Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« October 2011 »
S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
You are not logged in. Log in
Politicsland
Tuesday, 12 October 2004
Election laws changed to get Bush on ballot
In the world of work there are deadlines. When you are assigned a project you are expected to get it done by a specific time. Can you extend the deadline? Sure. There are many factors to extend a deadline. Death in the family and personal illness are very acceptable reasons. Assorted delays associated with a big project. What about extending the deadline so you can have a party? Is that a reason your boss will accept to extend a deadline? Heck no. So why have election laws been changed so George W. Bush can accept his nomination in September? Yup, the deadlines in several states have been moved in order for Bush to get his name on the ballot. Without those changes he would have to be a write-in candidate.
The GOP chose to hold their convention late August and early September in New York City and the excuse the republicans gave for such a late convention was Olympic coverage. They did not want to have a convention during the Olympics. For some reason the 1996 Democratic and Republican conventions were held without any interference from the Olympics and election laws didn't have to be changed. The real reason the convention was held so late this year was to capitalize on 9/11 and the photo-ops that will be available. "Then reality set in, in the form of victim's families who rightly said," "We don't want ground zero to be politicized." It was too late to change the dates so the convention had to go on and the risk of Bush not being on the ballot was for nothing. Or was it? Bush and his cohorts have still been able to invoke 9/11 at every turn and he will count on the kindness of strangers to change the deadline to help him.
In some states the deadline to certify a presidential candidate for the ballot is the last day of August or first day of September, which was just a little too early for when Bush officially accepts his parties nomination. Washington DC, with its 3 electoral college votes has moved its deadline and Alabama with 9 electoral college votes pushed theirs off to a comfortable September 5th. Idaho with its 4 votes gave Bush a five-day grace period and Indiana with 11 did the same. California with 55 electoral college votes and West Virginia with 5 votes have also moved their deadline to accommodate Bush's convention party. Florida, the ?battleground? state that had so many problems in the 2000 election has given Bush a pass on the deadline law so the states 25 electoral votes are still in play for Bush.
Wouldn't it be nice to tell your boss "Hey, I'm having a party so I won't get my work done by the deadline?" and the boss says "Sure, we'll push the deadline back for ya!" We have six states that have changed their laws for one man. We should question if this is not only ethical but also legal. Would those states change other deadlines set by state law for other citizens or just one citizen? I doubt that very much. So why is Bush getting laws changed to benefit just him? We know he has lived a privileged life surviving from one failed business to another with the help of family friends but now we have state legislatures making sure he gets what he needs.
You might wonder why the electoral college numbers are mentioned. States with a total of 112 electoral college votes gave Bush an early Christmas present and changed laws so the his supporters need not write in his name on November 2nd. How would it affect the election if he were a write-in? The race is close as it was in 2000 and the loss of a state with even 4 electoral votes means a sure defeat. Would Bush be able to count on his supporters to fill out a write-in ballot? He should ask that the laws stand as-is and trust his loyal followers.

Posted by blog2/politicsland at 9:30 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post
Treason in the White House
An important Grand Jury investigation is going on right now that when concluded will give us a view of the worst scandal of the Bush Administration. Well so far anyway. Last year in response to her husband's outspokenness about Bush, Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA NOC agent working on tracking weapons of mass destruction was exposed by right-wing columnist Robert Novak. A NOC agent is "non-official cover" which means the agent can in no way be traced back to the CIA or government agency. They are on their own if they are caught. The NOC agents are specially trained and they are a select few who do some of the most dangerous work.
Novak admits that persons within the Bush White House gave him Plame's name. Not only was a NOC agent exposed but in a subsequent article, Novak also exposed the name of the front company, which she and other agents used as a cover when doing their job. Her name was released to Novak to intimidate her husband Ambassador Joseph Wilson from speaking out further. There are few people with access to the names of CIA NOC agents and those people would have to be high up in the administration with top-level security clearance. Because the CIA can never reveal their assets, we will never know what damage has been done to our intelligence gathering and security. We will never know how many sources and informants have lost their lives because their contact has been exposed.
Who was behind what could only be called treason? How far up does it go? And when did Bush know about it? Both Bush and Cheney have "lawyered up" with criminal defense attorneys. Bush was questioned regarding recently but remarkably not under oath. He did have his criminal defense attorney present for the questioning. Colin Powell appeared before the Grand Jury not long ago to answer questions about conversations he had with Bush and just recently Air Force One phone logs have been subpoenaed. It has come to national television and print reporters being subpoenaed and questioned by the Grand Jury in an effort to capture the traitor.

Instead of wanting to get to the bottom of this breach of national security, the republican controlled congress would rather ignore it. Long Island Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) dismisses calling the leak a crime as "...off the mark" in an article in the fringe right-wing magazine Human Events. King cares little that Valerie Plame's life was put in danger along with other agents. He cares little that contacts and sources are now compromised. Peter King wants Ambassador Wilson to be investigated not the White House. King does not seem to understand exposing Valerie Plame has harmed the security of the United States. An agent of the United States working for the safety and security of this country was exposed for ugly partisan purposes. This is not politics this is treason. King should be ashamed of himself for trying to deflect from an issue of national security all in an attempt to provide cover for a treasonous act committed by the Bush Administration. When asked about investigating this leak, Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla) who is chairman of the House Select Committee on Intelligence and Bush's choice for CIA Director said "Somebody sends me a blue dress and some DNA, I'll have an investigation." How can a breach of national security be treated to cavalierly?
The Grand Jury investigation continues and soon the traitors will be exposed and brought to justice. Our national security is too important for political games. We cannot wait until after the election to find out about the crimes and cover-ups like we did in 1972 allowing Nixon to win re-election. Being an undercover agent knowing your life is in danger if you are exposed is a not an easy job and there are few who can do that job. Agents should not have to worry about political hacks using them as pawns to silence critics.


Posted by blog2/politicsland at 9:12 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post

Newer | Latest | Older