Saturday, June 03, 2006
Why the Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. article alleging the election was stolen is substantially right and the critics substantially wrong, part 1
The "rebuttal" has the feel of a concerted effort to it. And Salon would be the "left" end of that. I'm reminded about how the entire and then much more 'liberal' press immediately tried to restore their version of normal after Nixon resigned. They are invested in the way things go now, they will never do anything to call the crimes of the Republican-fascists into question.
If Democrats do somehow manage to get power again we have to destroy their hold on the media and we have to change the way we do elections.
Some people apparently think that this represents a rough patch in American democracy and if we just get through it, everything will be all right.
My belief is that the division sown by the failure to investigate will lead to a national breakdown. I believe that we will eventually be forced into the position of declaring that the first American Republic ended under Bush simply to clean up the legal thicket that has been created.
None of us can see the future. If the others are right, then those of us who argue in favor of an investigation are just preventing us from getting things back on track. If we're right, then they are making the inevitable crash more dangerous. But I assume that our opponents in this, exclusive of the right, have honorable intentions. I only wish they would offer the same respect in return.
So, rather than say, "They're wrong and we're right," I ask this:
What harm would an investigation do?
People like the folks who run Salon (and the less-clever-than-he-thinks-he-is Manjoo) are scared to death of being called "kooks".
Never mind that they're going to be called "kooks" no matter what.
If an election was stolen in Ohio and CNN did nor report it, did it happen?
He has posted an analysis of the RFK, Jr. article on his election law blog.
"I don't think [RFK, Jr.] makes a persuasive case that the election was "stolen" (i.e., that Kerry really won). The article is nevertheless useful in exposing how shoddy election administration practices can result in lost votes, and how some recently enacted laws will make things worse rather than better."
But: there's no argument he's one of the more reasonable voices discussing the election. And, when it comes down to it, there are few real experts in elections, though lots of people who say they are. I certainly wouldn't call myself any sort of elections expert, just someone who reads widely and skeptically.
Tokaji is correct that Kennedy hasn't made the case to a courtroom standard. But, as I argue, the standard for opening an investigation is much lower than when property, liberty, or life are at stake.
More blogs about politics.