Daily Kos :: There will be a recount of the presidential vote in Ohio!!

Dancing in the streets of Ohio!!!



Daily Kos :: There will be a recount of the presidential vote in Ohio!!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NOVEMBER 15, 2004
12:46 PM
CONTACT: Green Party of the United States
Blair Bobier, Media Director, 541-929-5755

Recount in Ohio A Sure Thing; Green Party Campaign Raises $150,000 in 4 Days, Shifts Gears to Phase II

WASHINGTON -- November 15 -- There will be a recount of the presidential vote in Ohio.

On Thursday, David Cobb, the Green Party's 2004 presidential candidate, announced his intention to seek a recount of the vote in Ohio. Since the required fee for a statewide recount is $113,600, the only question was whether that money could be raised in time to meet the filing deadline. That question has been answered.

Diaries :: pf99's diary ::

"Thanks to the thousands of people who have contributed to this effort, we can say with certainty that there will be a recount in Ohio," said Blair Bobier, Media Director for the Cobb-LaMarche campaign.

"The grassroots support for the recount has been astounding. The donations have come in fast and furiously, with the vast majority in the $10-$50 range, allowing us to meet our goal for the first phase of the recount effort in only four days," said Bobier.

Bobier said the campaign is still raising money for the next phase of the recount effort which will be recruiting, training and mobilizing volunteers to monitor the actual recount.

The Ohio presidential election was marred by numerous press and independent reports of mis-marked and discarded ballots, problems with electronic voting machines and the targeted disenfranchisement of African American voters. A number of citizens' groups and voting rights organizations are holding the second of two hearings today in Columbus, Ohio, to take testimony from voters, poll watchers and election experts about problems with the Ohio vote.

The winner is...

WorkingForChange-Fiore presents: The winner is...

Patriot act extends to blogs critical of government

An article in the Village Voice highlights a win for American values and liberty as a particularly heinous part of the Patriot Act has been struck down by a Federal District Judge. But it is also offers a chilling reminder of just how far reaching and anti-American this act really is.

'The provision we challenged [that the judge struck down],' says Jaffer, 'allows the FBI to issue NSLs against 'wire or electronic service communication providers.' Telephone companies and Internet service providers [are included.]' As Judge Marrero noted, the FBI could also use an NSL 'to discern the identity of someone whose anonymous web log, or 'blog,' is critical of the Government.'

Jaffer adds that by requiring information from telephone companies and Internet providers, 'The FBI could . . . effectively obtain a political organization's membership list, like the NAACP or the ACLU, [and could] obtain the names of people with whom a journalist has communicated over the Internet.'

Furthermore - dig this - every National Security Letter comes with a gag order. The recipients are forbidden to tell any other person that the FBI has demanded this information, and can't even tell their lawyers that the long hand of the government is scooping up their data.

As Judge Marrero said in his decision, this omnivorous invasion of privacy is so broad that it mandates this gag rule 'in every case, to every person, in perpetuity, with no vehicle for the ban to ever be lifted from the recipient.'

Read that again. The abuses are so outrageous and so broad it is nothing less than an affront to our constitution. It's an affront to every red blooded, liberty loving American. Luckily, one of those pesky judges Ashcroft hates so much struck down this provision. We all need to watch this case as it moves up the courts. Bush and his likely new AG Gonzales are big advocates of the PA, so look for them to fight for this one. We must fight back to make sure this anti-liberty, un-American piece of legislation is ends up where it belongs or else we make a mockery of the words 'liberty and justice for all.'"

The Village Voice: Nation: Liberty Beat: Cuffing Bush and the FBI by Nat Hentoff

Bush's re-election ensures that he and John Ashcroft's designated successor, Alberto Gonzales, will press Congress hard to retain the Patriot Act in its entirety, and enact a Patriot Act II that will further disable the Constitution.

There are two primary roadblocks to further assaults on our liberties. Despite continued Republican control of Congress, there is still a firm alliance there between civil-liberties Democrats and conservative Republican libertarians, especially in the Senate. That coalition will continue to oppose Bush's determination to fight the Patriot Act's 'sunset clause,' which permits reconsideration of parts of the act by December 2005.

During the presidential campaign, Bush repeatedly urged Congress to ignore the 'sunset clause' and enshrine the Patriot Act permanently. The Bill of Rights Defense Committee resolutions in nearly 400 cities and towns, and four state legislatures, will keep the pressure on Congress to resist this expansion of executive powers.

Our second hope is the awakening lower federal courts, which are now challenging sections of the Patriot Act. But even if these judicial curbs on Bush and Ashcroft grow, any such victories can be overturned by the Supreme Court, to which Bush is going to make at least one appointment, and possibly more, by the end of his second term.

These are obviously perilous times for constitutional freedoms. But attention should be paid to the strongest blow yet against Bush and the Patriot Act"

Furthermore—dig this—every National Security Letter comes with a gag order. The recipients are forbidden to tell any other person that the FBI has demanded this information, and can't even tell their lawyers that the long hand of the government is scooping up their data.

As Judge Marrero said in his decision, this omnivorous invasion of privacy is so broad that it mandates this gag rule "in every case, to every person, in perpetuity, with no vehicle for the ban to ever be lifted from the recipient."

The scope of this court's setback to Big Brothers Bush, Mueller, and Ashcroft is underlined by Jaffer's point that if Judge Marrero's decision is upheld, it could "apply with equal force" to other dimensions of National Security Letters that allow the FBI to get personal information from financial institutions, including credit card companies and banks.

Furthermore, the much publicized and dreaded section 215 of the Patriot Act, which gives the FBI authority to search your personal data from your visits to libraries, bookstores, and other sources of information, could also be overturned.

In striking down the noxious National Security Letters section 505 of the Patriot Act, Marrero wrote: "Under the mantle of secrecy, the self-preservation that ordinarily impels our government to censorship and secrecy may potentially be turned on ourselves as a weapon of self-destruction . . . "

Marrero then emphasized a truth that ought to be kept in mind as George W. Bush, having won the popular vote, unlike in 2000, uses national security even more forcefully against the Constitution. Judge Marrero warns:

"Sometimes a right, once extinguished, may be gone for good." (Emphasis added.)

But for now, as Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News Channel's resident—and admirable—constitutional analyst, says of the Marrero decision: "This stops the FBI from writing their own warrants."

During the campaign, John Kerry said nary a word about National Security Letters.

GOP and the Moderates

Daily Kos :: Anne Frank to the Courtesy Phone

A letter from the 21st Century...

Dear Anne Frank,

The was one thing I was never able to puzzle out, about your story. One thing I always wanted to ask. Why didn't you leave? When things got bad. Why did you stay? Why didn't your father take you all and flee to America. You had the money. At the first sign of trouble why weren't you gone?

That question has loomed so large in my mind, lately. Because in the past few weeks I think I might finally be understanding why you simply stood, helpless, and were eaten up.

You see, I've always looked back with the luxury of seeing what happened to you. I can see the warning signs, connect the dots, and realize what was evidence and what wasn't. But when Otto, your father, looked at the same evidence, at the time, it must have been confusing. He must have wanted to see it in the best light -not wanting to dissolve into pessimism or panic unnecessarily.

After all, it was just after the bloodiest war in history. So many people thought that after the Great War, another war was unthinkable. When Hitler rose to power in Germany, many saw a symbol of strength - the rebirth of a nation under a leader who would not flinch in the face of adversity. And for the Jews of Holland, well, as those things went, 1932 was a time when things had never been any better, historically speaking. The idea that things could slide into a horror undreamt of even in the bloody Middle Ages must have been ludicrous.

How did it start, Anne? I really need to know this. When the Germans first came. When did you and your father see it for what it really was?

You didn't have television, I know, but were radio programs censored? Did you assume that the silence of your advocates was a strategy - that they were choosing their battles wisely? Did you think that the majority of your neighbors would never let it happen? Did you ignore the hateful rhetoric as the ravings of a few extremists? Did you think if you stayed you would help to keep things sane? And when they took away your civil liberties, did you think, "That's okay. We have nothing to hide, anyway, this is targeting the criminals".

Did you think to yourselves, "We can march in the streets when it really gets bad." And when it did get bad, did your rich save themselves, and your advocates become fearful and silent, and were your leaders arrested as extremists?

And when they took some away, the gypsies and the homosexuals and the political agitators, without trial or explanation, did you think, "Well, they must be bad people - and if they are not, they will be set free"? And did you think, "this is keeping us safer, in the end." When you realized there were more, did you stay quiet because you thought it would end? Or because you didn't want them to hear you?

Anne, you once wrote ""I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are still truly good at heart..."

Anne, is that why you are dead?

Kos Diaries :: darcyjae's diary ::

God save the queen ?

ThisisLondon

Combat brigade may help secure inauguration

# Combat brigade may help secure inauguration
Omaha World-Herald - Nov 07 10:20 PM
WASHINGTON - An unprecedented level of security will frame President Bush's second inauguration, with officials planning to use thousands of police from across the country, new screening technology for inaugural guests and a military contingent that could include a combat brigade of up to 4,000 troops.
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_np=0&u_pg=54&u_sid=1252479

# Unprecedented inauguration security plans
The Washington Times - Nov 07 9:12 AM
WASHINGTON, DC, Nov. 7 (UPI) -- Security, always a concern in Washington, will be at unprecedented levels for President Bush's second inauguration Jan. 20 -- possibly including 4,000 troops.
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20041107-114046-3762r.htm

# Security layers padded for Bush's inauguration
Miami Herald - Nov 08 12:22 AM
WASHINGTON, D.C.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/10125371.htm?1c

# Inauguration security will be unprecedented
The Philadelphia Inquirer - Nov 08 12:21 AM
It will be the first since 9/11. About 2,000 out-of-town officers, military personnel, chemical sensors and new screening technology will be deployed.

Video of Tanks at anti-war protest in LA Nov 9, 2004

LA, November 9 2004 At 7:50 PM

two armored tanks showed up at an anti-war protest in front of the federal building in Westwood. The tanks circled the block twice, the second time parking themselves in the street and directly in front of the area where most of the protesters were gathered. Enraged, some of the people attempted to block the tanks, but police quickly cleared the street. The people continued to protest the presence of the tanks, but about ten minutes the tanks drove off. It is unclear as to why the tanks were deployed to this location.

Crooks and Liars

Crooks and Liars: "Keith Olbermann on Voter Irregularities: Part 1

Keith talks about the new Cincinnati Enquirer article and a host of other voter problems in Ohio and Florida.

Video

Keith Olbermann on Voter Irregularities: Part II

Interview with John Conyers. A senior member in the House of Representatives that was elected by his congressional colleagues to lead the Democratic side of the pivotal House Committee on the Judiciary.

Video