowledge, much less investigate.
AF: Who do you support?
MCM: I’ll support whichever Democrat ends up facing John McCain, because I think the GOP today is an extremely dangerous party, dominated by an extremist fringe; and I think McCain is, frankly, nuts, with a pathological appetite for war, and, on the economy, about as smart as Herbert Hoover. He’s also thrown himself into the arms of the most toxic theocratic clerics on the scene today, which only makes him even riskier.
Having said that, I must say also that I’m not a fervent follower of Clinton or Obama. As he appears to be the choice of grass-roots Democrats, however, and as his campaign is entirely innocent of fraud or any sort of vote suppression, I would certainly support him more enthusiastically than I could her. But he and she are centrists, who have each to some degree enabled the long crime spree of the Bush regime; and so I’m basically lukewarm about the two of them, and about the Democratic Party overall.
For now, however, we must do all we can do to bust the Bush regime; and that won’t happen under Pres. McCain. (It probably won’t happen under either of the Democrats, either, but we don’t know that yet.)
Translation: Any time a Republican candidate wins the Presidency, the election is stolen!
Now they just have to figure out an excuse for their existence. There really is none. The guy didn’t answer the question, “What is the evidence that they’ve tampered with machines in the Democratic primaries?”
Show me the evidence that the Republicans or Diebold have tampered with the 2008 Dem primaries. Idiots.
At last! A liberal writing on a subject he knows!
“In any case, a contest between Clinton and McCain would suit the propaganda purposes of the Republicans, who would cast him as Rambo and her as “Hanoi Jane.””
Paranoid, archaic, 9/10 liberal thinking.
She is not “Hanoi Jane.” She’s “Tuzla Hillary.”
I am truly surprised that lib brains don't sometimes just detonate themselves.
Translation: Any time a Republican candidate wins the Presidency, the election is stolen!
::::::
Yes — and stuffing ballot boxes, preventing the military from voting, corrupting liberal judges to change election rules illegally, and registering and counting votes from dead people (several times) — IS A CLEAN LIBERAL WIN !!!
Consider this thought.
The democrats can’t even run their own primaries/caucus without recounts, voter disenfranchisement, do-over possibilities, and super-delegate non-sense.
Just wait until the convention. Here is how the delegate breakdown works.
Obama - 1850-1900 (approx.)
Clinton - 1750-1800 (approx.)
Present - 350 (approx.)
Edwards - 26
No-one has 2025 on the first ballot. The present votes are Michigan and Florida disqualified delegates. After the first ballot, ALL delegates because un-pledged and who will get talked into, bribed, extorted, blackmailed, gone missing (i.e. concrete tied to feet and tossed into the Colorado river)?
The democrats have no business complaining about the general election when their own system make the mafia look honest!!
What he meant to say, but didn't, (due to an oversight, I'm sure) is that the Republicans are trying to remove all the dead people, dogs, and otherwise non-existent registrants from the voter rolls.
It's either that or the voters are just stupid and shouldn't be allowed to vote if they don't know that democrats are better for them.
He is pal-ling around with Farrakhan? That's a surprise...
“natural propaganda move to contrast McCain’s months in a North Vietnamese prison camp”
I suppose 5 1/2 years in a NVA prison could be described as “months”.
.....Bob
With democrat politicians, it doesn't need to be a truthful statement it just needs to be a statement made to sway mindset.
They just need to be incompetent and stupid voters....
There'll be a glut of this stuff once they arrive at their convention and start the real backstabbing and rioting.
Democrats are, as it turns out, a bunch of whiners.
'Millennial Generation' Set to Rock Vote - Carla Marinucci, SF Chronicle
- Obama Campaign Not Above Tit-for-Tat Politics - John Dickerson, Slate
- Nailbiting Time for Obama Fans - Jennifer Rubin, Contentions
- Whither McCain's 'Straight Talk'? - Anna Quindlen, Newsweek
- Brush It Off: Obama's Hip-Hop Moment - Maureen Dowd, New York Times
- Will Clinton's 'Republican' Tactics Backfire? - Sarah Baxter, Sunday Times
- Will McCain's Temper Become an Issue? - Michael Leahy, Washington Post
- The Case for Obama and Clinton - John Kerry & Ed Rendell, Newsweek
- Elite Democrats Lose - Salena Zito, Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
- The Character Attacks Begin - Michael Crowley, The Observer
- About Obama's Terrorist Acquaintance - Steve Chapman, Chicago Tribune
- Why Did He Stick by Tony Rezko? - David Ignatius, Washington Post
- Obama: Can't 'Swift Boat' Me - M. Hosenball and M. Isikoff, Newsweek
- McCain Overcomes Rank-and-File Concerns - David Paul Kuhn, The Politico
- Still No Clarity on Dem Exit Strategies - Trudy Rubin, Philly Inquirer
- When to Talk to Thugs - New York Post
- Senator McCain Digs In - New York Times
- Obama Fights on Two Fronts - Shailagh Murray and Perry Bacon, Wash Post
- The Rules Change for Obama - Michael Barone, US News & World Report
- Obama's Secret Weapon: The Media - John Harris & Jim VandeHei, Politico
- God and Guns? Heck, Yes - Mark Steyn, Orange County Register
- Conservatives Perfect Working-Class PC - Jonathan Chait, New Republic
- The Democrats' Road Map to Defeat - Bob Herbert, New York Times
- Why Not Blame Obama? - Larry Kudlow, RealClearPolitics
- How to Pick a VP - Carl Leubsdorf, Dallas Morning News
- Damage From Clinton's Attacks - Eleanor Clift, Newsweek
- How Obama Fell to Earth - David Brooks, New York Times
- The First 21st-Century Campaign - Ronald Brownstein, National Journal
- Delegates to Dean: Make Us - Jay Cost, RealClearPolitics
- Hillary Shamelessly Won't Let It Go - Mary Mitchell, Chicago Sun-Times
- Bowling for Pennsylvania - Gaiutra Bahadur, The Nation
- The Obama Aesthetic - Thomas Lifson, American Thinker
- The End of Two-Party System? - Reed Galen, RealClearPolitics
- Election Magnifies Internet's Media Role - John Ibbitson, Globe and Mail
- Dem Candidates Scoring with 'Bitter' Voters - Stuart Rothenberg, Roll Call
- McCain Bucks Congress' Waste of Dollars - Steve Huntley, Chicago ST
- Obama's Bitter Lesson - Karen Tumulty, Time
- Oblivious to Obama-gates Relevancy - David Limbaugh, Townhall
- McCain Readies Unorthodox Campaign - Jonathan Martin, The Politico
- Will the Web Power Dems Past McCain? - Scherer & Newton-Small, Time
- Obama's 'Bitter' Misstep - Kimberley Strassel, Wall Street Journal
- Stooping to Politics About Nothing - Margaret Carlson, Bloomberg
- Obama '08 Looks More and More Like Kerry '04 - Michael Hirsh, Newsweek
- William Ayers, Tom Coburn & Barack Obama - Byron York, The Hill
- How Obama and Ayers Became News - Joanna Weiss, Boston Globe
- Hillary Fades, While McCain Watches - Peggy Noonan, Wall St. Journal
- Obama Should Stop Bashing The Clinton Years - Paul Krugman, NY Times
- Bush's Legacy on Global Warming - Christian Science Monitor
- Obama Shaken, Rattled, and Rolled - Dick Polman, American Debate
- ABC Proves Obama's Point About Petty Politics - Michael Grunwald, Time
- The Debate Was About Convincing Superdelegates - Stephen Spruiell, NRO
- What About the Concerns of Pennsylvanians? - Will Bunch, Attytood
- John McCain Was the Big Winner - Philip Klein, The Ameican Spectator
- How Will McCain Handle 'Are You Better Off'? - Mort Kondracke, Roll Call
- Dems Sue for Peace in Culture Wars - Daniel Henninger, Wall Street Journal
- Still, No Satisfaction for Clinton's Sisterhood - Joan Vennochi, Boston Globe
- Racial-Preference Ballots Go National - Harry Stein, City Journal
- Obama Gets the Hillary Treatment - Steve Kornacki, New York Observer
- A Shameful Night for the U.S. Media - Greg Mitchell, Huffington Post
- Democrats Debate Republican Talking Points - John Nichols, The Nation
- Obama's Bipartisan Aims, Party-Line Votes - Ariel Sabar, CS Monitor
- Gibson, Stephanopoulos Lose Debate - Matthew Rothschild, The Progressive
- Clinton and the Feminist Reawakening - Amanda Fortini, New York Magazine
- Obama and Economic Opportunity - Jack Kemp, Wall Street Journal
- Democrats Leading McCain in 'Purple' States - Jeffrey Jones, Gallup
- Would Secretary of Poverty Help the Poor? - Michael Medved, Townhall
- Tough Questions Throw Both Off Message - Peter Canellos, Boston Globe
- Obama: Some Too 'Obsessed' with What We Say - Roger Simon, Politico
- Clinton Wins, Barely, but Will It Matter? - John Dickerson, Slate
- Honeymoon is Over for Obama - Michael Goodwin, New York Daily News
- In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC - Tom Shales, Washington Post
- Is It ABC's Fault the Dems Looked Bad? - David Brooks, New York Times
- Casualties of the Campaign - Victor Davis Hanson, RealClearPolitics
- Are Americans Unusually Stupid? - Robert Scheer, San Francisco Chronicle
- A Sociology Lesson from Obama - Marie Cocco, Indianapolis Star
- Who's Bitter Now? - Larry Bartels, New York Times
- McCain Can Win by Going Populist - Dick Morris, The Hill
- McCain's Economics: Pass the Dramamine - Froma Harrop, RealClearPolitics
- The Democrats and Gun Control - David Kopel, Wall Street Journal
- McCain Should Get Lift From Olympics - Steven Stark, RealClearSports
- Obama and Clinton Battle on - The Economist
- What's the Matter With Democrats? - George Packer, The New Yorker
- What Does 'Bitter' Reveal? - Jay Cost, RealClearPolitics
- Obama Takes Hits but Hasn't Lost Ground - Michael Tomasky, Guardian
- It's Hard to Shoo Away Aroma of Elitism - Maureen Dowd, New York Times
- Economic Theme Missing from McCain - Ross Douthat, The Atlantic
- Dems' Purgatory Of Nomentum - Reid Wilson, Politics Nation
- Obama Caves! Flag Pin Returns - Andrew Malcolm, Los Angeles Times
- Previewing Tonight's Debate - Chris Cillizza, Washington Post
- How Obama Should Hit Back at Clinton - Dick Polman, American Debate
- McCain Can Win By Going Populist - Dick Morris, The Hill
- Right Fight, Wrong Word - Dan Schnur, New York Times
- Of Bitterness and Boilermakers - Barbara Ehrenreich, Slate
- Dems Enter the Dead Zone - Michael Goodwin, New York Daily News
- Clinton's Last Chance: Go Negative - Doug Schoen, Washington Post
- Reverse Snobbery on the Campaign Trail - Clarence Page, Chicago Tribune
- The Politics of Bitterness - Michael Gerson, Washington Post
- Dems Shoot For June Solution - Scot Lehigh, Boston Globe
- McCain-omics - Wall Street Journal
- Obama's Moment of Truth - San Francisco Chronicle
I always feel like a minority when I have the thoughts this kind of statement provokes.
Iowa was (imo) a shock, in that middle American flyover would caucus for a (relatively) unknown black man.
Then came New Hampshire and all that crying and I would bake cookies, but this means so much to me, BS.
The x42 machine saw that a real good 'race' was beginning to develope, and there was no need to bring out the projected Republicans' dishonesty, when it appeared like the votes had been stacked with easily bussed in voters.
IMO, it's too late to play a voter fraud card, because too much is in the mix that would make a charge of voter fraud look like sour grapes.
But I believe it was part of the plan about 6 months ago.
I knew they were delusional when I read...
Like most members of the media, we here at Jossip firmly believe Barack Obama is going to win the Democratic primaries, and then usher in an era of change, unicorns, and free beer and candy for all Americans.
Then it just got better and better...
Ya know, zany is kinds cute, and crackpot has it’s moments but the liberal democrats are beyond all that, waaaaay beyond!!!
t.
It might come as a surpise to the professor but most major management jobs at most companies are held by Republicans because for profit companies need real world people.
On the other hand most democrats live in make believe worlds like government, theater, universities, unions were you do not have to make a profit.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.